i will never understand this. you are listening to a furry telling you that the number of furries who are comfortable being in the same room as people who sexualize real life animals is within rounding error of zero. yet you continue to claim that furries sexualize animals.
I’m not a furry but I do spend a lot of time on the internet. This person is probably not distinguishing between anthropomorphic animals and IRL ones.
One thing I typically find furries and non-furries agree upon is boobs and muscles. Two big ol’ titties/snitties/whatever, six pack abs if they have em. Appealing human traits in a hairy package.
Even furries into quadrupeds and such put emphasis on the Harkness test in one way or another.
Sexualizing animals is unethical because animals do not have human intelligence and therefore cannot give consent. The entire premise of the furry fandom is “what if animals had human intelligence and did human things?”
In this fictionalized world where animals walk on two legs, wear clothes, talk to their friends in English, and stress about how they’re going to pay for their apartment, and where, often as not, humans as such do not exist (for an example of such a world, please see Zootopia, Fantastic Mr Fox, etc.), it’s not really out of line to draw a buff two-legged wolf man, give him the gruffest possible voice and make an animation where he talks dirty to you, and then go “man, I wanna have sex with that guy”.
The important concept here is fiction, and being able to distinguish between it and reality. No one’s going to suggest you’re a criminal because you went on a killing spree in a videogame. In real life, where animals do not have human intelligence, furries react to people who want to boink actual animals the same way most people react to people who want to boink children, and for pretty much the same reason.
I’m not a furry or into loli stuff but I think there’s a big difference. Furries do closely resemble adult human bodies in every way, however lolis resemble human children.
The only difference between pantie shots of underage girls in anime and those in real life is the fact that one is on a screen. People who get off specifically to the fact that these characters are underage have no excuse for doing so besides being into children in real life. It is specifically their youth and by extension their lack of ability to give meaningful consent (because they treat anyone older than them as an authority figure) which, to a certain class of degenerate, makes them attractive.
If a real-life man who was short and had a childlike face was in a bar complaining about how his wife left him, and someone else in that bar thought he was hot, no one would begrudge them for it, because he’s an adult. So it is with furries. We see that animals are not intelligent and cannot give consent and ask ourselves “what if they were intelligent? what if they looked human? what if they stopped being animals in any meaningful way besides having fur?”
🙄 everyone sees you as loving beastiality. It doesn’t matter how much you defend it as fictional. Porn is fictional too. Furries are engaging with it and making it thier personality. It’s beastiality in the eyes of everyone that sees you. That’s it.
You can go on and on about it as much as you’d like. All I’m seeing is bullshit excuses, same as everyone else sees it.
Multiple people have replied to you defending me and led by saying they weren’t furries. Why can’t you just admit you’re the only one who thinks they’re disgusting?
That’s inaccurate. If you actually take a slightly closer look, they’re not “animals with human breasts and penises”; rather, they are much more “human with an animal head and fur/scales”.
It’s also all fantasy, much like magic and D&D, which means that it’s not real. Your vitriol is guided at nothing but smoke and mirrors. By all means, stay hateful, and stay negative.
i will never understand this. you are listening to a furry telling you that the number of furries who are comfortable being in the same room as people who sexualize real life animals is within rounding error of zero. yet you continue to claim that furries sexualize animals.
I’m not a furry but I do spend a lot of time on the internet. This person is probably not distinguishing between anthropomorphic animals and IRL ones.
One thing I typically find furries and non-furries agree upon is boobs and muscles. Two big ol’ titties/snitties/whatever, six pack abs if they have em. Appealing human traits in a hairy package.
Even furries into quadrupeds and such put emphasis on the Harkness test in one way or another.
Putting human breasts and penises onto animals in sexual ways is, and this may surprise you, sexualizing animals.
“We investigated ourselves and found nothing wrong” doesn’t change what you’re actually doing.
Sexualizing animals is unethical because animals do not have human intelligence and therefore cannot give consent. The entire premise of the furry fandom is “what if animals had human intelligence and did human things?”
In this fictionalized world where animals walk on two legs, wear clothes, talk to their friends in English, and stress about how they’re going to pay for their apartment, and where, often as not, humans as such do not exist (for an example of such a world, please see Zootopia, Fantastic Mr Fox, etc.), it’s not really out of line to draw a buff two-legged wolf man, give him the gruffest possible voice and make an animation where he talks dirty to you, and then go “man, I wanna have sex with that guy”.
The important concept here is fiction, and being able to distinguish between it and reality. No one’s going to suggest you’re a criminal because you went on a killing spree in a videogame. In real life, where animals do not have human intelligence, furries react to people who want to boink actual animals the same way most people react to people who want to boink children, and for pretty much the same reason.
Is that like how child like manga cartoon girls are fictional and not just pedo fantasy bs?
I’m not a furry or into loli stuff but I think there’s a big difference. Furries do closely resemble adult human bodies in every way, however lolis resemble human children.
Of course you think there’s a different, you’re into sexy animals, not sexy children.
You don’t see how they’re the same. They are the same type of thing. Sorry kiddo. Hate to break it to you.
Lol did you even read my comment? I’m into neither furries or loli. Perhaps you have a hard time reading from up there on your high horse.
The only difference between pantie shots of underage girls in anime and those in real life is the fact that one is on a screen. People who get off specifically to the fact that these characters are underage have no excuse for doing so besides being into children in real life. It is specifically their youth and by extension their lack of ability to give meaningful consent (because they treat anyone older than them as an authority figure) which, to a certain class of degenerate, makes them attractive.
If a real-life man who was short and had a childlike face was in a bar complaining about how his wife left him, and someone else in that bar thought he was hot, no one would begrudge them for it, because he’s an adult. So it is with furries. We see that animals are not intelligent and cannot give consent and ask ourselves “what if they were intelligent? what if they looked human? what if they stopped being animals in any meaningful way besides having fur?”
🙄 everyone sees you as loving beastiality. It doesn’t matter how much you defend it as fictional. Porn is fictional too. Furries are engaging with it and making it thier personality. It’s beastiality in the eyes of everyone that sees you. That’s it.
You can go on and on about it as much as you’d like. All I’m seeing is bullshit excuses, same as everyone else sees it.
Everyone, huh? Check the vote counters on any of the comments in this thread.
Furries up voting doesn’t mean a thing.
Multiple people have replied to you defending me and led by saying they weren’t furries. Why can’t you just admit you’re the only one who thinks they’re disgusting?
That’s inaccurate. If you actually take a slightly closer look, they’re not “animals with human breasts and penises”; rather, they are much more “human with an animal head and fur/scales”.
It’s also all fantasy, much like magic and D&D, which means that it’s not real. Your vitriol is guided at nothing but smoke and mirrors. By all means, stay hateful, and stay negative.
“it was
a jokefictional, bro!”