Crush...Yiff...Destroy!

Sinclair · Prattler Joined: 05 Jun 2005 Posts: 125

Sorry if this has been covered before, my search-fu is weak today.

If you had to pick, which would you prefer for whatever subjective reason(s):

The attackers, who are the lovably strange ones, who will jump on you for saying "Gee, don't you think that chakats are a little wierd?", going ballistic,

or the apologists, who are prone to making false comparisons like "vore isn't a furry thing, a lot of furries own cars, does that make cars a furry thing"?

I'll go with the latter, because laughing at the former often feels too easy.

Donotsue · Needs to get out more Joined: 17 Jan 2004 Posts: 884

I'm just in for the porn.. and atrocities. =)

Sinclair · Prattler Joined: 05 Jun 2005 Posts: 125

Porn's good. I can respect porn. Even the creepy stuff is just to be looked at as little as possible. I mean, everybody's gotta get off to something, right?

It's the lifestylers and the otherkin and so forth who wierd me out. They're operating with the same sort of thought-patterns as religious fanatics, or other ideologues: There is at least one central idea they've got that they will probably never drop due to outside means.

IceCat · Venter Joined: 31 Oct 2003 Posts: 244

got to say the apologtis come off as the most silly, though the attackers can be just as silly too.

Should have had both as an option for the poll.

weird_guy_in_the_corner · Vociferator Joined: 14 Oct 2004 Posts: 708

I'm just in for the porn.. and atrocities. =)

me 2 :D

I suppose I like the apologist a litlle more since they don't scream and throw a tantrum whenever someone disagrees with them.

Troggler · Venter Joined: 28 Jul 2005 Posts: 246

Hmm. I have to pick the apologists. I love the lies upon lies upon lies that they spin in order to make themselves feel comfortable enough to argue their point.

baserock love · Vociferator Joined: 04 Dec 2004 Posts: 685

I'm just in for the porn.. and atrocities. =)

M0us3_Zero · Vociferator Joined: 22 Mar 2004 Posts: 437

How about neither.

Both are drama ridden causes of migranes for yours truely.

I'd rather see them eresed from existance with some sort of orbital strike or a tac-nuke.

No drama for me. plz k thx.

Lim-Dul · Coadjutor Joined: 15 Jul 2005 Posts: 73

All I've come across are hybrids of the two parties...
I pick neither also.

foxykit069 · Qualificator Joined: 18 Aug 2005 Posts: 9

So whats the official definition of someone whose furry?

Is it anyone who likes furry art? By that reason then anyone who likes Star Trek is a Trekky.

Beauty of Nature · Prattler Joined: 29 May 2005 Posts: 178

By my definition... anyone who considers themselves part of it.

Drawing naked catgirls does not cut it.
You have to know of that "furry fandom" and try to be part of it.
Otherwise one aint a furry.

I draw naked catgirls but anyone who calls me a furry for it eats a baseball bat.

Sinclair · Prattler Joined: 05 Jun 2005 Posts: 125

Trying to define what furry is is a waste of time.

Because you'll have to factor in the people who are in it for the smut, and the really nutty otherkin types, and then you'll have the apologists saying "No, no, it's still about serious sequential-art stories involving anthropomorphic animals" who instead of decrying how things are, pretend they're not actually there.

Beauty of Nature · Prattler Joined: 29 May 2005 Posts: 178

Oh, I doubt anyone can find a strict definition for it.
But, since its some sort of group, you can decide yourself if you are part of it or not.
The people at PoE and SA look at furry art, too. Does it make them furries ?

foxykit069 · Qualificator Joined: 18 Aug 2005 Posts: 9

By my definition... anyone who considers themselves part of it.

Drawing naked catgirls does not cut it.
You have to know of that "furry fandom" and try to be part of it.
Otherwise one aint a furry.

I draw naked catgirls but anyone who calls me a furry for it eats a baseball bat.

This site is a part of furry fandom and your a part of it so then that makes you a furry right?

Beauty of Nature · Prattler Joined: 29 May 2005 Posts: 178

By my definition... anyone who considers themselves part of it.

Drawing naked catgirls does not cut it.
You have to know of that "furry fandom" and try to be part of it.
Otherwise one aint a furry.

I draw naked catgirls but anyone who calls me a furry for it eats a baseball bat.

This site is a part of furry fandom and your a part of it so then that makes you a furry right?

It makes me a CYD forum visitor.
The people at PoE and SA look at furry sites, too.
Maybe you should go there and explain to them they are all furries !
Just because someone had an audience with the pope does not make them catholic.

Charisma · Vociferator Joined: 03 Jan 2004 Posts: 326

Oh, I doubt anyone can find a strict definition for it.
But, since its some sort of group, you can decide yourself if you are part of it or not.
The people at PoE and SA look at furry art, too. Does it make them furries ?

I agree. if you plonk a Burberry cap on your head it may not mean you're automatically a chav, but people may assume you are.

I draw cartoon animals and people may think I'm a furry, but when it comes down to it, it doesn't really matter what you're labelled as, seeing though the whole label isn't important anyway. You may as well say you're not a furry if it doesn't dictate your life.

Cephus · Prattler Joined: 19 May 2005 Posts: 107

I picked apologist because I think primarily, you have to both be a good example of what furry should be and disprove people's misconceptions, but you also have to be an attacker and go after the perverts and idiots who have turned the fandom into their own personal fetish parade. If you don't do both, you're not really helping to solve the problem.

If you don't do either, you're selfish and pretty pointless IMO.

baserock love · Vociferator Joined: 04 Dec 2004 Posts: 685

By my definition... anyone who considers themselves part of it.

Drawing naked catgirls does not cut it.
You have to know of that "furry fandom" and try to be part of it.
Otherwise one aint a furry.

I draw naked catgirls but anyone who calls me a furry for it eats a baseball bat.

This site is a part of furry fandom and your a part of it so then that makes you a furry right?

Your troll skills are seriously lacking :|

But if i acctually had to choose it would be appologists, i fucking hate liars. The most common lie i've heard (and got lambasted at fchan for saying it) is that furry is not supremely fucked up right now. If you say it's not your in denial, furry doesn't really seem a whole lot about anthropomorphics cartoon characters anymore.

Stoneth · Needs to get out more Joined: 01 Dec 2004 Posts: 1225

Drawing and looking at art depicting anthroporphic animal art (or furry art) does not a furry make otherwise Carl Barks, Rich Kyanka and Scott Ramsoomair would all be furries by definition.

Furry is more of a label to identify with other people with a common interest and therefore does need be applied to someone if they don't care for it.

However, if you're going to beat your meat to erotic furry art, I say we call a spade a spade and call you a furry.

SLaitila · Vociferator Joined: 03 Jun 2003 Posts: 490

I once was an apologist.

Sinclair · Prattler Joined: 05 Jun 2005 Posts: 125

Drawing and looking at art depicting anthroporphic animal art (or furry art) does not a furry make otherwise Carl Barks, Rich Kyanka and Scott Ramsoomair would all be furries by definition.

Furry is more of a label to identify with other people with a common interest and therefore does need be applied to someone if they don't care for it.

However, if you're going to beat your meat to erotic furry art, I say we call a spade a spade and call you a furry.

If it's just porno, though, does that make it part of the furry "lifestyle"? I mean, is that fandom, or is that lifestyling? Does it matter? Has furry officially become a lifestyle/fetish?

RailFoxen · Vociferator Joined: 01 Jan 2005 Posts: 625

The fandom is an incredible morass of people. Even restricting it only to those who call themselves furry... there are the clean puritanical furries, the casual porn collectors, the spiritual therians... the pets under protection of their masters, the egotistical artists, the unemployed youth wandering between whatever furries like them enough to house them... the strictly heterosexual, the pansexual polyamorous, the transgendered...

Likewise, I don't believe there's any one thing that would make a person furry. Just the porn shouldn't do it. Not just the MUCKing. Not just the friends or the writing or a convention. The things build up, and there's a point where most people just have to look at a person and declare them furry. And just like that, things have to build up before a person is clearly one kind of furry - the pervert, the theriomorph, the clean socialite, whatever. Like looking at furry artwork doesn't make one furry, maybe believing one has an animal spirit doesn't make a furry a lifestyler.

So any attempt to define something broad (like porn, or spiritual beliefs, or sexuality) as furry or not furry is pretty likely to fail. Declare something to be part of the lifestyle, and you'll find uber-furries who claim it ain't so.

And this has to be one of the stupidest topics we've ever had.

Monkey King · Vociferator Joined: 16 Jun 2005 Posts: 459

I prefer the attackers myself. Why? Because I can understand them. You'd actually stand a better chance of bringing them around with rational arguments if you could keep them from banning you from their message boards or from leaving the argument in a huff. As defensive as they are, they wouldn't flip out unless they felt like they had something to compensate for. On some level, they KNOW the whole mess is fucked up, unlike the apologists who operate on delusion and non-logic.

itsthesheppy · Qualificator Joined: 03 Aug 2005 Posts: 29

I like the attackers, personally. I love seeing people get all mad on the internets.