|
|
|
|
#1
10-31-2003, 01:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Fuck you, Rexdart.
Now, I'm new at this, and I don't have the natural lyricism that some posters exhibit, so I'm going to keep this simple.
Fuck you, RexDart. Fuck your malign ignorance. Fuck your idiotic generalities. Fuck your apparent serious attempt to cite Something Awful as a source of information. Fuck the idiocies you've spewed [a href="http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=217954&highlight=rexdart"]here[/a] and [a href="http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=220589"]here[/a]. Fuck your apparent inability to distinguish between the actions of certain members of a group and the actions of every member of the group, and fuck your apparent delight in belittling people in a pathetic and ultimately futile attempt to bring yourself up. Your brainless spewings on teenagers have been adressed, so I'll focus on your comments on furries. Yes, some of us do wierd things. Hell, most of us do. This tells you nothing about the rest of the fandom, any more than you can judge the Harry Potter fandom on length and depth of the slash produced therein. So, either actually meet and talk to some of us, and probably gain enough material for a book of belittling remarks about some individuals, or admit you know knothing of what you speak, that you are perpretrating ignorance of the vilest sort, and shut the hell up. In conclusion, fuck you. That is all. 
|
| Advertisements | |
|
|
|
|
#2
10-31-2003, 01:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dammit. vB is not HTML. Links are http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/...hreadid=217954 and http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/...hreadid=220589
|
|
#3
10-31-2003, 02:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
On one hand, I like Something Awful.
On the other, I don't like RexDart.
|
|
#4
10-31-2003, 02:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Wow, he's still up to this, huh? Amazing.
Quote:
Alternately, perhaps he could just quit being an ignorant troll. Quote:
|
|
#5
10-31-2003, 02:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Troy, not to defend RexDart, as I think he is a flaming dipshit, but that thread is almost a year old.
|
|
#7
10-31-2003, 03:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mm-hmm.
|
|
#9
10-31-2003, 03:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
TMwtGG: Do you concede that however entertaining SomethingAwful is (yay for hentai game reviews), they in their very name decry their purpouse, and will certainly bring you the most awful view of whatever they present? Only a fool or someone with something to prove would read SA movie reviews to get an idea of movies in general.
Also, this is my first real pitting. How'd I do?
|
|
#11
10-31-2003, 04:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I would guess a poll would tell us that 95% of America views 'Furries' as freaks. I can't fault Rex Dart for sharing that feeling. He even qualified his responses in the 'Furry' thread to make it clear that he finds the practice as much funny as perverted.
I will go out on a limb and join him. People who get sexual stimulation from dressing as stuffed animals are freaks. I appreciate freakdom and would have no problem having a 'Furry' friend or neighbor. I would laugh at any claims that this is part of normal sexual practice. I disagree with Rex's views on teenagers, but I can't fault him for finding furries creepy.
|
|
#14
10-31-2003, 05:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
How did something Awful get mixed up in this?
/Lazy
|
|
#15
10-31-2003, 05:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Something Awful is rather anti-furry, and RexDart referred to it when talking about his anti-furry stance.
I have no real opinion of furries. I think it's a bit weird, but it's none of my business.
|
|
#16
10-31-2003, 05:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Well, fruitbat, inasmuch as the SDMB is a representative sample, http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/...hreadid=219829 this kind of proves you wrong. To me, the majority respose is "Huh?" (At least before CSI aired.)
|
|
#17
10-31-2003, 05:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Furries as in those people that dress up in bunny customes and get it on?
I can't believe I know that. Hangs head.
|
|
#18
10-31-2003, 06:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I never said I have a problem with furries doing what they want to do, I'm not planning on bombing a FurCon or rounding them up into concentration camps. What I said about them is that I find the furry fandom A) funny, B) scary/creepy, and C) to take itself way too seriously. There are alot of people in the world that enjoy alot of quirky and bizarre things, even quirky and bizarre sexual things, and I have no problem with whatever consenting adults want to do. Most of those people seem to have no problem whatsoever realizing that what they're into is indeed a little strange. What's odd about the furry fandom is that its adherents take themselves so seriously, they refuse to take a step back and admit "you know, I bet this seems pretty bizarre to an outsider" and insist it's perfectly normal. Go to the big "mainstream" furry board, and this is the general attitude you'll perceive. They construe a mere opinion that their fandom is creepy as an assault, and think MTV's Sex2k special on them amounts to persecution. Many of these people have redefined their entire identity around their fandom, which is what made the episode of CSI so funny to me, knowing a little about them. If someone built their entire life and constructed their entire identity around Star Trek, or some computer MUD, MUCK, or MMORPG they spent 20 hours a day on, wouldn't you think that was a little obsessive, perhaps even pitiful? I think "yiffing" is creepy. I think putting on a fursuit is creepy. Even the more PG-rated art I've seen on those links creeps me out. That I and many others find it creepy doesn't stop you or anybody else from doing what they wish, anymore than a guy who finds homosexual intercourse disgusting is automatically going to join up with Fred Phelps and start lynching gays. (Just for analogy, not to substantively equate a bizarre fandom with a whole sexual orientation.) It's just my opinion, and since the furry fandom/fetish is so far on the margins of our culture I don't really think it's that big a deal.
|
|
#20
10-31-2003, 06:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I saw that MTV special but I didn't realize there was an actual community, I figured it was a few nuts that had too much time on their hands.
I'm scared to ask but what the hell is Yiffing?
|
|
#21
10-31-2003, 06:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Yeah, what is "yiffing"?
Rexdart also has a bug up his ass about slash and fan fic for some reason. I can understand not liking it, but the degree to which it seems to bother him is rather extreme.
|
|
#23
10-31-2003, 06:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hmmmm, learn a new verb everyday.
|
|
#25
10-31-2003, 06:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I don't know the whole story on how the word originated (I heard it had something to do with a sound a fox makes during a the sex act), but it basically encompasses all sexual fetish activity related to furries. The furries use it to describe the sex they have while in costume (they have holes in the front of their fursuits for that purpose, but I have no interest in delving deeply enough to learn the precise mechanics of that though), and pretty much whatever else they do in that capacity for sexual gratification, like the "furpile" depicted on last night's CSI. They also use it as an adjective "yiffy" to describe anything that they find sexually arousing in a furry way, they might describe a drawing of an anthropomorphic man-wolf with a giant penis standing astride a cowering naked sheep-girl as "yiffy" to give you an idea. (You were right to be scared to ask.) So when the guy on the show last night said "I'm just here for the yiffing", he meant he was only at the convention to get involved with some furry sexual activity.
|
|
#26
10-31-2003, 07:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Well as long as they enjoy themselves nothing wrong with a little yiffage.
|
|
#27
10-31-2003, 10:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
THE PEOPLE WHO DRESS LIKE BUNNIES AND SCREW STUFFED TOYS ARE NOT THE ENTIRITY OF FURRIES. I'm getting really fucking sick of repeating myself in the face of willful ignorance. I mean, the hell? We're about fighting ignorance here, right? Furry can be as simple as stuff like Disney's Robin Hood. It's anthropomorphic animals. It's furry. What that has to do with dressing in costumes to have sex, I don't know. Not that anyone's explained to me why some costumes make you a sick freak, and the saucy french maid/catholic schoolgirl is just dandy. I'm sure you think that pulling percentages out of your ass actually means something. But as has been already pointed out, I doubt the numbers are entirely accurate. And, I think more importantly, they're based on not having a fucking clue what you're talking about. I just can't imagine where the bunch who goes around reciting the same bullshit about how furries are all freaks who have sex with stuffed animals, or exclusively while dressed as a small mammal can turn around and insist that factual information is important somewhere else. You people must have balls the size of melons.
|
|
#28
10-31-2003, 10:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
RexDart, you really ARE a moron, aren't you?
SA's whole raison d'etre is to make people look like freaks, by highlighting the extreme fringes. You cannot say, without making yourself look like a fucking idiot, 'I saw something freaky on Something Awful! These people are all freaks!' Yes, there are freaky elements to furridom. Yes, some of those freaky elements are certainly creepy. But they are, I repeat (again, and again, and again), the fringe. Taking it in ascending order of fringetude (and, accidentally, but not coincidentally, freakiness): 'Suiters are a large minority of furres. People who yiff in their suits are a small, but visible subgroup of 'Suiters. Plushies are likewise small group - and, my instincts tell me, completely orthoganal to furridom. The vast, vast, although I can't say, offhand, what proportion of plushies are furries, but I'd be less than surprised if it was less than 3/4. It hasn't been brought up in this thread (yet, but it will be), Zoophilia (real zoophilia, not the trumped up 'yiff's bestiality!' bullshit) is almost unknown in furridom. Yes, some furres are into it, and yes, some zoophiles gravitate to furridom in an attempt to find likeminded people, but they're so far outside the mainstream that one would be more than justified in ignoring them completely. What's really creepy is not furries. It's not 'suiters. It's not yiff. It's people who have so little mental capacity they let Something Awful, of all things, shape their perception of ANYTHING.
|
|
#29
10-31-2003, 10:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
People who enjoy a little furry cartoon stuff are one thing. But the "extreme" furries who actually imagine that they are really a wolf, or get really into it, they are freaky, IMO. Not that this is a huge deal; it's none of my business. But if (if) they expect me to take them seriously, they need to look somewhere else.
Now, what percentage of people who enjoy a little "furry" are extreme "furry," I don't know. But the extreme ones are freaks, IMO.
|
|
#30
10-31-2003, 10:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
yosemitebabe, the way you phrased it, I honestly agree with you. Some of the extreme fringe stuff is really freaking weird, and I don't really want to see/hear/whatever it. It's just the inability to seperate that angle that a lot of people seem to have that pisses me off.
|
|
#31
10-31-2003, 11:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
However, you do have a point. People that dress up in animal suits and have massive group orgies are rather wierd. They. Do. Not. Represent. The. Furry. Fandom. Please repeat it until it sinks in.
|
|
#32
11-01-2003, 12:01 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
But they continue to identify themselves as "furry" because they are wedded to the notion of having a united "community" and don't want to toss the fursuit people out. As I understand it, a prominent group of furries on the 'net tried to distance themselves officially from the fetishists and were treated as turncoats and called intolerant by the rest of them, until the "movement" to distance themselves fizzled out. But frankly, fursuits or not, I simply do not understand how any topic of interest as ridiculously narrow as "anthropomorphic animals" can possibly consume such a huge percentage of a person's time, and compose such a large portion of a person's identity. Hobby? Maybe. Lifestyle? Bizarre. The level of seriousness with which furries take their fandom is beyond the pale. Forget the guys on the Awful Links of the Day, just browse one of the furry message boards for a few minutes, the only word that describes it is "obsessive." Even a die-hard Trekker doesn't revolve his entire life around Star Trek and the cons, nor define a huge chunk of his identity around it. It's something he does not something he is. If you want to propose that some people who call themselves "furry" do not wear fursuits and jizz on each other's costumes, then allright. So how about the ones that don't just stop calling themselves by that label?
|
|
#34
11-01-2003, 12:22 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
If the show is correct about "yiffing", when yiffing are you supposed to haul out your penis and ejaculate on the other furries suit, or ejaculate inside your suit? How do female furries satisfy themselves in a fur pile with those big suit hands. Don't they make effective clitoral stimulation difficult?
Also, how so you get all that semen off the fur? Are they special furry dry cleaning methods?
|
|
#35
11-01-2003, 12:31 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
RexDart: My understanding of "furries" is pretty limited (I saw "furry" art in the con artshows, but that was it). But to claim that the Trekkers can't be just as bizarre or obsessive is untrue. There are some truly, truly WACKED Star Trek (and Star Wars, etc.) fans out there. I know some people who are obsessive, almost to the point of stalking. (And in the Los Angeles area, where these people are from, they can carry out their obsessive natures so much easier.) There are plenty of WACKED fans to go around.
So, barring evidence to the contrary, I guess I figure that furries are the same way. There are the harmless ones, and the wacked ones.
|
|
#36
11-01-2003, 03:14 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Bingo, yosemitebabe.
And, Astro - I can't vouch at ALL for what yiffing 'suiters do, but really, most 'yiffy' activity, it's just a matter of hoping your drawing/typing hand doesn't cramp up. (IE, it's a genre of art/fiction, rather than a 'suiter activity.) Although, I'd assume that both those ejaculatory possibilites would be discouraged. 'Suits CAN'T be easy to clean. (I'm probably wrong though. Heh.) And Rex, thank you for once again proving yourself to be a twit more thoroughly than anyone on the right side of the argument could. Yes, the willfully ignorant insist on blatantly misusing a term, so the people who coined it to describe themselves have to come up with a new one. That's CERTAINLY reasonable. :wally (And Trekkies can't be fucked up and obsessive. Riiiiiiiight.  )
|
|
#37
11-01-2003, 03:16 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I should note - I say that both as a furre and a Trekkie.
Lt. M'res forever! ^__~
|
|
#38
11-01-2003, 06:04 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
What?
|
|
#40
11-01-2003, 10:52 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I would be thrilled to have my ignorance challenged. If any furry would like to describe what kinds of things they collect and what, if any, sexual component there is to their interest I would be fascinated to hear their story.
|
|
#41
11-01-2003, 01:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
You know, RexDart, for someone who insists that furries are "freaks" and "bizarre", you sure know an awful lot about them.
"God, this furry website is disgusting! What kind of a weirdo gets off on this sort of thing! Look at all these pictures! Freaks! This is so wrong. And most of their links are broken, too!"
|
|
#42
11-01-2003, 02:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Haj
|
|
#43
11-01-2003, 03:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I have to say that fruitbat has a point.
I am truly ignorant of furries. Is it a common component of furridom to be sexually attracted to the anthropomorphic characters? Because that to me would be unusual. And frutibat is right--there's a difference between being attracted to the french maid or Japanese school girl and the fox-girl or wolf-girl. But then again--a lot of women had the major hots for Ron Perlman's character (Vincent) in Beauty and the Beast, so maybe it's not that odd after all in some cases. But I think a lot of people were surprised by their attraction to Vincent, and it took a lot of character development for people to think that Vincent was a cool guy (even if he had that kind of cat face thing going on). So Vincent had to be "sold" to the public. It wasn't automatically assumed that everyone would think Vincent was a hottie in his cat suit, because that's not how most people are wired. However, I am entirely unclear as to how important sexual attraction is in furriness. I think I just assumed that a lot of fans liked the little critters, the way I kind of like dragons, or some people like wolves. No sexual attraction, just an admiration for the beast. I like the Anne McCaffrey Pern books, and have done a few dragon mugs and dragon watercolors in my day. I'm a "fan," though a pretty tame one. If there are "furry" fans that are as "tame" as I am about dragons, then that to me does not very out of the ordinary. Suffice it to say, I have no desire to have sex with dragons any time soon, and I would consider such an urge to be ... well, really odd.
|
|
#44
11-01-2003, 04:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Some furries merely happen to like anthromorphic animals and drawings in a non-sexual context. This isn't that unusual; most people (not myself; I dislike most anthromorphic animals; they just bother me in some strange way.) like the old Bugs Bunny cartoons, and the non-sexual furries just take it a little more seriously; I don't consider them any worse than say Star Wars geeks who dress up as stormtroopers.
But the ones who are sexually attracted to anthromorophic animals, well they creep me out. They are not as bad as say, pedophiles, necrophiliacs, or actual bestiality, but they rate pretty close in my book. Of course, since sexual furries don't actually harm anyone, my ethics don't allow me to do anything to them besides reccomending they get conseling.
|
|
#46
11-01-2003, 07:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
And actually, one more point. Yes, a lot of people just like antho animals. The way someone likes dragons, or stormtroopers, or what have you.
And okay, you want to deny the schoolgirl. How about the kittygirl that's sold in mainstream adultwear catalogues? You know, the clip on tail and the ears on a headband. Is that freakish? If yes, why so and why is it still so incredibly mainstream? If not, why is an anthro catgirl, since that's what most of them are? and RexDart, you get more fucking stupid every time you open your mouth. that you are too willfully ignorant to recogize what a word actually means doesn't mean it's reasonable to expect the people who *created* it to stop using it. you don't get to define a term based on what you want it to mean when it has an actual meaning. you can try, but you sound like a moron when you do.
|
|
#47
11-01-2003, 08:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
George Bernard Shaw Caesar and Cleopatra, Act II Fenris
|
|
#48
11-01-2003, 08:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#49
11-01-2003, 08:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
What I want to know is this-is it worse to be turned on by the mascot, or the guy wearing the clerical garb?
|
|
#50
11-01-2003, 08:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
You know the difference because, at the very least, you are interested in anthropomorphic animals. I am not. I collect and deal rare books. I would not throw a hissy fit if you didn't know the difference between a printing and an edition. Yet you seem to expect me to know all the terms to define the precise psychological bent of members of a less than mainstream group. I find a sexual attraction to cartoon animals or to people dressed as animals to be odd (freaky being a synonym). I am not seeking to limit anyone's behavior. People can do whatever turns them on. I wouldn't dream of stopping them. Quote:
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Linear Mode
