# Is the "Furry" fetish a product of Disney animal cartoons? **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [July 25, 2009, 10:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-furry-fetish-a-product-of-disney-animal-cartoons/504211 "2009-07-25T10:32:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Meeko](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e495f1/32.png) [@Meeko](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Meeko)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 3:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-furry-fetish-a-product-of-disney-animal-cartoons/504211/101 "2009-07-31T03:25:33Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > This is exactly what makes you sound deluded and arrogant. \*\*And tell me, what would it look like, if I didn’t hedge? \*\* ---
**Author:** ![Meeko](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e495f1/32.png) [@Meeko](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Meeko)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 3:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-furry-fetish-a-product-of-disney-animal-cartoons/504211/102 "2009-07-31T03:27:05Z")
> [@Malleus\_Incus\_Stapes](#): > > I’ll admit, I’ve daydreamed about dressing up in a realistic cat costume. As was Raccoon, for me. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 3:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-furry-fetish-a-product-of-disney-animal-cartoons/504211/103 "2009-07-31T03:56:06Z")
> [@Meeko](#): > > \*\*And tell me, what would it look like, if I didn’t hedge? \*\* I have no idea what this means? ---
**Author:** ![mobo85](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b19c9b/32.png) [@mobo85](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mobo85)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 9:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-furry-fetish-a-product-of-disney-animal-cartoons/504211/104 "2009-07-31T09:51:28Z")
I personally don’t have a comment one way or the other on this controversy, but it seems part of it stems from people misinterpreting **Meeko** ’s statement “Furries are more human than most humans are” as an almost Nazi-ish statement, claiming that furries are more fit to exist than most humans are. I don’t think this is the case. Some people think he was confusing “human” with “humane.” Looking online, I see that the term “human” can indeed be used in a way similar to “humane”: > [@Random House Dictionary](#): > > sympathetic; humane: a warmly human understanding > [@American Heritage Dictionary](#): > > Having or showing those positive aspects of nature and character regarded as distinguishing humans from other animals: an act of human kindness. This is what I think **Meeko** ’s statement meant: “Furries are usually kinder to each other than humans usually are.” ---
**Author:** ![E-Sabbath](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e19adc/32.png) [@E-Sabbath](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-Sabbath)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 10:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-furry-fetish-a-product-of-disney-animal-cartoons/504211/105 "2009-07-31T10:27:21Z")
If you didn’t hedge? [Something like this.](http://images.allmoviephoto.com/2006_Over_the_Hedge/2006_over_the_hedge_008.jpg) ---
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-furry-fetish-a-product-of-disney-animal-cartoons/504211/106 "2009-07-31T14:58:05Z")
> [@Meeko](#): > > Please show me where I said that I wasn’t Human. Please show me where I said that we were “better” than humans. **Meeko** , I have quoted your exact words back to you twice. Do I have to do it a third time to make it clear which sentence of yours I am referring to? For the last time: [QUOTE=Meeko] I am willing to bet further, that Furs are more ““Human”” towards each other, than Humans are towards each other. [/quote] You specifically contrast “Furs” and “Humans” here, not “Furs” and “other Humans”, making it pretty darn clear that you do not consider “Furs” to be a subset of “Human” but rather an entirely different group. And what is “more ‘Human’” supposed to mean if not “better”, particularly in the context of a post about how great furries are? > [@](#): > > \*The OP implied that Furries were one thing. We are many things. The vast majority of us do not Yiff in fursuits. Further the OP had assumptions in it that were wrong. I was offering input on how the assumptions were incorrect. \*And I informed you that you weren’t helping your cause by claiming that furries were not human, but were in fact better than humans. Incidentally, the OP didn’t say anything at all about people having sex in animal costumes. It talked about people being turned on by animal cartoons. If you don’t want people to get the impression that a lot of furries have sex in animal costumes, maybe you shouldn’t keep bringing it up. > [@mobo85](#): > > This is what I think Meeko’s statement meant: “Furries are usually kinder to each other than humans usually are.” That is exactly what I understood it to mean – it was a claim that furries are not humans, and that they are morally superior to humans. If **Meeko** wants others to believe that furries are both delusional and obnoxious then that’s just the kind of claim he should be making. If he wants others to believe that furries are just regular folks who have particular tastes in art and entertainment then it is not. Disregarding the human/not human issue, there’s nothing special about people who share a particular interest being nicer to or more understanding of each other than people who do not share an interest. I don’t doubt that furries are on average nicer to other furries than two strangers with nothing in common would be, but that’s true of almost any other group you could name. It isn’t limited merely to geek subgroups (already mentioned by **Justin\_Bailey** ), but just about any interest at all. If I meet someone who mentions that they enjoy watching my favorite TV comedy then I’ll be somewhat more inclined to like them than if they preferred shows that I didn’t care for. If I cared for sports I’d probably feel the same way about people who were fans of my favorite team. That doesn’t mean that people who watch _The Office_ or root for the Green Bay Packers are better or kinder than people who don’t, it just means that people tend to like other people who share their tastes and interests. Big deal. ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-furry-fetish-a-product-of-disney-animal-cartoons/504211/107 "2009-07-31T15:28:23Z")
> [@Lamia](#): > > Incidentally, the OP didn’t say anything at all about people having sex in animal costumes. **Bryan** brought that in via the [CSI](http://www.csiguide.com/episodedetail.aspx?csi=118) [episode](http://www.csifiles.com/news/260903_01.shtml). ---
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-furry-fetish-a-product-of-disney-animal-cartoons/504211/108 "2009-07-31T15:46:47Z")
> [@Lute Skywatcher](#): > > **Bryan** brought that in via the [CSI](http://www.csiguide.com/episodedetail.aspx?csi=118) [episode](http://www.csifiles.com/news/260903_01.shtml). Which was not the OP, was it? **Meeko** said the OP implied that furries were all having sex in costumes, but it didn’t say anything about people dressing up in costumes at all. And while **Meeko** may not have been the first person to allude to costumed sex in the thread, he does keep talking about it. After a certain point saying “Oh, but most of us don’t do that!” is self-defeating. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-furry-fetish-a-product-of-disney-animal-cartoons/504211/109 "2009-07-31T15:54:45Z")
Anyway, why does **Meeko** think there’s anything wrong with the people that do? ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-furry-fetish-a-product-of-disney-animal-cartoons/504211/110 "2009-07-31T18:19:11Z")
> [@Lamia](#): > > Which was not the OP, was it? **Meeko** said the OP implied that furries were all having sex in costumes, but it didn’t say anything about people dressing up in costumes at all. Which part of > [@Meeko](#): > > I stated that the OP was getting two things mixed up. I wanted clarification on if he thought every Fur was as kinky as he seemed to be assuming. means “that the OP implied that furries were all having sex in costumes”? > [@](#): > > \*And while **Meeko** may not have been the first person to allude to costumed sex in the thread, he does keep talking about it. \* Did you not notice the discussion with **Dio** WRT the sexual habit(s) of furries? It’s called “fighting ignorance”. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-furry-fetish-a-product-of-disney-animal-cartoons/504211/111 "2009-07-31T19:27:19Z")
[Quote=Lamia] > [@mobo85](#): > > This is what I think Meeko’s statement meant: “Furries are usually kinder to each other than humans usually are.” That is exactly what I understood it to mean – it was a claim that furries are not humans, and that they are morally superior to humans. [/quote] I don’t parse that as saying furries aren’t human, I parse it as saying furries are a subset of humans that are kinder than average. For example, if someone said, “Texans are louder than Americans usually are,” they wouldn’t be claiming that Texans aren’t Americans, they’d just be identifying them as an especially voluable subset of Americans. **Meeko** ’s actual quote was more ambiguous, but I think that was just poor phrasing. Suffice to say, he has clarified that he was not trying to say that furries aren’t human, so I don’t think beating him up over that point serves any particular purpose. No comment on the idea that furries are nicer than non-furries. ---
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-furry-fetish-a-product-of-disney-animal-cartoons/504211/112 "2009-07-31T19:28:48Z")
> [@Lute Skywatcher](#): > > Which part of > > > [@Meeko](#): > > > > I stated that the OP was getting two things mixed up. I wanted clarification on if he thought every Fur was as kinky as he seemed to be assuming. > > means “that the OP implied that furries were all having sex in costumes”? Which part of my post #106 was in response to that particular quote? Here’s a hint: none of it. The part of my post that you have a problem with was in direct response to a particular section of post #98 by **Meeko**. I included the quote that I was responding to as per usual SDMB practice. I don’t see how you could possibly be confused as to which post I was responding to or what particular section I was quoting, since it’s on this same page just a couple of posts back. It’s beyond me why you are trying to make it look like I was replying to a different quote from way back in post #27, but I would prefer it if you didn’t try to play these little games with me. > [@](#): > > \*Did you not notice the discussion with **Dio** WRT the sexual habit(s) of furries? It’s called “fighting ignorance”. \*Claiming repeatedly that the OP said something it didn’t say isn’t “fighting ignorance”. And since you brought it up, I note that **Diogenes the Cynic** has said very little about furries having sex in animal costumes either. He stated [back on the first page](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=11390604&postcount=29) that “My image [of furries] is of people jerking off to Petunia Pig JPEGs” and most of his other posts here have been in that vein, but he’s barely mentioned people having sex in animal costumes. He’s certainly spent far less time on the subject that **Meeko**. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-furry-fetish-a-product-of-disney-animal-cartoons/504211/113 "2009-07-31T19:31:10Z")
Saying they’re kinder than other people is the part that’s arrogant. he’s pleading for tolerance and understanding on the one hand, and claiming moral superiority to the rest of humanity on the other. ---
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-furry-fetish-a-product-of-disney-animal-cartoons/504211/114 "2009-07-31T19:45:27Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > I don’t parse that as saying furries aren’t human, I parse it as saying furries are a subset of humans that are kinder than average. For example, if someone said, “Texans are louder than Americans usually are,” they wouldn’t be claiming that Texans aren’t Americans, they’d just be identifying them as an especially voluable subset of Americans. I think someone who wanted to contrast Americans from Texas and Americans who aren’t from Texas would usually phrase that as “Texans are louder than _other_ Americans usually are.” > [@](#): > > \ ***Meeko** ’s actual quote was more ambiguous, but I think that was just poor phrasing. Suffice to say, he has clarified that he was not trying to say that furries aren’t human, so I don’t think beating him up over that point serves any particular purpose. \*He hasn’t really clarified that at all, he just keeps pretending he doesn’t know what I’m talking about. He could have said “Oh, I see that was badly worded, it would have been more clear if I’d said ‘other humans’”, and that would have been the end of that line of discussion. Instead he keeps asking me to explain myself and to show him where he said furries weren’t humans. I don’t think it’s fair for you to characterize my posts as “beating him up over that point” when he’s _asked_ me to go over the same point over and over again. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-furry-fetish-a-product-of-disney-animal-cartoons/504211/115 "2009-07-31T19:48:25Z")
> [@Lamia](#): > > Someone who wanted to contrast Americans from Texas and Americans who aren’t from Texas would phrase that as “Texas are louder than _other_ Americans usually are.” “Texans are louder than Americans usually are” suggests that the speaker does not believe that Texans are Americans. (Insert your own joke about Texans thinking they’re still their own country here.) I don’t think that’s a necessary interpretation, is all. It could just as easily be read the other way. ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-furry-fetish-a-product-of-disney-animal-cartoons/504211/116 "2009-07-31T20:04:45Z")
> [@Lamia](#): > > Which part of my post #106 was in response to that particular quote? Here’s a hint: none of it. The part of my post that you have a problem with was in direct response to a particular section of post #98 by **Meeko**.\* Ah, you mean: > [@Meeko](#): > > The OP implied that Furries were one thing. We are many things. The vast majority of us do not Yiff in fursuits. Further the OP had assumptions in it that were wrong. I was offering input on how the assumptions were incorrect. I see the sex in fursuits as being part of “many things” but not the “one thing” in the OP. YMMV, obviously, or you’re reading more into that than was intended. > [@](#): > > _Claiming repeatedly that the OP said something it didn’t say isn’t “fighting ignorance”._ So “reading more into that than was inteded” is it? > [@](#): > > _And since you brought it up, I note that **Diogenes the Cynic** has said very little about furries having sex in animal costumes either. He stated [back on the first page](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=11390604&postcount=29) that “My image [of furries] is of people jerking off to Petunia Pig JPEGs” and most of his other posts here have been in that vein, but he’s barely mentioned people having sex in animal costumes. He’s certainly spent far less time on the subject that **Meeko**._ **Meeko** has been trying to dispel [**Dio** ’s notion that the fetishists (i.e.: fursuiters) are the majority](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=11391246&postcount=56); fursuiters who have sex while in costumes are a necessary part of that. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-furry-fetish-a-product-of-disney-animal-cartoons/504211/117 "2009-07-31T20:14:08Z")
That’s putting words in my mouth. I’ve never said anything close to that, and I don’t believe it. I think the fetish is defined by a sexual attraction to images of anthropomorphic animals. I don’t think costumes are a necessary component, and I accept the assertions that most furries don’t wear costumes. I also don’t really hear even the furry defnders denying that those who copulate in costumes are fucking goofy. ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-furry-fetish-a-product-of-disney-animal-cartoons/504211/118 "2009-07-31T20:21:08Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > That’s putting words in my mouth. I’ve never said anything close to that, and I don’t believe it. I think the fetish is defined by a sexual attraction to images of anthropomorphic animals. I don’t think costumes are a necessary component, and I accept the assertions that most furries don’t wear costumes. Then you must be unique because “furry fetish” typically refers to fursuiters. Those of us who simply like anthromorphic art are called “anthrofans” or similar. > [@](#): > > _I also don’t really hear even the furry defnders denying that those who copulate in costumes are fucking goofy._ I see what you did there. ---
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-furry-fetish-a-product-of-disney-animal-cartoons/504211/119 "2009-07-31T20:23:17Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > I don’t think that’s a necessary interpretation, is all. It could just as easily be read the other way. Ah, you managed to quote me before I edited my post to be less strongly worded. I agree that it’s possible to interpret the Texas quote either way, but (as you said yourself) **Meeko** ’s actual quote was less clear. Given that there really are people out there who either actually believe they are or spend a lot of time pretending to be anthropomorphic animals, I’d think someone concerned about the reputation of the furry subculture would be careful to avoid such ambiguous phrasing. It seems an especially bad idea to include such phrasing in a sentence where you’re claiming that members of your subculture are nicer than everyone else. Whatever **Meeko** ’s intentions may have been, my impression of furries is now worse than it was before\*. I did not previously associate “condescending” and “poor communicators” with that subculture. > [@Lute Skywatcher](#): > > I see the sex in fursuits as being part of “many things” but not the “one thing” in the OP. Then **Meeko** is even worse at communicating than I thought, because that makes no sense. Why would he specifically mention people who have sex in costumes if that wasn’t the “one thing” of the OP? > [@](#): > > \ ***Meeko** has been trying to dispel [**Dio** ’s notion that the fetishists (i.e.: fursuiters) are the majority](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=11391246&postcount=56); fursuiters who have sex while in costumes are a necessary part of that. \*I can’t speak for **Dio** , but it seems clear enough to me that he considers furry fetishists to be people who masturbate to pictures of anthropomorphic animals, not people who dress up in animal costumes to have sex. You and **Meeko** are the ones who keep bringing the conversation back to people who have sex in costumes, which like it or not is only serving to reenforce the association between “furry” and “person who has sex in an animal costume”. \*And FWIW, I’ve met several furries personally, although that was years ago. A girl I was friends with in high school actually went on to become a semi-professional furry artist. (The first Google hit on her name is a WikiFur entry about her.) She was also kind of psycho, but I’m sure that would have been the same whether she was a furry or not. ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-furry-fetish-a-product-of-disney-animal-cartoons/504211/120 "2009-07-31T20:25:46Z")
> [@Lamia](#): > > Then **Meeko** is even worse at communicating than I thought, because that makes no sense. Why would he specifically mention people who have sex in costumes if that wasn’t the “one thing” of the OP? Because it’s been brought up elsewhere in the thread? > [@](#): > > \*I can’t speak for Dio, but it seems clear enough to me that he considers furry fetishists to be people who masturbate to pictures of anthropomorphic animals, not people who dress up in animal costumes to have sex. \* As I said to **Dio** , it typically refers to fursuiters. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-furry-fetish-a-product-of-disney-animal-cartoons/504211.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-furry-fetish-a-product-of-disney-animal-cartoons/504211.md?page=7)