And this, folks, is really the crux of the entire thread (no sarcasm intended; it really is). Does he have gender issues which are demonstrated by his rather mercurial manifestation of his own identity in this regard? Or did he have gender issues which he has transcended by escaping the psychological prison of socially imposed stereotypes? The simple fact is, we have no way to ascertain that. Some see his presentation as a sign of serious internal conflicts, others see it as a sign that he has conquered them; and we are collectively in no position to determine which is the case.
Let’s face it: not everyone is configured to be successful as a “normal” (from a majority/status quo-type standpoint) person. Most mammals are land-based, but some can’t survive outside of an aquatic enviroment. Whales that try to live on the beach die. Cats that try to hunt their prey at 20,000 leagues under the sea (lotsa fish down there) die. Trying to live out of context isn’t good for any of us. So is he living in his proper context or out of it? He seems satisfactorially employed, he’s found a relationship that evidently works for him, and he appears generally happy about his life. To me, with all due respect to all other opinions, that argues more for him having had issues in the past; rather than arguing for him having them now.
True, but this may be his successful way of solving it.
All reasons, I think, to consider the fact that he may be more successful at dealing with his issues than he might first appear.
Okay, NOW look at who’s got gender issues…
[quote]
*Posted by matt_mcl:
A question for discussion: What first leaps to mind when you think of “denying who you are and pretending to be someone else?”
I believe you’ve nailed it precisely; he is probably like just about everybody: he has issues to resolve before he can feel truly alive and happy. Seems he’s resolved 'em!
It is silly to think that the only true route to positive self-esteem and good mental health is conforming to society’s expectations.
And of course, Europeans are known for their vast tolerance of gypsies, Jews, Catholics (or Protestants, depending on where you’re at) Calvinists, Puritans, and Muslims. Europeans never did things things like invent the slave trade, annihilate whole tribes of Native Americans, the Inquisition, the Holocaust, pogroms, or invent the idea of a “ghetto.”
The prejudice your ancestors suffered was carried from the Old World. It sure as hell wasn’t invented here.
And as for our culture being generic…well, I guess that’s what happens when you don’t have a (speaking rhetorically) 98% white population that mostly speaks the same language. Hell, if we did, we’d be…France?
Ah yes, France! That bastion of liberalism and free thought, which felt it necessary to “reconquer” Indochina after WWII, and which dominated the Algerians, the Haitians, and various native peoples of Africa and islands all over the globe and kept them in a state of servitude for centuries. Bet your French friend didn’t bring THAT up, did he? Just who INVENTED Imperialism, anyway? It wasn’t the United States.
I think the relative worth of the United States is more accurately measured by the fact that a thousand times more people are trying to get here than are trying to get to France, or any other country.
(And I realize this is a total highjack, and I went off on a “France vs. the U.S.” tangent, but when Europeans criticize my country I get real pissed. Anyone who knows European history knows they have NO moral leg to stand on.)
And personally, I think that Peter Pan guy is a near-total nut job. If that makes me “prejudiced,” than fine. I’ll hang with people who DON’T have severe identity crises.
[sub]Boy is this a disjointed rant. Good thing this is the Pit.[/sub]
Well when this thread started I was pretty neutral - nay ambivalent - on the matter. On the one hand, I wondered if his attempt to escape reality was rooted in personal problems but on the other hand I thought it great that someone would throw off the shackles of expectation and live as he wished.
Then Scylla and matt entered the fray and I read with interest. Historically, it isn’t often that I agree with Scylla and it’s rare that I disagree with matt.
But on this occassion I’m afraid that Scylla’s argument has been far more persuasive.
It comes down to this, if I may also indulge the role of amateur psychologist. Matt - I don’t think you’ve really read this guy’s website. I think that you’re reading what you want to read - like you’ve started off with the assumption that he must be well-adjusted and happy and ignored that which doesn’t conform to this opinion.
I think that it is perfectly possible to have a Peter Pan fantasy that you indulge in during your spare time. I think to be in touch with your feminine and childlike sides is great. I think that this individual is seriously disturbed.
Why do I think this? Well - I think it because after reading what Scylla posted, I went back and actually read the parts referenced. And I agree - his issues seem to go a lot deeper than a need to express himself.
He actually expresses the desire to not be part of this world. You’re surely not telling me that such an attitude leads to happiness and good things. He’s not trying to confront people’s attitudes and make this world a better place. He’s trying to pretend that this world doesn’t even exist.
You have made good points. You have defended your position. But…It just strikes me as another screaming fit when someone dosen’t conform. Scylla, you wrote a beautiful post about how your hands defined you, and yet you fanatically( and I don’t get it, what does Peter have to do with you, he seems happy, why are you so angry???) attack someone who has another way of defining himself. I used to respect you. I don’t not respect you, but now I’m starting to wonder. You get this worked up over a harmless fantasy that works for the people involved? Grow the fuck up, man. Let other folks do as they will, if it dosen’t have anything to do with you, stop holding your “common sense” up as the ultimate judge. It ain’t as much as you seem to think it is. I say again, grow the fuck up, let it go. I thought better of you than this.
You know, I reckon you’re right, but I also reckon that most of us have some serious issues we should address. Maybe his are just more visible than some.
I’m not here to defend Scylla, he seems capable of that himself, but I have noticed here and other threads an argument that I think is invalid:
He made a quick comment and a little joke at the beginning and would have probably been on his merry way if nobody challenged him. That doesn’t strike me as someone who particularly cares about it.
See his first post again. He got angry in the heat of the debate. This had nothing to do with Peter Pan.
Most of the time the person getting challenged doesn’t really care and isn’t angry at the beginning. It is the debate that causes it.
I’m pissed at Matt for acting like a self-righteous prick, not at Peter Pan.
I’ve read his entire website, something I doubt Matt has bothered to do, otherwise he wouldn’t be challenging me on the gender confusion issue, since that’s how this guy describes himself.
I deeply resent having to defend myself for having and sharing a considered personal opinion based on what I read.
I don’t think this is a well-adjusted guy, I think he’s a troubled one. That’s all that I’ve said, and it really pisses me off when people try to twist my words or ascribe to me arguments of points of view that I have not made, and do not share.
I’m not making the claim that the guy is clinically insane, and I can’t fucking stand the bullshit tactic of deliberately misattributing an argument to an opponent in order to villify him or get him to defend or deny a point of view or statement he isn’t making.
You’re right. It is a screaming fit when someone doesn’t conform. I’m getting screamed at for not conforming to the idea that this guy is a well-adjusted free spirit expressing himself.
Based on what he himself has written on his website it doesn’t seem that way to me, and it was nothing to do with whether he’s being a noncomformist or not.
You know, I really don’t see how one opinion is any more valid or invalid than the other. To chastise someone for stating their unqualified opinion then making your own unqualified, is a little hypercritical, don’t you think?
I do work with the mentally ill and those with personality disorders (yes, there is a difference), however, before anyone challenges me to post my credentials or qualification - don’t. I’m not going to do that for many reasons, one being that I only know this guy from reading his website another is that I don’t feel like bringing that side of my personal life to a board I use only for entertainment (okay, and the friendships I have made).
My armchair psychiatric OPINION is that this guy has some pretty deep issues that sure as hell don’t seem to have been resolved, or at least that is my OPINION in reading his website. You don’t agree? Cool. That is your OPINION. It is also my personal OPINION that I think he is pathetically silly and looks like a fool. You may think he is the poster boy for individuality. Whatthefuckever. No one here has any basis to make a positive diagnosis of this guy’s mental or emotional status - period.
Nada.
None.
Not Matt, not Scylla, not jab, not Zette, not Zoid, and sure as hell not me.
In other words, you all are basically arguing a debate that is not winnable with the limited information we all have about this guy. Like Zette said:
Oof… Gotta get around to reading the boards more than once a day…
I was betting that was probably what you got it from. Probably the largest single publicity for furries, and also probably the most incredibly negative and skewed one, too. Going by that article, you’d have to believe that every single furry is single-mindedly fixed on sex. I’d say the average fur is much less… “prudish” about such topics than the average person, more open-minded, but not obsessed with sex (At least, any more than the average person of the same age group). They seemed to be about as mis-representative as they could without flat-out lying (And there were a few parts that were certinaly border-line on that). The average furry isn’t anything like that article describes…
The article seemed like something that was written for one of those tabloids you always find in the supermarket check-out stands, the covers adorned with all sorts of headlines that show how idiotic they are (Wouldn’t surprise me if that’s where that magazine IS from, seeing as I don’t think I’ve ever seen an actually copy of it).
As for the rest of this thread… Well, I’ve seen this before. More amature psychoanalysis by a single person of another person they’ve never met, and quite surely havn’t the full story on. I’ve always been surprised that some people are so ready to lable someone as being mentally damaged just because they’re different. Personally, I think it’s good that he lives the way -he- wants to, even though it’s something so visible, something that quite easily attracts negative attention, instead of trying to suppress his interests with the idea that he’d be happier by acting like he’s told to act. And if anything, I’d wager that the ability to stand up to what I’d imagine would be a good deal of criticism speaks at least a little of his stability. But then, who knows…
'sokay. I figured you were just going with a Z motif…
As long as I’m here, I’d just like to say that I read everything that seemed to be personal (as opposed to trip reports, etc) on that site and I can’t find any expression by the guy that he’s confused about anything. He seems crystal clear on what he’s about, what he wants, who he is, what makes him happy, etc.
Here’s what he knows for sure:
He’s male.
He’s straight.
He’s femme.
His costuming is a fetish as well as an expression of his inner child.
He’s goofy.
He’s ok with all of it.
Other people are going to assume other things about him based on the above facts, but it’s their assumptions, not his reality.
No confusion that I can see.
well, that is a topic I need to be more informed about, I guess, because surfing the net only seems to support the Vanity Fair article (of which btw, they are not a tabloid).
However, I’ll start a new thread. That would be hijacking this one way too far. IMHO would be the forum I suppose.
