Not a furry either but I really appreciate just the sheer amount of effort these people put into the costumes. must take a lot of time and money to do but these people love what they do and go to these conventions where they have tons of fun. props to them!! 👍
I’m going to get a lot of hate for this, but for the majority of furries, their fandom is at least party sexual in nature with over 70% of furries reporting they they view furry porn. Personally, I find that disgusting and I feel that the furry community’s constant need for validation detracts from the seriousness of LGBT issues at large. I may be wrong in my judgements, but the claim that furries are just people with a hobby is an attempt to sweep an inconvenient truth under the rug.
I have literally never seen anyone claim being a furry is just a hobby lmao. Yes, it’s sexual. Who gives a shit?
Then we do not have the same experience. From my perspective, people have been claiming for years that the sexual aspect of the furry community is only popularized by a vocal minority and that most furries are just individuals interested in a hobby. If that isn’t your stance, then you and I have no disagreement.
I may be wrong in my judgements
The issue is that you’re conflating “furry sexuality” with beastiality when they come from very different places with very different outcomes and moral implications.
The short story is that humans at ~10yrs old start learning and coding for what features they find sexually attractive which happens to co-incide with the target audience for many anthropomorphic films/cartoons/etc. and so some small percentage start developing an aesthetic and/or sexual preference for animorphism which then creates a subculture that feeds back onto itself.
It’s not “beastiality” it’s “mickey mouse-iality”. It’s not a sexual attraction to animals, it does not result in harm to animals, it does not result in rape or consent violations from those unable to give consent. It’s as close to beastiality as anime girls are.
It’s as close to beastiality as anime girls are.
that seems to bring up another issue, which is the overtly-cute, cartoon nature that seems to be very attractive to children. I also find anime girls problematic as so much of that porn blurs the line between adults and children, which gets into some strange differences - apparently in japan, they don’t consider depiction of minors as problematic as we do. I think it’s outrageously creepy.
so interesting thing to bring up, because some will find ALL OF THIS very off putting, and for good reason.
Yeah, if I’m honest I probably chose anime girls as my comparison point for that reason and because I also find it all a bit unappealing.
However, if someone was running around and saying anyone with an anime profile is a pedophile my response would be the same. Anime girls ultimately harm no-one.
I understand the mechanics of it. I’m not conflating furry sexuality with bestiality. I am still repulsed by the attraction to anthropomorphic animals just as much as I am to the attraction to real animals - especially the furry art featuring non-human genitals. It’s gross, it’s weird, and it’s a perversion of childhood themes that I would prefer not to be so public.
I’m not conflating furry sexuality with bestiality
You literally said in a comment further down:
I don’t find porn in general disgusting. I find furry porn disgusting because it borders on bestiality.
It’s perfectly valid for you to have the feelings of “It’s gross, it’s weird, and a perversion of my childhood themes. I don’t like it, and I don’t want to see it” because honestly; Same.
The problem comes when you start arguing that they need to be shoved into a closet in order to protect the children and the “real” LGBTQ individuals.
It becomes especially problematic when you start equivocating it to things that are actually harmful like beastiality and is no different than the “all gays are pedophiles” trope.
The problem comes when you start arguing that they need to be shoved into a closet in order to protect the children and the “real” LGBTQ individuals.
yet I can totally see why LGBTQ people would NOT want to complicate their already assailed lives by defending the fursona types. life’s hard enough explaining the intricacies of human sexuality without tossing in cartoon hypotheticals.
Yup
As the TERFs say:
I can totally see why women would NOT want to complicate their already assailed lives by defending the gender non-conforming. life’s hard enough explaining the intricacies of womanhood without tossing in crossdressing hypotheticals.
Not calling you a TERF, but you do see the logical fallacy you’re sprinting straight into, right?
Cute straw man. Either I’m a terf or I agree with your premise. Neither, thanks.
I’m using something we can, hopefully, both agree you’re not and is problematic to demonstrate the fallicious logic. What would be a better way to communicate that?
Again. I’m not conflating the two. You quote me on explaining why I personally find it disgusting. Then you tell me it’s okay for me to have that feeling. Great. We’re on the same page.
The problem isn’t conflating anthropomorphic animal porn with animal porn, it’s conflating being a furry with sexual and gender identity.
Edit: I will also add that I’m not arguing we do anything to furries. If you look for my calls to action, I’m clearly just arguing that people need to admit it’s a fetish community. I’m not saying we need to shove furries in the closet or make it illegal to be a furry. However, even if I did say that it would be difficult to argue it’s the same as violating LGBT rights because sex and gender are central to a person’s identity while being a furry is not.
sex and gender are central to a person’s identity while being a furry is not.
Sex and gender are clearly central to your identity, just as much as ‘furry’ is central, sometimes exclusively, to other people’s identity.
it’s conflating being a furry with sexual and gender identity.
Who are you to define what is or isn’t a legitimate sexual or gender identity? Identity is a personal and subjective thing. For many ‘furry’ is a gender and/or sexual identity and to say that it isn’t is no different than arguing with a trans person about theirs.
The issue isn’t that you are explicitly making some call to action, it’s that you are othering and implicitly calling for the persecution of other people based entirely on your personal aesthetics.
Why are heterosexuality and homosexuality not ‘just part of the fetish community’?
Why are heterosexuality and homosexuality not ‘just part of the fetish community’?
because people are born with these predilections, they don’t buy them off of temu.
Predilections for certain features, what makes you so certain anthropomorphism isn’t one of those predilections?
I’m not the one to define these terms. At best, furry is a case of gender expression, not gender identity. These are not the same concept, and I would argue that furry is not even gender expression since there isn’t an underlying gender identity for it to express, though I am not an expert here.
The issue isn’t that you are explicitly making some call to action, it’s that you are othering and implicitly calling for the persecution of other people based entirely on your personal aesthetics.
That’s not what I’m doing. Let me be clear about my central claim - the furry community is a fetish community. While I have given my personal feelings on the matter, my arguments have all been in service of this claim. Even if I were attempting to other furries, I wouldn’t feel that bad on the basis that I don’t believe it’s a sexual orientation, sexual identity, or gender identity, rather I believe it’s a fetish. However, that’s not what I’m intending to do, though I admit that sharing my personal feelings on the matter may have come across that way.
If I did kink shame anybody, or otherwise make furries feel like inferior people, I want to apologize here. I don’t have an issue with furries. I hope they can continue to enjoy their fetish. I just want it to be recognized for what it is.
Why are heterosexuality and homosexuality not ‘just part of the fetish community’?
I have also made the claim that the misidentification of the furry community as a gender identity, sexual identity, or sexual orientation is harmful to the LGBT movement which exists to protect gender identities, sexual identities, and sexual orientations. To me, this question is a perfect example of the confusion that’s brought about by the conflation of furry sexuality with the LGBT movement that is harmful to the LGBT movement.
To give my answer, it’s because heterosexuality and homosexuality are not defined by their pornographic material, sex toys, roleplay scenarios, or a shared hobby in the way that furry sexuality is.
I have also made the claim that the misidentification of the furry community as a gender identity, sexual identity, or sexual orientation is harmful to the LGBT movement which exists to protect gender identities, sexual identities, and sexual orientations. To me, this question is a perfect example of the confusion that’s brought about by the conflation of furry sexuality with the LGBT movement that is harmful to the LGBT movement.
appreciate the nuance in this reply.
a case of gender expression, not gender identity.
When those don’t align that’s usually referred to as dysphoria/dysmorphia. That’s what the fursuits are for, just like HRT, tattoos, piercings, clothing, etc.
I just want it to be recognized for what it is.
What it is, or what you perceive it to be? I don’t disagree that fetish is a part of it, but that’s true of any gender/sexuality etc. It’s like flattening down all homosexuality to leather daddies.
Then what are heterosexuality and homosexuality defined by?
Pornographic material: Pornhub has entirely separate sites for “straight” and “gay”. Would adding a “furry” site really feel all that strange or out of place?
sex toys, roleplay scenarios: I don’t think that’s as strongly correlated as you’re suggesting. Pony/pet play is big in the BDSM community and bad dragon toys were far from exclusively for furries. Unless you have something else in mind I’m unaware of?
Shared hobby: What exactly is the hobby all furries share?
Personally, I find that disgusting and I feel that the furry community’s constant need for validation detracts from the seriousness of LGBT issues at large.
And the overt sexual displays in public places at Pride events don’t? That is objectively much more damaging to the attempts by the queer population to not be seen as deviant sex freaks by the general population.
The irony is that most people who wear fursuits don’t perform sex acts with them, while you won’t be able to find a single person at pride wearing bondage gear who will tell you that what they’re wearing is never ‘utilized’ in their bedroom.
Singling out furries in this way makes no sense, you’re just personally squicked by it and trying to rationalize that feeling.
P.S. Is a Star Trek fan not a ‘legitimate’ fan if they lust over Seven of Nine or any of the other characters?
The irony is that most people who wear fursuits don’t perform sex acts with them, while you won’t be able to find a single person at pride wearing bondage gear who will tell you that what they’re wearing is never ‘utilized’ in their bedroom.
Yes. That is harmful too.
Singling out furries in this way makes no sense, you’re just personally squicked by it and trying to rationalize that feeling.
I did say that I personally find it disgusting. My ability to reason is not somehow tainted by my opinions.
P.S. Is a Star Trek fan not a ‘legitimate’ fan if they lust over Seven of Nine or any of the other characters?
I never claimed that furries don’t like anthropomorphic animals if they view furry porn.
https://www.addictionhelp.com/porn/statistics/
Online use: Approximately 69% of American men and 40% of American women view online porn each year.
Other people view porn too. Do you now find everyone disgusting? Also, what’s the source of you claim that over 70% of furries view furry porn? And how does it matter? They’re individuals, and can make choices on their own.
The only way it’s only 69% of men is if 31% of them have no Internet access, lol.
I remember a decade or so ago reading about an attempt to do a study on porn consumption for men, but they literally were unable to cobble together a control group because they all watch porn.
Other people view porn too. Do you now find everyone disgusting?
No. I don’t find porn in general disgusting. I find furry porn disgusting because it borders on bestiality. You obviously know that’s what I meant. Don’t be obtuse.
Also, what’s the source of you claim that over 70% of furries view furry porn?
https://furscience.com/research-findings/sex-relationships-pornography/5-4-frequency-of-porn-use/
And how does it matter? They’re individuals, and can make choices on their own.
They are individuals and can make choices on their own. However, I have already expressed why I think it matters. I personally believe the furry community is harmful toward the LGBT movement. Regardless, it matters simply because it’s the truth and there is a major misconception that being a furry isn’t a kink because it isn’t inherently sexual, despite the fact that it is a kink for the majority of furries.
I personally believe the furry community is harmful toward the LGBT movement.
The same logic is used by transmedicalists to call non-binary people harmful to LGBT because they are “weird”. The rest was perfectly explained by @[email protected].
That’s categorically incorrect. First of all, I never said the harm towards the LGBT community is caused by the fact that furries are weird. Being a furry is independent of sexual and gender identity. The implication that they are the same is the very thing that is harmful to the LGBT movement. The fact that furries are weird just amplifies the issue.
I find furry porn disgusting because it borders on bestiality.
The only reason bestiality is really a problem in the real world is because of the intelligence/sapience difference between humans and animals.
That doesn’t exist in the fantasy worlds of furries, where the human-animal hybrids all have human-level intelligence.
You’re using the same logic that made Australian authorities ban women with A-cup breasts from being porn actresses: 'female children don’t have large breasts either, therefore porn of a flat-chested woman ‘borders on pedophilia’.
Ridiculous.
No. It’s clearly not the same logic. I have no problem with anyone’s body shape. If an actress were to act out the role of a child in an adult film, then I would have a problem. Since you want to take it there, then I’ll point out that you are using the same logic as the people who claim certain art is not pedophilic because the child’s body is canonically inhabited by a thousand year old soul. Is that context readily apparent? Is that context entirely relevant? I would argue it is not.
Is that context readily apparent
Yes.
Visible human emotions, walks on two legs, exhibits clear intelligence (talks, reasons, makes jokes, etc.)
They are called anthropomorphic for a reason. Nobody wants to fuck a real wolf.
This just opens more questions than it answers. Like, I know this is from a children’s movie, but since we are discussing furry sexuality, suppose it was furry porn. How could a bunny realistically consent to a fox? Is that not a problematic power dynamic? It sounds like a stupid question, but I shouldn’t even have to evaluate these sorts of questions. It shows that I don’t need to understand the intricacies of pornographic material to be able to decide if it’s gross or not. (And before you ask, I don’t like power in balances in human porn either.)
I’d also like to emphasize that I am not drawing a moral comparison between furries and pedophiles. I don’t care if furries want to do their thing behind closed doors. I personally find it gross, and think that the way the furry community suppresses this side of their fandom is unhealthy and potentially a public health risk, but I do not have a moral qualm with furries in principle. I’m not advocating for making furries illegal or anything. I simply think they need to collectively admit that the sexual side of their fandom exists and is prevalent.
furries tend to be gay men for some reason, I rarely see women in suits? they’re like rare birds
I have lots of friends who are furries. I just tell them I’m too old and don’t get it, but have fun.
I don’t care for furries, but I actually dislike the common art style that Western furries use. They always have this aesthetic that make them look like knock-off DreamWorks characters. Not sure if they count as furries but I find animal-based characters in anime much cuter. Also, I’m not a huge fan of their R-18 stuff popping up on my feed.
My beef with furries is entirely my own derangement and has everything to do with beserkers. No I don’t want to turn into an anthropomorphic bear, I want to embody a bear driven mad which is to say go apeshit hit someone with a yard implement and sacrifice them to an ancient god. If you call me a bear because of my weight and general looks I am going to hit you with a shovel and steal one of your kidneys.
Its one of those niche communities that makes me smile - a lot of creativity there. They’re my kind of critters (absolute geeks and nerds).
Same I’ve been to so many furcons and it’s a fandom full of geeks and nerds. The creativity of the community is awesome and it’s something you don’t see in any other fandoms. Them fursuits do be crazy expensive too and it’s really just a form of cosplay which is what people don’t understand.
Did meet disgusting furries too that painted my view in a not-so bright light. Oh well, I’m now just more cautious all-around.
There are horrible people in every group. Unfortunately, it tends to be the worst offenders that stand out and define the rest.
had a strange discussion a couple years ago with someone who insisted their fursona / fur suit outfit should be protected like LGBTQ rights have been enshrined. I took exception to that and still do because I do not want to see this as a lever to justify excluding / persecuting LGBTQ folk who have fought for a century for their rights. The way they put it was that ‘stonewall’ was for furry rights as much as LGBTQ rights and my mind said: yeah but they did the fighting, they’ve been in the struggle, you just showed up with a fox suit with crotch zippers… my dawg…
I’m not advocating for their persecution, nor do I believe ‘we have enough diversity and should close the door’… but I still don’t see it as an equivalent.
I do not want to see this as a lever to justify excluding / persecuting LGBTQ folk
You are the one pushing the lever of exclusion by arguing to remove ‘just a bit’ of the Q from LGBTQ.
Re-read this thread replacing ‘furry’ with any other form of queer and tell me that there’s no struggle, fighting, persecution, etc. An equivalent of what you just said would be:
The way they put it was that ‘stonewall’ was for drag rights as much as LGBTQ rights and my mind said: yeah but they did the fighting, they’ve been in the struggle, you just showed up in clown makeup wearing a dress… my dawg…
Re-read this thread replacing ‘furry’ with any other form of queer
do the LGBTQ folk consider furry a form of queer? or is that just more of the same assumption on furry folks part?
honest query because that’s a lot more important to me than furry folk considering themselves lgbtq.
In order to be welcomed into the “LGBTQ community” you must gain acceptance from the elder queers via the standard committee process. The specifics are written down within the gay agenda if you care to get into the weeds, but ‘furry’ is currently pending review and is in the queue after a consensus is reached on ‘asexual’. /s
Serious answer:
- LGBTQ folk are not a monolith and neither are ‘furry’ folk.
- This folk, me, would include them as such if that is how they self-identify because that is how you treat people.
- You do see how your questions are othering and engaging in the worst kind of gatekeeping right?
of course, you can be gay and furry, but this doesn’t answer the query which was: is furry lgbtq. does a cisgender, straight furry have any claim to the same struggle as stonewall - which was the comment that prompted my query.
you do see how you are continuing to confuse what should be a fairly straight-ahem-forward thing to answer, right?
because I don’t see this as gatekeeping at all, I’m not in either community, but consider myself a strong ally of lgbtq people whom I’ve advocated for my adult life, both in and out of the military. I get that these things are very fluid for some people and titles / permissions aren’t granted by the committee, BUT ALSO, I do listen to my lgbtq peers when they take exception to rando’s hopping onto their float claiming it was built for them.
hence my genuine confusion. it’s not an attempt to limit people’s rights or to man the gates, it’s a genuine question.
does a cisgender, straight furry have any claim to the same struggle as stonewall
If you read through this thread replacing “furry” with any other identity label the levels of discrimination and phobia should be extremely apparent, and this is a rather tolerant and accepting space for them compared to more general cultural attitudes.
Also it’s not like stonewall was the struggle and now that that’s done all the struggle is over. In my opinion the core of “the struggle” is to advocate for inclusivity of all those marginalized. There’s a lot of marganilizing going on in this thread.
you do see how you are continuing to confuse what should be a fairly straight-ahem-forward thing to answer?
To some degree, but the problem is that gender and sexuality is not that straightforward. Do you have suggestions on how to make it less confusing?
I do listen to my lgbtq peers when they take exception to rando’s hopping onto their float claiming it was built for them.
That’s gatekeeping. The only thing it does is further wedge issues and perpetuate divide and conquer exploits. That argument and line of thinking is the exact same one that TERFs, etc. apply. I think they are unaware of the work that the furry community does to help propel that specific float if for no other reason than it adjusts the Overton window.
it’s not an attempt to limit people’s rights or to man the gates, it’s a genuine question.
I know, which is why I’m engaging at all. I apologize as I’m a crotchety old person annoyed at having to constantly repeat the same thing over and over again which always seems to boils down to “discrimination is bad, yeah?”. My frustration isn’t directed at you and I apologize that it’s leaking(spraying) out, but I’m trying to provide a genuine answer to a question with a flawed premise.
To some degree, but the problem is that gender and sexuality is not that straightforward. Do you have suggestions on how to make it less confusing?
yes, by not involving costumes!
That’s gatekeeping. The only thing it does is further wedge issues and perpetuate divide and conquer exploits.
it’s gatekeeping to listen to queer people. Huh. that’s a new one.
“discrimination is bad, yeah?”
and how are they being discriminated against? Are they being refused medical care, marriage rights, the ability to serve their country? I can’t see these as equivalent as they represent two fundamentally wildly different cases - a person wants to wear a costume, vs., a person’s sexual preferences that have been observed in humans and the animal kingdom everywhere.
I’m sorry if my premise is flawed, and I’m not trying to create arguments where there people should find love and support. If people came out of the womb identifying their fursonas perhaps I’d feel differently.
yes, by not involving costumes!
All clothing is costume. People costume to express all sorts of identities, it’s not any more complicated than skirts, dresses, burkas, etc.
it’s gatekeeping to listen to queer people. Huh. that’s a new one.
Textbook “I have a black friend” fallacy.
If people came out of the womb identifying their fursonas
Nobody comes out of the womb identifying as anything. If somebody transitions later in life does that make it less valid?
people should find love and support.
That is all I’m arguing for. If somebody self identifies their sexuality as anthropomorphic fictosexual who are you to argue with that? If they define their gender as otherkin why are you telling them that’s not allowed?
Went to pride march recently. We obviously saw some absolutely wild costumes, lots of skin on show etc, but the furries took it to an extreme level. Like couldn’t you just tone it down a little bit in public so you’re not traumatising children.
so we have pride parades that are all out full nudity here heh. PNW. But it’s easier to explain for me. They might see some tiny shriveled dinkies. That’s the majesty of human forms kids. It’s not the skin that would bother me, it’s the mixing of adult and kid stuff that you get with furries. A valid counter-argument is, we sexualize motherhood as well - hell the Venus of Willendorf is some people’s ideal - and that’s not seen as taboo.
It’ll be interesting to see how this all develops in the next few decades.
So I agree with your result but not with the path you took to get there. If we find out tomorrow that there’s some other part of gender or sexuality and people start identifying as that because now their life makes sense with this new label then they should be allowed in even though they didn’t fight or struggle.
But furries aren’t a sexuality or gender, they’re a hobby. It’s just a fun suit and roleplay. That can be enough to base a life around, but it’s a learned hobby like video games or d&d. Not something they’re born with that would cause persecution along with gay and trans rights
Not something they’re born with
Sexuality and gender are a complex interaction of nature and nurture, the belief that homosexuality is exclusively a ‘nature’ thing is predicated on eugenics with the goal of eliminating it. The ‘something they’re born with’ counterargument comes from Alfred Kinsey, et al’s work which showed it’s something everyone carries and so it can’t be eliminated that way.
Traumas, experiences, medications, etc. can all cause changes to an individuals sexuality and gender often in unpredictable ways.
Would you be this exclusive of someone who self-identifies as lesbian after an abusive heterosexual marriage?
If you just want to fuck people wearing wolf costumes then it’s okay dude. You didn’t have to write all that
You gonna do some introspection on that defensiveness and why you’re trotting out the homophobic “you only support LGBTQ people cause you’re gay” trope?
That’s not what I’m saying at all. I have no idea where you’re getting that from.
I’m saying that you are probably a furry and you think your hobby belong in the LGBTQ space instead of lumped in with other roleplay hobbies like dungeons & dragons or LARPing.
Literally nothing about being gay or homophobia, that’s a completely different subject and the fact that you brought it up means you’re the one being defensive.
Not something they’re born with that would cause persecution along with gay and trans rights
yep.
To be clear: I harbor no resentment against furries. They have a right to do their thing, I just don’t want to be involved.
If furry porn didn’t exist, then I might have less of a prejudice against furries and furry content. But as it stands, I will actively avoid anything with the furry aesthetic, because the porn is too weird for me to stomach. You will never be able to remove that association; the damage is done. When I see video games that I might otherwise like, but the art is furry art, I think, “ah, that’s a shame. Won’t be playing that.”
Imagine refusing to play Tunic because of this.
Tunic has a very different art style from furry art IMO.
Idk, I can enjoy a good set of bunny ears or tail
…every furry i’ve known has been a cool person: i’m not saying it’s universal but the fandom tends to attract geeky fun-loving personalities and those are my favorite kind of people to play with…
…as for furry sexuality (which of course isn’t strictly synonymous with the fandom): well, it may not be my jam but neither are men, so i don’t feel any differently about it than i do corset-rippers or gay erotica; as long folks keep their kinks tastefully discreet, go with the gods…
(really the only kink which gets under my skin is objectification / degredation / humiliation / exploitation, and that’s sexuality-agnostic)
I still have an old comment on my computer from Kongregate where I disliked a game just for having a wolf character.
I now hang out with furries more than other types of people.
youre allowed to not like furries but do me a favor and shut up because you trying to justify it is just digging your own grave
I never said I didn’t like furries…
im not talking about you
What are you talking about then?
the other comments on this post? doing the thing i am complaining about
Sorry man I’m quite confused, are you saying people who don’t like furries are trying to justify furries?
people who dont like furries attempting to justify not liking them, which in my opinion is a bad look, regardless of whether or not they say theyre ‘ok’ with furries
Ohhhh, fair point. Sorry for assuming you had something against furries
i’m not a furry
i don’t f/w spaces if i don’t see furries around & welcomed
for one i want to know its a place people don’t have to pass to feel safe
You mean they’re hot?
Dedication and creativity
I can respect that they deserve to be treated a humans and still find it gross. because it’s gross.
Gross? What’s gross about it?
Y’all smell under that suit.
I, unfortunately, do not have a suit 😭
thats a plus for some
Uh, read their username
Mostly the related art. The amount of yiff communities I had to block to keep their porn out of my feed was surprising. I don’t begrudge them their lifestyle. You want to put on something and have sex with somebody, go for it. I’m not into even 1%. The amount of erotic art that exists is beyond astounding to me. Meanwhile, I struggle to find active communities about Halloween, Lego, and various games I play. Granted, I haven’t looked lately for new ones, but the ones I subscribed to previously aren’t very active.
That might be an instance issue, honestly. I have never seen porn of any kind cross my feed unless I specifically go looking for it. Your instance might just be federated with a bunch of furry porn communities.
My feed is basically exclusively 196, politics, Linux, Star Trek, and related meme subs to those - and I just set my feed to top 24 hours or sort by active on the all feed. But I also think a lot of communities outside of those are rather underrepresented on Lemmy.
From my understanding of federated instances, wouldn’t that mean your instance disconnected from whatever instance where those communities were hosted? Additionally, my instance either hosts those communities or is still connected with them, yes? I’m trying to explain Lemmy to friends. So, I’m making sure my understanding is accurate.
Yeah, that’s right. You’re on .world, right? Which I believe is federated with just about everything. There are all kinds of instances out there, and some are more selective of which instances they’re federated with to filter out communities like that.
That’s correct. I’m fine filtering them out manually, I was just very surprised at how much content I was seeing.
Fur suits and furry porn are two different things.
Sure, but nearly all of the furry art I’ve seen has been porn. I get that there lifestyles and activities that are not porn-related. Either way if you’re into it, you do your thing. I’m probably not going to be commenting on their creativity because I find the whole thing a little creepy, but I also wouldn’t limit someone’s ability to live that way.
nearly all of the furry art I’ve seen has been porn
That’s a you problem, the majority of furry art is not porn, and it’s trivially easy on pretty much every site online where furry art is compiled, to filter out explicit material.
You said you find fur suits gross though, those aren’t inherently sexual.
That was someone else. I’m not the original commenter on this comment chain.
When they asked them what they thought was gross you answered, so I would assume you share that opinion. Do you not?
Those outfits look really impressive upclose.
