Furries.

[TxonTirea]

Originally Posted by Zai-en-ken

I was just saying that maybe furries should have their own mini-site within deviant art, since there are so many there already. They could call it
"AnthroArt" or something, and maybe this way trolls would be easier to single out, since they would all be trying to get after people in the mini site if they wanted to troll furries. They would still be free to do whatever they wanted on the normal site, so it isn't segregation.

Also,
Index -- Fur Affinity [dot] net
SoFurry.com

There are already so many of your "Mini-sites", more arn't going to happen. People are going to post things you deem innapropriate on websites you think shouldn't have them. Its called the Internet. Get over it.

[Fkeu 'Awpo]

Taken from Merriam-Webster. If you wish to dispute with them, be my guest.

[Raiden]

Originally Posted by Fkeu 'Awpo

Taken from Merriam-Webster. If you wish to dispute with them, be my guest.

Nice try.

The word, alone, does mean separation. However, when applied to social scenarios, it means something more than physical separation, such as the segregation that occurred during the holocaust, Apartheid, and the period of slavery in the United States. Perhaps "Social Segregation" would have been a better word choice when you tried accusing me of that a few pages ago.

Nice try, though.

Originally Posted by TxonTirea

Also,
Index -- Fur Affinity [dot] net
SoFurry.com

There are already so many of your "Mini-sites", more arn't going to happen. People are going to post things you deem innapropriate on websites you think shouldn't have them. Its called the Internet. Get over it.

-______-

I was actually trying to make a helpful suggestion that would make both sides happy.

If furries weren't so easily provoked by everything, stupid arguments like this wouldn't start. Also, I never actually said that furry art was inappropriate. I just said that some people really hate it, and would rather not have to see it if they had that choice. Just today, I decided to visit the DeviantArt page of a favorite Flash artist of mine. Instead of the expected images of his work, I got a nice big picture of a scantily clad furry. I didn't want to see a jailbait squirrel girl posing, I wanted to see pictures of his 2D sprite artwork.

And you know what? I'm not gonna get over it. If I'm watching T.V. and I happen to come across Oprah, am I gonna "get over it"? No, I'm gonna change the goddamn channel, because I can't stand Oprah.

I'm done with this thread......it's just getting derailed from what it was it was supposed to be about, and I don't want to be on bad terms with other members over stupid **** like this.

[Fkeu 'Awpo]

Originally Posted by Zai-en-ken

The word, alone, does mean separation. However, when applied to social scenarios, it means something more than physical separation, such as the segregation that occurred during the holocaust, Apartheid, and the period of slavery in the United States. Perhaps "Social Segregation" would have been a better word choice when you tried accusing me of that a few pages ago.

Yes. Yes it does mean separation.

Doesnt' really matter what you think it means. It's been defined as separation.

Social segregation, racial segregation. It's all still segregation.

But I'll say separation from now on. Happy?

You're trying to separate some art from the other art. And when theres nothing NSFW about it, I don't see the problem.

Originally Posted by Zai-en-ken

Nice try, though.

Thanks.

Originally Posted by Zai-en-ken

Just today, I decided to visit the DeviantArt page of a favorite Flash artist of mine. Instead of the expected images of his work, I got a nice big picture of a scantily clad furry.

I don't really understand how this is possible.

Did you enter his gallery, see the furry thumbnail, then "accidentally" click on it?

Did it go a little something like this?

Originally Posted by Zai-en-ken

And you know what? I'm not gonna get over it. If I'm watching T.V. and I happen to come across Oprah, am I gonna "get over it"? No, I'm gonna change the goddamn channel, because I can't stand Oprah.

We should put Oprah on a really high channel so no one accidentally comes across it, right? Because nobody likes her anyway.
You make even stranger analogies than I do.
Changing the channel /is/ getting over it. Do the same on the Internet.
Oh no, furry porn. *close tab*

Originally Posted by Zai-en-ken

I'm done with this thread......it's just getting derailed from what it was it was supposed to be about.

umad? Honestly, this thread has never really been about anything specific.

[Elyannia]

Originally Posted by Zai-en-ken

I just said that some people really hate it, and would rather not have to see it if they had that choice.

I hate vanilla cake so should that have its own section in the bakery away from the other cakes?

Originally Posted by Zai-en-ken

And you know what? I'm not gonna get over it. If I'm watching T.V. and I happen to come across Oprah, am I gonna "get over it"? No, I'm gonna change the goddamn channel, because I can't stand Oprah.

Well that sounded really childish.Maybe you should come back when you're not so angry. No one will respect you if you start ranting out anger that mean nothing. And yes I agree by changing that channel that is getting over it. If you didn't "get over" Oprah being on T.V then you would probable be starting a petition to get her off the air, but by flipping the channel you get over the fact that she will be on air and you move along with your life and go to the next channel.

Originally Posted by Zai-en-ken

I'm done with this thread......it's just getting derailed from what it was it was supposed to be about, and I don't want to be on bad terms with other members over stupid **** like this.

Derailed from what? It's a debate thread about furries. No main topic. It's nice to know though that you don't respect us enough to finish the debate. You just throw your hands in the air and say "I quit I'm done with you" Well If you didn't want to be on bad terms maybe you shouldn't have went into a debate thread. There's not going to be roses and sugar cookies in a debate thread.

[Advent]

Originally Posted by Elyannia

I hate vanilla cake so should that have its own section in the bakery away from the other cakes?


Well that sounded really childish.Maybe you should come back when you're not so angry. No one will respect you if you start ranting out anger that mean nothing. And yes I agree by changing that channel that is getting over it. If you didn't "get over" Oprah being on T.V then you would probable be starting a petition to get her off the air, but by flipping the channel you get over the fact that she will be on air and you move along with your life and go to the next channel.
Derailed from what? It's a debate thread about furries. No main topic. It's nice to know though that you don't respect us enough to finish the debate. You just throw your hands in the air and say "I quit I'm done with you" Well If you didn't want to be on bad terms maybe you shouldn't have went into a debate thread. There's not going to be roses and sugar cookies in a debate thread.

Well said.

[Lyra]

Just read the first page on this thread and i'd like to say... Like it or not the na'vi are furries. Want to know why? Because Their art is on various furry sites, I'd like to think that artists who draw furries know more than some of you guys about their own fandom.

Not trolling, just making a point.
Further proof of this is on 'SoFurry' when searching for AVATAR fanfics.

[Eltu]

I disagree, Lyra.

Na'vi are both furries and not furries, it's entirely up to personal definition. One cannot say "this is a furry", since it varies depending on who you ask.

Some people will say "I see Na'vi as furries" - and that's entirely correct. Some people will say "I do not see Na'vi as furries", and that is just as right.

It's nothing else than a matter of individual opinions.

[Lyra]

But seriously, the above is proof that the COMMUNITY of furries itself sees it as part of their fandom (same as the Lion King, and Digimon.) All are entirely different concepts and things, but they still fit into the fandom and have been accepted. I think most of you in the avatar fandom are just scared to admit that you may be called a furry because you like avatar.

(Also, Just want to state here, if you think my views are getting heated, please contact me and tell me... Before it gets out hand!)


also, according to furry wiki, this is a furry


therefore avatar is obviously furry.

[Human No More]

Furries. Ruin. Everything.

You can find furries creating their fetishised version of anything (rule 34 at its worst...) - it doesn't mean the original subject has anything to do with their fetish.
The fact that furries see children's movies and TV shows as 'part of their fandom' is just weird - if they really have a fetish for those, then that's their business, but there are children who like those and have no interest in sex with a humanoid animal - they are not furries. Furries are an unintended audience for 99% of things.

[Tsyal Makto]

TBH I don't really give a tinkers damn what anyone thinks about any of this either way.

Whatever makes life easier.

[Devourment]

Originally Posted by Lyra

also, according to furry wiki, this is a furry

therefore avatar is obviously furry.

That's a furry because it's clear and definitive purpose is to represent an animal with humanistic features. The Na'vi are blue aliens living on a different planet.

You need to remember that just because all furries are anthropomorphic doesn't mean that everything that is anthropomorphic is a furry. A fandom can't simply come through and redefine characters in movies like the Lion King that have been around years before them.

Also: Egyptian gods, wtf man, wtf.

[Eltu]

I completely agree with Devourment.

(now that doesn't happen every day )

[Elyannia]

Originally Posted by Human No More

Furries. Ruin. Everything.

You can find furries creating their fetishised version of anything (rule 34 at its worst...) - it doesn't mean the original subject has anything to do with their fetish.
The fact that furries see children's movies and TV shows as 'part of their fandom' is just weird - if they really have a fetish for those, then that's their business, but there are children who like those and have no interest in sex with a humanoid animal - they are not furries. Furries are an unintended audience for 99% of things.

Are you trying to piss people off?

[Human No More]

I could ask the same about people who try to justify their interest by claiming things are part of it. I know they they may want to incorporate it into their interests and don't care so much (there is far, FAR worse stuff on the internet...), but I do object to attempts to connect anyone who likes that subject as 'a furry' in some misguided attempt at justification.