submitted 2015-02-20 18:49:08 by furvert_tailEquine, large canid
furvert_tailEquine, large canid 1 point on 2015-02-20 18:51:16
Was pointed to this recently. Seems that zoophiles are roughly twice as likely to be animal right advocates as the general population.
Tundrovyy-VolkCanidae 4 points on 2015-02-20 20:06:14
I'm not entirely sure what this is showing, other than that 8.7% of furries are zoos (I thought it was more like 15% but anyway) and 5.9% are both zoos and ARAs.
I don't see anything that pertains to zoos as a whole, just furry zoos. Still interesting though.
AliasTheReindeerPone 2 points on 2015-02-20 22:42:30
(I thought it was more like 15% but anyway)
Actually, I think that's what the graph is trying to convey in a very roundabout way. If we add the ARAs and the overlap, we get 26.2 percent. In the next slide, the ARAs and the overlap also add to 26.2 percent, even though the percent of people who are solely ARAs is different in either case.
So I think what the graph is saying is that 8.7 percent of furries are zoophiles but not ARAs, and 5.9 percent of furries are both zoophiles and ARAs, which means that a total of 14.6 percent of furries are some sort of zoophile.
Phew. I guess what I'm saying is, I completely agree; this graph could be much more clear.
Tundrovyy-VolkCanidae 3 points on 2015-02-20 23:48:30
a total of 14.6 percent of furries are some sort of zoophile.
Christ, yes, thank you. In my defence I did make that post about 5 minutes after waking up this morning... :P
AliasTheReindeerPone 2 points on 2015-02-21 00:11:58
And in the defense of everyone, I think five minutes after waking up is about when that visual was made. I don't know if I've ever seen a diagram arranged quite like that, but either way, it's interesting information to think about.
I'd have more questions: What exactly counts as animal rights advocate? For example I try to only buy and consume vegan stuff and I'm all for the animal rights cause. But other than the occasional comment on reddit I'm not active at all. I maybe wouldn't put myself in that category, maybe others would?
furvert_tailEquine, large canid 1 point on 2015-02-21 09:32:04
I think it's "self-identifies as a…", in both cases.
YearningmiceEquus 2 points on 2015-02-20 22:40:14
I would also say that self-categorization like this can be misleading. I wouldn't want to have the "animal rights" label yet my thinking is closer to their camp than "regular" folks.
Also, because it is self-identified, the number have gone down significantly as people get hunted.
ulungu 3 points on 2015-02-20 23:11:25
Also, because it is self-identified, the number have gone down significantly as people get hunted.
Interesting. Furries are twice as likely to be animal rights advocates than the general public, and Furry Zoophiles are twice as likely as that, so four times as likely as the general public. This is good, because I really can't imagine being a zoophile and not being an advocate of animal rights, unless you really don't care about the animals after all, which most zoophiles claim they do.
It's a little distressing that apparently the majority of zoophiles don't identify as advocates of animal rights, but at the same time I know people are horrible at changing their minds, unable to believe anything outside the norms of society, and can tolerate extreme levels of cognitive dissonance. With that in consideration, zoophiles aren't doing too badly on that front, and the fact that more aren't animal rights advocates can probably be attributed to stupidity rather than malice.
KynophileDog Lover 2 points on 2015-02-21 18:22:17
Part of it is cognitive dissonance, and the same sort of exceptions for those close to us that human beings do naturally (we care more for our family and friends than strangers, animals included). But the difficulty for me in identifying as an animal rights advocate, despite being behind that cause for a lot of issues, is the sort of extremism and self-righteousness that is found within the larger of those communities (PETA, for example). I'm all for giving animals better lives, but removing them from human society entirely seems like a well-intentioned terrible idea.
It's the same reason I don't identify as a feminist, despite believing that men and women should have equal standing in society. Too many people with extremely bad ideas have taken over the label for me to view it as more than an embarrassment at this point.
/r/zoophilia archive
Was pointed to this recently. Seems that zoophiles are roughly twice as likely to be animal right advocates as the general population.
I'm not entirely sure what this is showing, other than that 8.7% of furries are zoos (I thought it was more like 15% but anyway) and 5.9% are both zoos and ARAs.
I don't see anything that pertains to zoos as a whole, just furry zoos. Still interesting though.
Actually, I think that's what the graph is trying to convey in a very roundabout way. If we add the ARAs and the overlap, we get 26.2 percent. In the next slide, the ARAs and the overlap also add to 26.2 percent, even though the percent of people who are solely ARAs is different in either case.
So I think what the graph is saying is that 8.7 percent of furries are zoophiles but not ARAs, and 5.9 percent of furries are both zoophiles and ARAs, which means that a total of 14.6 percent of furries are some sort of zoophile.
Phew. I guess what I'm saying is, I completely agree; this graph could be much more clear.
Christ, yes, thank you. In my defence I did make that post about 5 minutes after waking up this morning... :P
And in the defense of everyone, I think five minutes after waking up is about when that visual was made. I don't know if I've ever seen a diagram arranged quite like that, but either way, it's interesting information to think about.
There are comments, so why not ask? https://www.weasyl.com/submission/877419/visualization-zoophiles-and-animal-rights
I'd have more questions: What exactly counts as animal rights advocate? For example I try to only buy and consume vegan stuff and I'm all for the animal rights cause. But other than the occasional comment on reddit I'm not active at all. I maybe wouldn't put myself in that category, maybe others would?
I think it's "self-identifies as a…", in both cases.
I would also say that self-categorization like this can be misleading. I wouldn't want to have the "animal rights" label yet my thinking is closer to their camp than "regular" folks.
Also, because it is self-identified, the number have gone down significantly as people get hunted.
Yes.
Compare the survey from 2008: http://www.furcenter.org/pubs/SF_2008.pdf
Interesting. Furries are twice as likely to be animal rights advocates than the general public, and Furry Zoophiles are twice as likely as that, so four times as likely as the general public. This is good, because I really can't imagine being a zoophile and not being an advocate of animal rights, unless you really don't care about the animals after all, which most zoophiles claim they do.
It's a little distressing that apparently the majority of zoophiles don't identify as advocates of animal rights, but at the same time I know people are horrible at changing their minds, unable to believe anything outside the norms of society, and can tolerate extreme levels of cognitive dissonance. With that in consideration, zoophiles aren't doing too badly on that front, and the fact that more aren't animal rights advocates can probably be attributed to stupidity rather than malice.
Part of it is cognitive dissonance, and the same sort of exceptions for those close to us that human beings do naturally (we care more for our family and friends than strangers, animals included). But the difficulty for me in identifying as an animal rights advocate, despite being behind that cause for a lot of issues, is the sort of extremism and self-righteousness that is found within the larger of those communities (PETA, for example). I'm all for giving animals better lives, but removing them from human society entirely seems like a well-intentioned terrible idea.
It's the same reason I don't identify as a feminist, despite believing that men and women should have equal standing in society. Too many people with extremely bad ideas have taken over the label for me to view it as more than an embarrassment at this point.