Who else is into anthropomorphism (example below)? (self.zoophilia)
submitted 2016-12-13 01:52:00 by ManIsAshamed
I always had a crush on this character from Star Trek: The Animated Series named M'Resh. Rewatching as an adult, she often purrs for Kirk because she has the hots for him.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/94/M%27Ress_2.jpg
Yes, I do :P
Now I hate to admit it, because it reinforces our negative stereotypes, but yes, I AM a furry :/
[deleted]
Mostly not.
It depends on how much 'human parts' an anthro has.
Things like human genitals, hands, feet, face, etc. are an instant no.
It kind of ruins the beautiful parts that I love in dogs, wolves and foxes.
If its somewhat human, its a turn down. I prefer canines, and when it's mixed with human... neh
Furries get out! REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE~
Wtf
Ｏ Ｕ Ｔ ！！！ ☞☞☞
Are you new here or something?
i'll have you know that i reported you to this site's admins for violating our safe space that we
havehad here until you unceremoniously burst in and defiled it with you're disgusting perverted art (or "anthropomorphic" as you deviant types call it). i'm onto you're sick game your trying to play here. you think you can condition us into liking human-like stuff? wrong! stop now or i'll be passing all of your ips to the police.Lol
Either zoophiles really don't like these jokes or zoophiles are truly delusional when it comes to seeing sarcasm.
Guys, do I really have to tell you he isn't serious?
I'm trying to equalize your downvotes and upvotes, but looks like the baddies are having it their way.
Dude, it's cool. I'm totally fine with downvotes. Don't worry about it. But hey, I really appreciate your kindness! Thanks! <3
I enjoy it.
Quote: "This is a subreddit for information and expressing of love, not fetishism or kinks." `Nuff said....
[deleted]
Because I use the name of a cartoon character, I´m a furry? Do you mean that?
[deleted]
Huge disappointment ahead: I´m not at all interested in oversexualized cartoon characters (that´s what the whole "Furrydom" idea revolves around, right?) and took Thirty as my symbol because our temperaments match quite perfectly...as you surely have noticed if you are familiar with the cartoon series. ;)
we're quoting the sidebar now eh?
nuff said...
Have I complained once about being attacked? I think that´s not the case...also, there´s something missing in the siderbar: Respect your orientation. Bringing in this infantile Furry shit doesn´t exactly show much respect for zoophilia at all...
I don't want that in the sidebar and would hope it never ends up there (reminds me too much of the white racist "respect your race" propoganda frankly), and yes, you've at least complained about downvote "brigading" quite frequently.
Well, I never use the voting system, not even for you or my other antagonists. I wasn´t even complaining, I just pointed out how similar the mechanisms of " don´t listen to the pariah" in here are, compared with the way the normies react to zoophilia.
Honestly 30-30, I've never told people explicitly not to listen to you. Heck, I've even defended you. I just find you're complete lack of evidence for most of your points less than compelling. Couple that with the certainty you have that you are right, and it makes for some kind of strange but sick comedy.
I wish you'd consider all-in-all, that maybe I am right one one or two points. I know I've extended you that courtesy.
Lack of evidence? Well, take a look outside, surf the internet, read newspapers and interviews with so called zoophiles. It´s all there. I think the problem is that you simply don´t want to see, don´t want to realize. "Was nicht sein kann, das darf nicht sein", as we Germans say ("What cannot be real that mustn´t be real"). YOu categorically exclude the possibility even before you check the evidence, therefor you will not see.Selective perception.
Don´t you think it wouldn´t be easier for me if I was wrong? I could dismiss any last little bit of hope for the better and just live my life. What you still don´t include in your views is the fact that I, unlike you, have experienced times other than the recent ones. I lived through the 80s and 90s, when we, the zoos who see things as I see it and tried to leave a mark for the future with the zeta rules had the upper hand within our community. I know what it is like to be a zoo without the porn and hysteria; it isn´t simple nostalgia that lets me say this era was way better for us than the recent one. We gained traction as a community, we found more than enough openminded persons we could talk to.
I also have toi remind you that I live in a country where having sex with animals wasn´t illegal until july 2013. I know how it feels to be a zoo without laws. You lack that experience, what causes your narrow vision.
I was a zoo before the internet porn craze, I know how life as a zoophile was back then...you don´t. I can assure you that I have put lots of consideration into it before I made up my mind. It took me from 1998 to 2008/9 to realize what really is going wrong within our community. It took the first few articles of animal porn distributors, it took Enumclaw, the birth of Beastforum, the birth of the anti zoo movement, the birth of ZETA shitshills, the animal brothel hysteria, etc.....but all of that led to all of my conclusions and opinions. I eliminated all the variables and, voilá, here we are now, arguing. Let me remind you once again: you!do!not!see!the!entirety!of!the!picture!. That´s the burden of being born too late and in the wrong country. ;)
tl;dr: You obviously are too young and haven´t lived in an environment without laws against your orientation. I have; I know how easygoing it was back then. I was an eyewitness of the decline after 2000 and what´s the worst, we veterans of the IRC felt like prophets all of a sudden when all our worst fears became true after 2000. The mechanisms behind all of it...we knew what would happen if things went the way they actually went, with the porn, the negative press, the irresponsible idiots being irresponsible idiots...we already knew and could foresee it in 1995. Reality has proven us right, Rannoch. What the world is today, how it is, with all the laws, the hositility, the lack of openness, the taboo remaining....that IS the evidence you crave from me.
Sure, there´s no way of telling if things would be better if the "conservative" point of view prevailed. But if you have some cranial capacity left for a little mind exercise, sit down and try to imagine the last two and a half decades without a legion of negative examples freely available online. Without the fencehoppers popping up every two to four weeks in the headlines, without the international porn mafia making us look like their accomplices, without the "anything goes!" credo. Just plain and simple zoophiles who are not accusable of being FATWs because they´re not "exclusive", zoos who actually put the animal´s wellbeing before their own sexual gratification and never stop the self actualization program that is obligatory for any true zoophile. The point is: the antis aren´t completely wrong with their accusations. I realized it painfully on several occasions when so called "zoophiles" tried to play down inacceptable behavior from other "zoophiles". I know the rhetoric too well by now, the black-and-white perspective. "You fuck animals, therfor you must be a good person. Calling yourself a zoo? Then you´re even more the good guy".
The same goes for the sex lib rhetoric. Black-and-white perspective.Plus, it´s an old and already worn out idea , falsified by the 70s. Free love is a hoax, Rannoch. Sexual "freedom" is nothing more than just swapping out religious dogma with porn dogma. Polyamory? Biggest Bullshit Ever, all those folks living in those free love communes in the 70s will tell you alike. The LGBT , once with a very respectable demand of equality, has now mutated into a lobby organisation craving for privilege instead of equal rights. "Privi lege", latin for private law...The "out and proud" attitude has become anachronistic in a time that features an entire industry targeting at gay people. People were given sexual freedom that is unprecedented in human history. Porn, cheap fucks via online hookup sites, openness to almost any kink, fetish and sexual deviation...but, Rannoch, what has this led us to? Is our world sexually more free? Or has it become less free? Or is there a third option...that sexuality has deteriorated into a tradeable good, something to buy and sell, something equally meaningless as a pack of rice or flour? Oversaturation will inevitably lead to perversion. Look around you, Rannoch. Animals are raped in the name of the z-word, your name, Rannoch, if you take zoophilia serious. It´s even caught on tape, millionfold.
I know, the word restriction isn´t particularly popular these days. We know what happens when sexuality is completely restrained. But why are you so sure about having ultimate sexual freedom being beneficial? Sex is a drug as alcohol. As a German, I know the usual "Schnapsleichen" (passed out drunks)...this is when you sell alcohol unrestrained, without limitation and fucking cheap. Lots of alcoholics here in Germany. Is total freedom really the non plus ultra? Or shouldn´t we adopt the asian philosophy perspective of duality, freedom and restraint well balanced as the yin and yang?
Why is society so underfucked although you´re absolutely free to do whatever you want (except animals, corpses and kiddies, of course)? And how exactly our community benefits from th sex lib agenda when we´re already under heavy fire for the sole and simple fact we´re sleeping with quadrupeds? Is it beneficial to open up several other frontlines like animal exploitation through porn, weakening our claim of actual and true love for the animal by inviting this poly bs, by glorifying all that is "porno", limitless and unrestrained sexual conduct with animals?
If nothing prior convinces you, then answer me only one question: what is smarter? To feed a pizza to a pizza-hater by rolling it up and shoving it down the hater´s throat by force? Or isn´t it smarter to cut the pizza in tiny slices and mix it into his regular food covering the pizza looks and taste? Which option will make him choke less or not at all? Why should "they" fully adapt to us when we don´t even try to adapt to them? In the end, it´s us who demand things, not them. So, why not trying to form a picture of zoophilia that will give the normies the least reason to hate on us? Why does it have to be the "everything or nothing" approach? Is this smart? Effective?
Yeah, and it's always been there. The newspaper has never portrayed us positively. It never will. Not until public perception changes. Please respond to my other post addressing this if you actually have an argument against it. I'll consider it. Otherwise, I got nothing for you.
Here: https://www.reddit.com/r/zoophilia/comments/5hujc6/lets_talk_activism_and_public_image/db5ucx7/
Most of the rest of your post relies on this premise, so I admitedly am not going to read the rest. But there is this:
Uh no. I'm in Washington dude. Enumclaw? Remember? I was around when it was legal. I was around when it was illegal, and inbetween too. Nothing has changed.
Again, I was there in 2000 too dude. Nothing was different except a ridicules amount of porn that is now by and large gone. Not sure what you are fighting for now, really.
No, it is not beneficial.
But the way you want to push them away rather than guide them is even less beneficial.
Again, most of the rest of your post tries to discredit me based on not knowing because I was "too young" to experience legality, a factually false pretense. I won't consider it as such.
If you actually have a point, I might consider it. At the moment, the burden of proof is on you.
EDIT: Sorry, I will grant you your one "pizza" question, since you asked directly. I missed it in my skim through before:
Frankly, I would recommend not feeding him pizza.
That seems to be where you and I disconnect.
Look 30-30, I'm really trying to give you another shot here. But it doesn't help when you make so many false assumptions about me (that I've corrected in the past multiple times no less) and then tell me I'm the one covering my ears.
I'll just repeat again: The burden of proof is on the claimant. That would be you.
" ...has never portrayed us positively." Wrong. There are more than enough neutral and/or slightly positive articles---or at least reporters approaching the "zoophiles" in neutrality. Usually, those interviews were going quite well until they arrived at one of the points I´m trying to bring across...fencehopping, animal porn etc....that´s when the the backfire comes into play.
You assume general negativity and that might even be true...for you Americans. Do I have to remind you that Europe isn´t America and we had an entire country with such a high permissivenes that it was totally legal to sell animal porn in official sex shops? Please take note that America isn´t the world.
Enumclaw and "nothing has changed"? What about the laws? What about the Enumclaw incident being the true origin of the anti movement? Before 2005 , no antis were seen around. Sure, people weren´t too pleased when they found out that some guy had sex with an animal, but the organised resentment, the hate, the crusade against us...nothing has changed?
What I am fighting for? Well, a moderate form of zoophilia that makes it as easy as fucking possible for society to tolerate, some sort of "minimal invasive" zoophilia. Our orientation itself already stirs up shit enough, so why stirring up shit even more with all this stuff that leaves a sour aftertaste? Why do we have to pour even more oil into the fire...into the fire we´re standing in?
My proposal is less beneficial? Please tell me, how could I make it worse for us? The only worsening I could imagine is active scanning of every zoo board user´s IP address, hunting us all down until no one even dares logging into the internet anymore. No, really, what could be worse, with a public image not far from the worst imaginable... And now we arrive at the real core issue I have with you: what is YOUR take? Sitting and waiting until "freedom" comes raining down the sky? Sheeplishly accepting our fate? Finally giving in to those who took our entire community hostage? Furries, porn fiends, dangerous retards, "zoophilia try outs" and such...do you really have nothing else to propose than "This experiment failed.Multiple times. Don´t change anything and do it again!" What is it YOU would propose? And what repercussions do you have to fear, without an animal partner and as an "abstinent zoo"?
What if not feeding the pizza isn´t an option? What if your life and that of your quadruped partner depend on feeding the pizza to the pizza-hater? I think, in your current state, ther simply isn´t as much at stake for you as it is for me and other practicing zoophiles. While you seem to have resignated, I and many others haven´t. We NEED changes. Not for us, but for our animal partners. In this light, your answer is a typical Rannoch answer...avoiding the controversial subject at all costs instead of giving the whole thing a decent and long thought. You seemingly answered, but objectively, you sucked out cheap and easy. My question still stands...what will you do: roll it up and force it down the guy´s throat or outsmart him by hiding the pizza in his regular food.
Maybe you aren´t exactly the one to discuss activism with. Since I got to know you a little better by reading your posts, I have sensed an invumerable amount of despair in you, but no anger. Not even when I attack you fiercely. That is a problem of yours, my friend. All changes are the result of anger. Halfhearted...that´s the word that is coming into my mind here, as if you try be be someone that you´re really not in your innermost soul. Is zoophilia really the origin? Or is it just a symptom? I won´t bother you with my thoughts on you right now as this is something you have to sort out with yourself alone.
Look, maybe you would get a better grip of my perspective if you had my experiences. And maybe this would be equally valid for me vice versa...but it is as it is. I cannot "unzoo" myself, but you could gather some experience , experience of how it is to actually lead a longtime relationship with an animal. Honestly, move on and find yourself some mate you are happy with. I swear to all deities known to mankind that your views will change and you´ll be left behind saying "Ooooh, that´s what he meant!" when I´m long gone from this subreddit. Yes, I´ll stop all internet "pro zoo" activities when I turn 50. This I´ve planned for long as I don´t want to waste my last third of my life doing what I´m doing right now...hacking text into the keyboard instead of cuddling with my mares. 5 more years, folks...put the champagne in the fridge so it´s cold enough when I´m gone...;)
Anyway: I doubt we will ever agree on many points, Rannoch. The difference between your viewpoints and mine: my approach never has been tested, whereas your openminded, al inclusive approach has proven to be ineffective and even massively harming our cause, has proven to dig the trenches between us zoophiles and the normals deeper and deeper. I just cannot wrap my head around the fact you don´t see the harm that has been done by this permissiveness. Just name a common accusation from the opposition and I´ll prove it with a single word. Zoophiles are porn fiends (obvious, isn´t it?), cannot control themselves (trepassing, fencehopping), are sexual perverts who fuck everything that walks ("zoo polygamy" promiscuity), try to justify the unjustifiable ("Aluzky"), misled by their own rhetoric ("Harmlessness" of zoophilia despite the millions of porn flics proving the opposite)...I still believe that a huge chunk of the hostility towards us zoos is self created by failing to separate us from this stuff and well deserved. Hiding our heads in the sand like an ostrich won´t help. We need to address this stuff or there´s no chance for any progress. Another Enumclaw, even stricter laws, hasher restrictions, you all should be familiar with the routine by now when you have been following everything since Enumclaw. If we cannot outgun them, we have no other choice but to outsmart them. Clinging to a strategy that has failed us so many times isn´t particularly smart, don´t you agree? Your way of thinking has brought us here, even if you deny this painful truth. Almost all of Europe now is "Verboten" land for zoophiles because of being too permissive and liberal. Reality is paradox and you´ll usually get the exact opposite of what you want. Conclusion: demand restrictions and you´ll be granted freedom. And before you discard this with a "Huh?", I´ve applied this on everyone around me while my mare was standing in public stables. I even beat up some fencehoppers who tried to molest other people´s horses and gained a lot of trust from that although everybody knew that I led a genuine relationship with my mare. After the little whoopass I dealt out, people intentionally warned me before they opened the door to the part of the stables my mare was standing in. Silent agreement, I´d call that....we let you know when we enter your stables, so you don´t have to go though an embarrassing situation, being caught buttnaked and stuck balls deep in your love. That´s what I experienced, Rannoch. That´s what I teach the younger ones, with equal positive outcomes, the last one who benefitted from that is my ex-rooommate who was caught with his head under his cow´s tail. After a little chat with the farm owner, my rommate was assured that he never has to worry about being turned in to the police or other ramifications and repercussions. Remarkable how someone who is completely disconnected to reality can achieve that, isn´t it , Rannoch? My method is tested and deemed effective by more than ten zoophiles who actively applied it when shit hitted the fan. Can you back up your attitude with something that is comparable?
No. Besides the laws, nothing has changed. You always have had a high risk of being shot out there if someone thought that of you, nevermind the legality of it.
We also had the infamous "asairs" prior to enumclaw. Let me tell you an even earlier story, though:
It wasn't so long ago that a major police crackdown on zoos happened in the states. It was before my time, but not by much. The community here still is reeling from it. How'd they get the names?
Simple. They beat a zoos mare nearly to death until he spit out every fellow zoo he knew.
This is a true story and it's still hard to earn a zoos trust over here from that generation because of it. Call me crazy, but I do think things now are better.
As for the " legal days" this is not euro liberalsm at play for the most part, but the fact that the old sodomy laws that weee repealed also covered bestiality. In short, we were overlooked, but not ever wanted in any form.
But it's irrelevant really. I don't know about you, but I don't plan on getting caught even if I was zoo active.
You know what, we aren't getting anywhere so I'm not going to bother breaking this one down. But if you really think the two days I took to form my reply to your one civil post were not spent considering it for it's merits, you are dead wrong.
Oh, and on the anger thing, I loved Star Wars, so...
"Fear leads to anger, Anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering..." -Yoda
This leads my life more than you will ever understand. I was once angry like you. I'm much better off without it. Trust yoda on this one...
Well, I am familiar with "asshairs", I´ve heard a lot about it from older community members, but I still cannot outright condemn the original idea behind asairs. The idea was good, the execution of it wasn´t.
Hearing about the police crackdown thing is horrifying, but here´s my two cents:
Sure, this incident if fucked up beyond reality. How was the zoo whose mare has been beaten up identified? What has HE done to make everything that followed happen? This is the first that comes into my mind here. It is a saddening fact that such a thing has to happen to make your local "zoo" scene realize the risks involved in "zoophilia". This, exactly this, has been taught by the veterans, we were aware of the risks and tried to provide rules to prevent incidents like this from happening. But no one listened. The zeta rules isn´t the only "heritage" we have left behind, you know...
By the way: isn´t the police supposed to OBEY the law in the US? Animal cruelty is outlawed in the US, too, right?
Anyway, I´ll do some research and thinking before I continue addressing your story. I need more facts to get a clearer picture here, maybe you can share some more details on it.
Speaking of "sodomy" laws, we also had this in Germany, until it was repealed in 1969. FYI.
Well, nobody "plans" to get caught. But as a zoo who is interested in farm animals, you just cannot simply close your doors and draw the curtains like some dog zoo, you know. As a farm animal zoo, you always have to prepare for the worst case scenario. That´s, by the way, one big difference between dog and horse zoos and one of the reasons why there is a certain division of our community, the "dog zoo" versus "horse zoo" schism as I call it. For a dog zoo, life is way simpler. Risks aren´t as high as for someone with a horse, but without a farm of his own. We farm animal zoos don´t have an option to face the risks of being exposed by accident, it is a reality for us and thus, we have other priorities, such as "preparing our grounds" for the worst case scenario. Sometimes, you simply cannot avoid being caught...even if you abstain from all the idiotic stuff like putting out animal porn with clearly identifiable faces. What I am trying to put across here is almost completely based on that fact, it is meant to anticipate such negative situations and targets to give any zoo a solid chance for a neutral or positive outcome. Breaking through the common public image of "zoos" is ultimately important for people like us who are in constant danger of being exposed by accident. And it works, Rannoch. It has worked out for me, it has for my ex-roommate, it has worked out for some of my fellow zoos I´m in contact with.
When I demand that we, the zoos, should do everything to make it as easy as possible for society to tolerate us, I´m not talking out of my arse. This is backed up by experience and it works. If you, like it or not, if it fits into your point of view or not...and let me ask you this: Are we zoos really in a position to be picky and stubborn instead of being open to new ideas and approaches? What is it we have to lose by testing a new approach? Why should someone who is broke as fuck worry about thieves stealing his non existent money? ;)
Oh, my....Yoda. You know that Star Wars basically is a fairy tale clad in Sci Fi? The "hero" , the "damsel in distress"? Unfortunately, Star Wars "wisdom" isn´t applicable to reality. Just name one social movement where anger, good and justified anger, wasn´t the motor of it all. I bet you can´t. Without anger, there´s no success. Stonewall incident? Well, gays were ANGERED by being incarcerated because they were gay and thus, they decided to take action. As Zach de la Rocha has put it: "Anger is a gift". If we´re fishing for applicable wisdom in movies, I´d rather choose "Fight club" instead. Funny that "Jack"/Tyler Durden´s development quite accurately depicts what we, the veterans, went through. "Jack" would be the original idea of true zoophilia and Tyler is a symbol for what it can become when everything, every rule, every morale, every ethics, are thrown out the window. No surprise that "Jack" finally turns against what he has built himself in the end of the movie, culminating in him turning a gun against himself to eliminate the rotten, vile, limitless Tyler. Beautiful symbolism. For the zoo movement as well as for every individual. Tyler represents the ego, "Jack" the inner self...
Sorry that I won´t take anything from a little green dwarf who looks like he´s not getting any for centuries...;) Also, "fear leads to anger" is a crude overgeneralisation. Fear CAN lead to anger, it also can lead to isolation and detachment from the world. Fear can also lead to a better future, just take a look at your own country...haven´t you noticed how everyone not a Trump-et prepares for battle? How the entire Trump opposition, even some Republicans (!), prepare to fight back the Alt Right coup d´etat? And all of that because of fear? Sometimes , worse is better in the long run. Such a movement is completely missing in our community, everyone seems to be complacent and calm, nobody dares to ask the hard questions. Nobody wonders "How the fuck did we get here?" and escapes into blaming society for everything bad. "They are intolerant, uneducated, religious fanatics,etc..." Sounds familiar? Even the "establishment", the Democrats are aware they have made a mistake and now, they´re trying to find a way out of their desperate situation. Do we zoos do something like that, too? No, we stick to our worn out rhetoric. "It´s always and exclusively the others who are to blame!" If it takes fear and anger to wake up our community, well, then that´s what it takes. Our opponents are small in numbers, yet they manage to be effective. Why can´t we do that? What do you think will be the impact if it wasn´t Op Beast DDos ´ing Beastforum, but a zoophile activist group? Don´t you think that would leave a mark for ages? What if there was an active force within our community trying to prevent all the excesses that are done in the name of us, of the z-word? "He who remains silent seems to agree"....haven´t we been silent for too long? Just imagine getting an info graphic stating that "This site has been attacked by us zoophiles because it is forging our unfavorable public image as animal rapists and part of the international porn mafia", including a link to a site featuring OUR values, our rules. What impact would an action like this have on our community, on the outsiders, on the anti zoo movement? Just think about it for a while.
Change demands action. Sitting and staring won´t change anything. We got nothing left to lose as a community, we´re already seen as the lowest of the lowest...why don´t we give new ideas a shot? Even if they violate the "tolerance dogma".
Let me know if you do, the zoos I've talked too are very closed lipped about the whole thing. It's tricky. He might have done something stupid, he may not have. I honestly can't say beyond it being a fucked up story.
The police are supposed to obey the law everywhere. But this was the 70s, things were a little more "buddy-buddy" in cops land in the USA. That, and we were just a bunch of perverts, you know?
Yes, and that George Lucas, the man behind it created both Jabba the Hutt and ewoks, quite possibly the most disturbing things known to man? Yeah, I'll confess, it's fantasy. I still find the words comforting. Same as humans find comfort in many fictional things. I admit, it's not an argument, just an attempt to show you where I come from.
I could make other arguments about emotion in general doing more harm than good vs rational logical though, but instead, I would like to spend more time on your other points as we seem to maybe be getting somewhere. Ok?
Uh, no. You have no idea how bad it can get... but let's leave that theoretical aside for a moment. It's livable now. How can it get worse? Let me tell you a story of how I envision it worse, a story that is true:
I knew a man once. A man you wouldn't have called a zoo. He was polygamous, had dated and yes, nearly gotten married to a human in his youth. He had a collection of bestiality porn. This man however, was a good man, and he loved his animals dearly. He was a zoo. I don't care if you want to call him otherwise, he taught me more about being a zoo than you can ever imagine. He was to me, the epitome of what it is to be a zoo. He was my center through some of the hardest times in my life, and absolutely oozed love for animals wherever he went. On his deathbed, the only concern of his was getting back to them. Not for himself. That is zoo.
He died recently. It's been very tough on me. But it made one thing clear: This man, you would've thrown him under the bus without a second thought in your crusade. THAT is what we have to lose. You want to throw good people under the bus for acceptance. Fuck acceptance, then, I say. It isn't worth it to me, not in the least.
If you adjusted your blinders a bit, you'd find you and I agree on quite a bit. I don't think fencehopping or sexual abuse of any kind is good, and I think all zoos should be in a stable situation before trying to get an animal (leaving the "one night stand" thoughts out is a GOOD thing), but why all the extra entrance criteria no one is going to care about. What good does it do us? That is my one question to you I'm going to have to ask you to answer? Why do you have an issue with all these seemingly trivial things that society in general isn't going to give two fucks about if they are willing to make the leap to "sex with an animal is alright?"
It makes no logical sense to me. And that is the crux of our disagreement. I know people whom you consider "troublemakers" in our community, who are anything but. And I for one, refuse to throw them under the bus for acceptance. It is a completely unacceptable demand to me that makes me not want acceptance in general, if you are right that that's what's needed. I'd sooner go on like this for eternity, and I'd hope most other zoos stand with me on this.
tl;dr: I agree we need to change our public perception. This is a core thing we agree on. I completely disagree with your idea about how to do it, and find the consequences of your proposed solution to be throwing too many good individuals under the bus. Frankly, that appalls me.
TIL furries can't love...
TIL Rannoch still lives in his own world and makes up things. Surely, furries can love...as leather fetishists can love. But since this is a subreddit about zoophilia/ not furrydom, go take this stuff to where it belongs...as if there aren´t enough subreddits dealing with cartoon character fetishes...
You know as well as I do there is a significant crossover between zoophilia and furries, as zoophiles are statistically more prevalent in furry communities.
There's nothing made up about that. Thus, it is relevant to zoophilia. The only thing that remains in relevance ot that rule is the question of whether it's an act of love... which I thought you were attacking. Apparently not, you just have no reason whatsoever.
You know, I tried to be reasonable with you in your other thread. You know me better than to accuse me of making things up. Please try to show some respect.
If you really believe I am making this up, then wow.
Please read carefully what I wrote. The accusation of making things up was targeted at your totally baseless assumption I accuse furries of being unable to love. That is what you make up.
Yes, there might be some parallels between zoophilia and furrydom. But there are also parallels between homosexuality and zoophilia, as there is a big number of individuals involved in both. But, do you really want r/zoophilia to turn into yet another LGBT sub although there are more than enough subs for the LGBT? Talking about misunderstood "tolerance" and this "all inclusive" attitude that backfires....do you see any connection? If not, then you cannot be helped by anyone anymore.
Haven´t you read my "castle wall" analogy in the other thread? Including furry bs is exactly what I strictly advised against, it truly is "ripping open another hole in the wall". Aren´t we as a community under fire enough? Do we really need this added amount of cringeworthyness the "furrydom" will inevitably bring in? Isn´t being seen as a notorious animal rapist , imbecile and sexual pervert already enough to fight against or do we really need to add the infantile moron flavor of furrydom?
As I said, rannoch:sadly, you´re not part of the solution, you´re a part of the general problem. This "all inclusive" attitude you´re displaying in here is the problem. And given the fact that roughly 90% of the furries are totally against zoophilia in any way, your attempt to connect these two things is as vile as trying to connect zoophilia to homosexuality. I don´t mind your "liberal" and "tolerant" attitude, but when you use it to deal even more damage to zoophilia by drawing false comparisons, inviting the wrong kind of folks in here for the sake of your dogmatic "tolerance"....well, making a mistake can happen (not distancing zoophilia from animal porn etc.), but doing the VERY SAME fucking mistake again by refusing to show the furries where the exit is is just plain stupid and retarded.
We zoophiles DON´T need another frontline that is impossible to defend. We already got enough frontlines in battle.
I know some exclusive zoos who are furries, not for porn but just for fun. Do you honestly think a good portion of zoos deserve to be "shown the exit" because they also happen to enjoy furry art or characters? That's pretty silly. I think your misconception is that furry is just a fetish and that only, when that's not actually true these days. I know plenty of furries who aren't into the NSFW aspects of furry art/fandom whatsoever.
You obviously missed that I was largely making that in jest. In case it's not clear, it was sarcasm and not intended to be taken completely seriously or broken down like you did.
No, I do not. At least not the way you do. Read my other post, I elaborate on this. I thought on it a long time.
Prove it. I mean, really. All you've ever done on this point is point at our "predicament" and scream. I'm doing fine, and I don't think anyone cares what we think or who we accept. See my other post.
Interesting, since 20% of furries identify as zoo in the latest surveys, but meh...
There's nothing vile about talking about related subjects. That's all. Related. I don't think there is any kind of strong connection. These are just things a zoo may experience. This reddit is dead enough without you dictating what we can/cannot talk about.
TIL if I don't think like 30-30, I cannot be helped by anyone anymore.
Again, this is jest... kinda. I hope.
[deleted]
http://9gag.com/gag/aW8opr3
We don't talk about that here.
Oh, you!
I agree that some My Little Pony fandom can be very creepy. There is some savagable stuff in it, but when it comes to My Little Pony porn it triggers the What The Hell feeling.
I will basically always avoid MLP porn if I'm doing ... research?
I didn't know this would happen. I'm sorry.
Yeah, I've technically been a furry since I made my first "fursona" (I didn't know what it was called at the time) at like age ten lol. My main focus isn't the porn though, I enjoy all kinds of furry art and there are SO many talented artists out there who draw anthro characters. It's amazing. I love all kinds of fantasy creatures and I think furries or any combination of human/animal is just fun.
I'm not a furry, but there are a few anthro artists I like a lot. Mostly the ones who depict them as being more animal than human. A few examples of stuff I like:
SFW
SFW
SFW
Nudity
NSFW
I might be an exclusive zoophile, but there are human aspects I can enjoy.
I am not fond of anthros. However, some cartoonists that draw anthros seem to also draw some cool (or rather hot) feral pictures.
Couldn't you just say furrys.
I didn't know. Sorry.