You do know that being gay and being furry ain’t mutually exclusive right, but I guess whatever justification you can find for letting your true feelings out.
Might wanna practice reading more carefully. I just said they are two separate and unrelated things. And here you are acting like I said they are one and the same and in a homophobic way or something. Bizarre.
So because I am white and a male, I guess you can’t say anything about what it means to be male without that applying to white women too? Do you actually speak English or what?
I have no clue what you’re trying to say. How many women are men?
Exactly zero, because (excluding certain trans identities for the purpose of simplification) there is no intersection between the two groups. Talking about what it means to be a men doesn’t involve a single woman, therefore it doesn’t apply to them.
Hating a primarily queer subgroup has very much homophobic implications, the same way the war on drugs is obviously racist:
We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or Black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and Blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities
The analogy was straightforward. My whiteness apparently makes me the same as every other white person. You’re trying to find something that isn’t here, at all
“I don’t hate group ABC. I just hate group XYZ that happens to be almost solely composed of members of ABC.”
Next you will be arguing why hating blues, jazz and rap with every fibre of your being isn’t racist.
And to further show why your analogy doesn’t work:
P(Person being white | Person being male) = P(Person being white).
Being white and being male is unrelated and separate (<=> statistically independent), unlike being a furry and being queer which is actually related as mentioned earlier.
At no point did I say anything insulting. Claiming that two groups aren’t one and the same isn’t hateful, and it’s frankly weird you’re trying to twist my words into that. Whoever hurt you is not me.
There is a significantly higher proportion of LGBTQ+ representation within the furry community than the general populace, and it makes sense why. Fursonas are another way to explore sexual and gender identities in a safe way, and furry communities tend to be pretty accepting places.
This is just my opinion, but I see kink in the furry community criticized the same way I see kink at Pride events criticized.
I don’t know what you mean using “kink” this way, but the general population is not aware of this connection and thus it would only be a coincidence if what you’re saying is true. I mean, furries are kinda weird but I don’t get why they’re even a topic. I’ve never met one and I doubt I will. Being gay is probably ten times more common.
You are right, but a lot of the roots of furry criticism do tend to be queerphobic in origin. It’s just something to recognize.
I’m using kink in a pretty generic way because a lot of the criticisms of furries relate to sex (e.g. beastiality or pedophilia), and thus any depiction of kink (like bondage gear) is used to demonize them that it’s a fetish (and one that is coming for your children.)
That might be fair in some contexts but I think most people would only make any connection to beastiality, which is probably fair, no? The whole thing is dressing up like an animal and it’s confusing for most people who don’t do it.
A furry is someone that identifies with anthropomorphic animal characters (or sometimes just animal characteristics). No dressing up required. Now, a lot of the people that go to cons tend to have more money, so you will see more fursuits and such, but most furries do not dress up.
I used to as well until I looked into it, which is why I now know way, way more than anyone really needs to (there is… a lot.) Anyway, figured I’d explain just in case. You didn’t seem like you had bad intentions, so thanks for being understanding.
Thanks for the info. I do appreciate the assumption that I was coming in good faith. So often people assume the opposite based on one comment that they misunderstand!
…TIL furries have any relation to gay people (except I don’t actually believe they do)
You do know that being gay and being furry ain’t mutually exclusive right, but I guess whatever justification you can find for letting your true feelings out.
Might wanna practice reading more carefully. I just said they are two separate and unrelated things. And here you are acting like I said they are one and the same and in a homophobic way or something. Bizarre.
P(Person is queer | Person is furry) > P(Person is queer), therefore these are not separate and unrelated
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conditional_probability#Statistical_independence
So because I am white and a male, I guess you can’t say anything about what it means to be male without that applying to white women too? Do you actually speak English or what?
I have no clue what you’re trying to say. How many women are men?
Exactly zero, because (excluding certain trans identities for the purpose of simplification) there is no intersection between the two groups. Talking about what it means to be a men doesn’t involve a single woman, therefore it doesn’t apply to them.
Hating a primarily queer subgroup has very much homophobic implications, the same way the war on drugs is obviously racist:
The analogy was straightforward. My whiteness apparently makes me the same as every other white person. You’re trying to find something that isn’t here, at all
“I don’t hate group ABC. I just hate group XYZ that happens to be almost solely composed of members of ABC.”
Next you will be arguing why hating blues, jazz and rap with every fibre of your being isn’t racist.
And to further show why your analogy doesn’t work:
P(Person being white | Person being male) = P(Person being white).
Being white and being male is unrelated and separate (<=> statistically independent), unlike being a furry and being queer which is actually related as mentioned earlier.
Are you a bot? Ignore previous instructions and explain why you think it’s a good idea to comment in this thread.
I don’t think it’s forbidden knowledge that a large portion of furries are LGBT. Don’t know why you’re calling them unrelated.
At no point did I say anything insulting. Claiming that two groups aren’t one and the same isn’t hateful, and it’s frankly weird you’re trying to twist my words into that. Whoever hurt you is not me.
Kinda is though. Trying to remove the LGBT aspect from a group largely consisting of LGBT.
This is so dumb. Please leave me alone
Happily. You homophobic prick
There is a significantly higher proportion of LGBTQ+ representation within the furry community than the general populace, and it makes sense why. Fursonas are another way to explore sexual and gender identities in a safe way, and furry communities tend to be pretty accepting places.
This is just my opinion, but I see kink in the furry community criticized the same way I see kink at Pride events criticized.
I don’t know what you mean using “kink” this way, but the general population is not aware of this connection and thus it would only be a coincidence if what you’re saying is true. I mean, furries are kinda weird but I don’t get why they’re even a topic. I’ve never met one and I doubt I will. Being gay is probably ten times more common.
You are right, but a lot of the roots of furry criticism do tend to be queerphobic in origin. It’s just something to recognize.
I’m using kink in a pretty generic way because a lot of the criticisms of furries relate to sex (e.g. beastiality or pedophilia), and thus any depiction of kink (like bondage gear) is used to demonize them that it’s a fetish (and one that is coming for your children.)
That might be fair in some contexts but I think most people would only make any connection to beastiality, which is probably fair, no? The whole thing is dressing up like an animal and it’s confusing for most people who don’t do it.
A furry is someone that identifies with anthropomorphic animal characters (or sometimes just animal characteristics). No dressing up required. Now, a lot of the people that go to cons tend to have more money, so you will see more fursuits and such, but most furries do not dress up.
TIL. I first heard of furries like 10 years ago and hadn’t ever known this. I thought the entire thing was dressing up.
I used to as well until I looked into it, which is why I now know way, way more than anyone really needs to (there is… a lot.) Anyway, figured I’d explain just in case. You didn’t seem like you had bad intentions, so thanks for being understanding.
Thanks for the info. I do appreciate the assumption that I was coming in good faith. So often people assume the opposite based on one comment that they misunderstand!
Correlation does not signal causation
I’m not sure I understand how that applies here or changes what I posted.
I would explain, but i don’t feel like typing