The whole furry thing is creepy as hell. It’s weird. Wanting to have sex with anthropomorphized animals is not a thing that should be normalized.
And it’s even creepier when they add things like “kitten” or showing anthropomorphized animal kids.
And thank you to Unruffled [they/them] / Flatworm7591 @lemmy.dbzer0.com for this sane and reasonable response.
And thanks to recursive_recursion who seems to be an alt of Flatworm for continuing that sane and reasonable response. Note that in over 1,400 comments here I’ve never once said a single word against trans people. Not once.
It really bothers me when people lie about racism. So many people really do experience it so much in life, and lying using false racism accusations as a sword and shield to make other people look bad and make themselves look like the victim is demeaning to every real instance people suffer.
Hopefully one day this person realizes that lying about transphobia for the same reasons does the same thing.
Disgust reactions are rarely helpful. Reasoning needs to be involved in decisions, not just knee-jerk emotions.
Disgust is an involuntary reaction, but my reasoning is what says that wanting to have sex with anthropomorphized animals is really weird and creepy.
Wrong. You’re not the victim here, you’re the victimizer. If someone is attracted to someone or something they don’t have a choice in the matter, that’s what’s involuntary. They do have a choice in whether they act on those feelings, but that is all. Again, they cannot choose whether or to not be attracted. If you research it, you’ll learn that there is currently no humane way to change attractions, and the proof of efficacy of inhumane ways is severely lacking. Therefore, attraction itself is not wrong. It cannot be. And thus accepting one’s attractions is not wrong. In fact, if one goes to therapy, a competent therapist will be helping the person to accept themselves and their attractions. It’s self-destructive to try to bury those feelings or hate oneself for them. Instead, it’s perfectly fine to find joy in one’s attractions. Those hating and condemning others for their attractions are the ones that are the problem. Now if someone is actually sexually abusing animals that’s a different matter, but there’s no proof of that here. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this shirt. And no, before you accuse me of it, I’m not a furry.
And you would say that exact same thing to defend a community of people who can’t control having sexual attractions to children, who wear the costumes and fill public places with the art that would fit their attraction in the same way the furry community does?
Yes
is it not close to beastiality though? Like there are people into baby play, but I dont see baby play art everywhere, because it walks this line of morality. Yes, the two people are in constumes and consenting, but its fetishization is of something morally wrong, and I never say anything, and avoid the content how I can, because its whatever, but I do see it from time to time.
I really dont care what ppl do in thier free time. this is just my thoughts and were on the topic in disscusion here, so it feels okay to ask, how people do this without feeling like it’s some form of beastiality play? I fully dont understand here, and am doing my best to not convey judgement on something I dont understand
No? Not to me anyways. The issue with beastiality is the lack of consent. At least, to me? Maybe there’s different takes on that, but animals can’t consent. So… when you anthropomorphize them and the wolves start talking? They can now consent, and my problem goes away.
But that’s just imagining a fictional scenario in which having sex with an animal is alright. It seems exactly like the anime thing where the girl who looks 10 is actually hundreds of years old so it’s totally ok for her to be sexualized for people who want to have sex with children. Saying a character clearly designed to look and act like a child is actually over 18 doesn’t make it suddenly become moral. Because it’s designed to look like a child. On purpose.
I don’t see how anything healthy could come from people imagining scenarios where some people might consider it moral to fuck their dog. It’s normalizing something abhorrent and actually makes me more worried now because before I wasn’t thinking about people getting themselves used to their fantasy idea an animal can consent to sex with a person and then misinterpreting a wagging tail or a dog bumping it’s rear end into you because it itches.
It’s just feeding and normalizing something that’s in no way alright.
… is anyone doing that? Or are we just making up terrible slippery slopes in our heads?
People display their sexual preferences in public all the time. It’s hard for me to say that only certain types of sexual preferences should be allowed in public and others not.
I think for some people there is a fear that pride would spread the attraction, as if attraction were a contagion. But, I believe that has the same refutation as above. None of us chose our attractions. Seeing furry art isn’t going to make someone a furry. If someone liked it, then I’d say they were already a furry and maybe just didn’t realize their attractions yet. And them realizing it and accepting it would be a good thing for them.
Also wanted to mention that this could be a matter of life and death. You start to realize your attractions when you’re young. If everyone around a kid is telling them their attractions are wrong, creepy, etc, then they might decide they are unloved and defective and kill themselves. To me that’s a tragedy, whatever their attractions happened to be.
If a kid keeps announcing to everyone that he wants to fuck sheep the social reaction to that will not be positive and encouraging.
It’s a sexual preference for a thing that doesn’t exist in reality. Imaginary characters people make sexualized art of online. There’s a huge difference between people being themselves openly as in adult couples being free to be together with their relationship known publicly and people wearing costumes used for fetish sex to the library. I’m sure there are people somewhere who feel more comfortable in a gimp suit and a strap-on and feel like that’s the real them, but most humans would react fairly negatively to seeing that in public.
Attraction can be influenced to some extent in adolescence, though. If you never see any furry things until you’re an adult you’re going to be less likely to find any interest in them than if you discovered them when you were young and just starting to have biology push you towards sex. Sexuality is complex, but the things you grow up used to seeing and thinking of in a sexual manner definitely have an impact.
Again, this is a baseless assumption you’re fixated on to justify your position. The reality is that the vast majority of furries don’t have sex in fursuits.
It seems the same to me. It’s hard to see a distinction when people try to explain that they’re not sexually attracted to animals, they’re sexually attracted to imaginary animals who are roughly human shaped while retaining their animal characteristics and also able to speak.
It’s weird that there’s a sexual attraction to things that don’t exist in reality, that are most commonly seen in images on the internet, that has grown so much over the 20 or so years where people have grown up with the internet. Those things seem likely related.
Yeah non-offending pedophiles haven’t done anything wrong necessarily. You’re completely correct.
It wasn’t the uncontrollable attraction that I was seeing as an issue, but the filling public spaces with art and costumes that would fit that attraction. I don’t think anyone should be hated or shunned for things about themselves they have no control over, but also see a distinction between accepting that person in public and accepting art depicting sexualized kids in public.