Confurence Public Affairs (what is the image SUPPOSED to be?)
Custer J. Winston
After looking at all of these long threads of arguments it all seems to
boil down to one simple subject that everyone seems to touch on but not
consider it as important as it really is.
It appears that that *actual* actions of people are not the real question.
the real concern in the image the convention presents.
I've worked for the U.S. army for 17 years now, and we take public affairs
VERY seriously. I work in a 2 star general's headquarters and down the
hall from me is an office staffed by 3 people who have TV cameras, film
cameras out the yang, state of the art desktop publishing equipment and a
printing press. Their entire reason for existing is to make us look good.
And they succeed.
My point is we all pretty much know each other, and what to expect. I see
a lot of flames on AFF but not many surprises. What is important to
*everyone*, and I doubt anybody will question this, is what image does
Confurence present to someone from the outside?
It is pointlless to argue what is right and what is wrong, on the books we
are a very permissive society that doesn't define as much as wrong as we
used to. But that does not mean people think that way.
Unfortunately if there was a published set of standards of conduct people
would either complain / flame about it or deliberately flaunt it to somehow
make some statement about personal freedom. In short, it won't work with
this crowd.
So consider this, based on what YOUR observations were at CF8, what kind
of person do you thinks would be attracted to it?
--
===========================================================
http://www.huzzah.com/ they aren't the same thing anymore!
http://www.huzzah.org/ (but huzzah.org doesn't work yet
===========================================================
Brian Henderson
"Custer J. Winston" <cus...@huzzah.org> wrote:
> My point is we all pretty much know each other, and what to expect. I see
>a lot of flames on AFF but not many surprises. What is important to
>*everyone*, and I doubt anybody will question this, is what image does
>Confurence present to someone from the outside?
A very poor one?
Now personally, just thinking back to before I got involved in
ConFurence, I ran one of the largest collectives of anime fan groups
in the U.S. (right after the C/FO went down the drain). I was asked
by Mark and Rodney to run an anime room at CF0. Yes, I wass a fur fan
at the time, but had the reputation of fur fandom or of ConFurence
been anything like it is tooday, I wouldn't have wasted my time and
would never have attended CF.
But I did, and I had a great time and I still look at CF0 and CF1 as
being the best of the ConFurences, the goal to which we should still
be striving.
> Unfortunately if there was a published set of standards of conduct people
>would either complain / flame about it or deliberately flaunt it to somehow
>make some statement about personal freedom. In short, it won't work with
>this crowd.
So what? I'm to the point that if we have to throw 60% of the con
membership away to get back to an acceptable convention, let's do it.
CF9 with only 400 people? Fine with me. It *WILL* work if the concom
has the guts to actually take some responsibility for the way the con
runs instead of letting the lunatics run the asylum.
> So consider this, based on what YOUR observations were at CF8, what kind
>of person do you thinks would be attracted to it?
Exactly the wrong kind?
-Brian
Steve Gattuso
> So consider this, based on what YOUR observations were at CF8,
> what kind of person do you thinks would be attracted to it?
Well, I can't speak for myself at the moment, but here's what someone
else has asked me to post in reply to that question...
Lance Rund
snipsnipsnip poetry
A valid point. Confurence is not indispensible. It was first, but
there is no -entitlement- associated with that. If Confurence wants
to stay the biggest and best, wonderful... but that has to be earned.
The amount of money and time the fandom has to spend on conventions
is finite, and people have to select which convention they go to.
So...
With the rise of other conventions, (hopefully) friendly competition
could raise the standards. And those who do not will either fall by
the wayside or become "specialized". I can envision a scenario where
Confurence attracts that portion of furry fandom who want to go wild
in the halls (a 'yiff-con' as it were) and everyone else going to
other venues with more 'mainstream' behavior. THis is fine, as long
as the other conventions are not tarred with Confurence's brush.
Personally, I think that Confurence is bigger than the staff can
handle. I also think there's no realistic way to control the size of
the convention, short of saying "behave yourselves" to the attendees
(the people who are out of control are also the most likely to cry
"censorship" and not attend... that's fine with me). The scenario I
mentioned above is something I think is the most likely, and when
Confurence spirals into itself I will spend my limited free time
elsewhere.
A side note: if I get the idea that Confurence is not going to take
steps to moderate the behavior of its attendees, I won't go. If the
police make a vice raid on Confurence, they will seize the membership
list and investigate every name on that list. I don't want to be on
such a list, thank you... I have a career to protect.
Side note the second: it's been highly educational to see who has
stopped talking to me since I stopped drawing furry art. You find out
who your friends really are, and who was pretending just because they
liked having a source of explicit furry art in their bed.
...lance
D. A. Graf
Lance Rund <la...@arclight.net> wrote:
: A valid point. Confurence is not indispensible. It was first, but
: there is no -entitlement- associated with that. If Confurence wants
: to stay the biggest and best, wonderful... but that has to be earned.
: The amount of money and time the fandom has to spend on conventions
: is finite, and people have to select which convention they go to.
I fully agree. So do many others. I personally feel that more voices
need to be heard on this, lurkers and the usual posters alike.
: So...
: With the rise of other conventions, (hopefully) friendly competition
: could raise the standards. And those who do not will either fall by
: the wayside or become "specialized". I can envision a scenario where
: Confurence attracts that portion of furry fandom who want to go wild
: in the halls (a 'yiff-con' as it were) and everyone else going to
: other venues with more 'mainstream' behavior. THis is fine, as long
: as the other conventions are not tarred with Confurence's brush.
You've been seeing the same thing as well? This is scarey, Lance, we're
thinking alike here. *grins* But, OTHERS have come to this conclusion as
well in the last months I've been finding out. Many of the artists, names
seen as pros or semi pros, see and feel this. Some see this as the signal
to go elsewhere to where what they persue in the field of anthropomorphic,
NOT what has come to define "furry" for what seems the majority, can be
found and enjoyed again as they once did when they first found "furry"
fandom.
The tarring, however, is inevitable unless many voices are raised in
explaining over and over and over again that what is seen at ConFurence is
not the norm nor standard for other anthropomorphic conventions.
: Personally, I think that Confurence is bigger than the staff can
: handle. I also think there's no realistic way to control the size of
: the convention, short of saying "behave yourselves" to the attendees
: (the people who are out of control are also the most likely to cry
: "censorship" and not attend... that's fine with me). The scenario I
: mentioned above is something I think is the most likely, and when
: Confurence spirals into itself I will spend my limited free time
: elsewhere.
Agreed. I have gone to the staff meetings of ConFurence and I have seen
for myself how much is talked about, planned, and falls apart when it
comes time to execute these plans.
Personally, I feel that ConFurence has already been spiraling into itself
since FurryMuck was discovered. Please note, that this is a personal
view. I will be the first to say that FurryMuck has good folks there.
And I will be the first to also say in the next breath and sentence that
FurryMuck has many questionable folks there.
: A side note: if I get the idea that Confurence is not going to take
: steps to moderate the behavior of its attendees, I won't go. If the
: police make a vice raid on Confurence, they will seize the membership
: list and investigate every name on that list. I don't want to be on
: such a list, thank you... I have a career to protect.
Agreed. I stated my reasons for pulling all support from ConFurence.
Other artists and fans have pulled support on the quiet side since I
announced my own decision. This says something, however, I'm willing to
say that Mark Merlino and Rod Riley are NOT listening. Their eyes and
ears are closed, so we who are speaking out shouldn't pretend to be here.
: Side note the second: it's been highly educational to see who has
: stopped talking to me since I stopped drawing furry art. You find out
: who your friends really are, and who was pretending just because they
: liked having a source of explicit furry art in their bed.
Interesting. Very much so. You have had the very same experience I did
when I announced I was pulling back from being solely in "furry" fandom to
the larger more mainstream of fantasy and horror. Many stopped talking to
me, I lost many from my mailing list, and my sales plummeted. Next thing
I know I'm hearing the fast spreading rumour and "fact" that I stopped
drawing any anthro or "furry" art, never mind the fact that I had stated
in my pinfo on FurryMuck as well on my website that I would still continue
to draw anthropmorphics. Just not ALL the time.
Such is the price of following one's own Path. I willingly pay it. As
Lance says, you do find out who your true friends are and which are the
ones who are just kissing your ass to get what they want for their
jollies.
--Tygger
--
******************************************************************************
gr...@primenet.com
www.av.qnet.com/~canuss/tygger www.av.qnet.com/~canuss/tygger/gk.htm
******************************************************************************
"Hey, I'm just an ex-Guard with a bad attitude...."
Random quote from Saraenae Kohiino, Guardian Knights
Brian Henderson
Lance Rund <la...@arclight.net> wrote:
>A valid point. Confurence is not indispensible. It was first, but
>there is no -entitlement- associated with that. If Confurence wants
>to stay the biggest and best, wonderful... but that has to be earned.
>The amount of money and time the fandom has to spend on conventions
>is finite, and people have to select which convention they go to.
You're absolutely right Lance, ConFurence is not indispensible. In
fact, it's just another con. It might be large, but if it doesn't
draw quality fans, it will soon collapse on itself and die. I think
we're starting to see the earliest signs that this is what is
happening. Now the question is, do the directors and staff of
ConFurence do something about it, or do they let it die?
>With the rise of other conventions, (hopefully) friendly competition
>could raise the standards. And those who do not will either fall by
>the wayside or become "specialized". I can envision a scenario where
>Confurence attracts that portion of furry fandom who want to go wild
>in the halls (a 'yiff-con' as it were) and everyone else going to
>other venues with more 'mainstream' behavior. THis is fine, as long
>as the other conventions are not tarred with Confurence's brush.
Unfortunately, they are tarred with ConFurence's reputation. That's
why I think AAC should change the name of their Auction to something
neutral. It isn't that there is anything wrong with the name, but
because of ConFurence and other cons, the term "Pet Auction" carries
along a lot of emotional baggage that they simply do not need.
>Personally, I think that Confurence is bigger than the staff can
>handle. I also think there's no realistic way to control the size of
>the convention, short of saying "behave yourselves" to the attendees
>(the people who are out of control are also the most likely to cry
>"censorship" and not attend... that's fine with me). The scenario I
>mentioned above is something I think is the most likely, and when
>Confurence spirals into itself I will spend my limited free time
>elsewhere.
We're starting to see it. We've seen a consistent growth in
membership every year, except this last one. Now I didn't get final
membership figures from DeWayne, but from what I recall (people can
correct me), we had only a few more this year than last. We've
stopped growing and have now plateaued. What's next? 1000 next year?
800 the year after? ConFurence needs to COMPETE for it's membership
and now that more and more fur/semi-fur cons are showing up, they have
too decide if they will change and remain the #1 convention, or stay
the same and be gone in 3 years.
>A side note: if I get the idea that Confurence is not going to take
>steps to moderate the behavior of its attendees, I won't go. If the
>police make a vice raid on Confurence, they will seize the membership
>list and investigate every name on that list. I don't want to be on
>such a list, thank you... I have a career to protect.
A lot of people do, myself being one of them. The company I work for
is pretty conservative and while they really don't care too much what
I do in my off time, I'm sure that if it became public knowledge that
I was being investigated in regard to a vice charge, I'd find myself
on the street, just for the preservation of their own public
relations.
It's not fair, but that's life.
>Side note the second: it's been highly educational to see who has
>stopped talking to me since I stopped drawing furry art. You find out
>who your friends really are, and who was pretending just because they
>liked having a source of explicit furry art in their bed.
Yeah, we still like you Lance. I never had a lot of your art around,
but I always thought you were a good guy. :)
-Brian
Dr. Cat
Custer J. Winston (cus...@huzzah.org) wrote:
: After looking at all of these long threads of arguments it all seems to
:boil down to one simple subject that everyone seems to touch on but not
:consider it as important as it really is.
: It appears that that *actual* actions of people are not the real question.
:the real concern in the image the convention presents.
Well yes, people have brought that up as the issue here, though the
discussions wander off into incidents about sheep and bananas. In fact,
I think the question of image may have been what was in the first post at
the beginning of the first flamewar aeons ago, in the early days of furry
fandom. But that's just a guess on my part as I wasn't there.
So anyway yes it has been discussed some, but here's what we have
essentially learned so far by asking that question.
* We can't agree about whether the image is ok, a little bad, fairly
bad, very bad, or what.
* We can't agree on what things are bad in an image and which are ok.
* We can't agree on how much of the non-furry world has perceived the
image of us that the con presents, how many have gotten some other
impression of us, and how many have no clue that furry fandom exists.
* We can't agree how much we should care if somebody forms a bad
impression of us anyhow.
* We can't agree about what would happen after furry B gets turned down
for a job because of anti-furry discrimination, whether furry B would
then go get hired by someone else and be happy or just end up
unemployed with no other job offers and be miserable.
* We can't agree whether it was really furry B or whether it was actually
furry A or C or someone who was the one looking for a job.
* We can't agree whether we should just start new cons and let
Confurence end up however it's gonna end up, or whether we should
keep telling Mark and Rod to change Confurence, or whether we should
tell all our fellow fans to all bitch at Mark and Rod to change
Confurence, or what.
* We can't agree on which side it is that's flaming and arguing instead
of making positive useful suggestions like starting a new zine,
telling friends about the good side of the fandom, putting up a web
page, starting a new MUCK, petting a dog, writing a FAQ, contributing
money to Wolf Park, writing email to artists and writers you like
encouraging them to keep making more good stuff, planting a flower,
kissing your teddy bear, hugging a tree, or selling your banjo.
* We can't agree on who's causing the worst behavior at conventions,
and we can't agree on whether the best method for telling those people
is saying something to their faces, sending them email later, or
telling lots and lots of alt.fan.furry readers in the hopes that they
will hear it too.
* We can't agree on whether it's ok for a bisexual man to wear short,
tight cutoffs in public and act cheerful and flirty.
* We can't agree on whether it's ok for men to wear women's clothes
in public.
* We can't agree on how our levels of sexually explicit art compare
with those at science fiction and fantasy conventions.
* We can't agree on how our levels of hotel damage, rowdiness, and
impressions on hotel staff compare to sf/fantasy conventions, or
on how both of the preceeding compare to Shriner's conventions.
* We can't agree on whether it's a tiny percentage of fans at
Confurence that are horribly rude, or a modest percentage, or a
huge percentage.
* We can't agree on whether someone who has a good time for a whole
weekend without running into horribly rude people was lucky as hell
or just having the most typical and common type of experience that
most attendees had at Confurence.
* We can't figure out whether the police nabbed those videotapes
because of copyright infringement or whether they seized those videos
because of obscenity laws.
* We can't agree on how much influence Confurence's reptuation will
have on perceptions of Albany Anthrocon while it's starting out,
and we can't agree on how much influence it will have on AAC's
reputation after a few years either.
* We can't agree on how likely Confurence is to get into legal trouble,
how big the trouble will be if it gets in some, or on which of its
events is the one most likely to get it in trouble.
* We can't agree on whether the majority of purchases at the pet
auction are furry fans buying friends of theirs or non-fans buying
total strangers for sex.
* We can't agree on whether one should deal with prejudice from outside
a group by 1) getting the group members to choose to act less
offensively, 2) explaining to all prejudiced people one meets that
they are wrong about this group in specific and that such prejudices
are usually unfair and wrong in general, and telling them why, or 3)
assuming that having prejudiced people think badly of you isn't so
bad and is inevitable in life no matter how hard you try to avoid it,
and choosing not to worry about it much.
And down to the final three:
* We can't agree whether this is a hobby or a lifestyle, because we
are too ST00PID to realize that since there are two or more furry
fans it is possible for it to be BOTH (i.e. to some subset of us
it is one thing and to the rest it is the other thing).
And most relevantly to this discussion and this newsgroup:
* We can't agree on whether arguing about all the things we can't
agree about leads to useful forward progress or just annoys a
lot of people without getting us anywhere.
And to close:
* Anything else I didn't mention we probably can't agree about either.
*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*
Dr. Cat / Dragon's Eye Productions || Free alpha test:
*-------------------------------------------** http://www.bga.com/furcadia
Furcadia - a new graphic mud for PCs! || Let your imagination soar!
*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*
(Disclaimer: Somebody will probably PROVE the final point for me by
replying and disagreeing about the implications of this post, or at least
about what they THINK this post implies - which of course different
people will disagree on. I'm guessing they'll say something like "Well
yes but the majority of furries can and do agree on the important point I
myself am trying to push here so we can get pat those few whiny
dissenters and get somethign done on this issue". Yeah right! What have
you gotten done to change furry's image in the last five years, monkey
boy? Besides sticking bananas in your ears? Go start a zine already.
Oh wait, you did? Gosh is my face red. You have far more right to
lecture everyone about the future of furry fandom than me, I never did
anything for the fandom and... Oh wait, I started a graphic mud thing!
Ha, I have the right to speak up too, which is a good thing because I am
right and you are WRONG, so there!)
(Proposed new tagline: "Alt.fan.furry - N years of failing to make
significant changes in furry fandom's public image, come help us
make it N+1!" Permission granted to use this tagline for free. Keeping
the N and N+1 are recommended rather than substituting in actual numbers,
'cause this way you don't have to change your .sig next year, or the year
after that, or...)
David G. Bell
In article <33061b22...@news.linkline.com>
BHend...@linkline.com "Brian Henderson" writes:
> So what? I'm to the point that if we have to throw 60% of the con
> membership away to get back to an acceptable convention, let's do it.
> CF9 with only 400 people? Fine with me. It *WILL* work if the concom
> has the guts to actually take some responsibility for the way the con
> runs instead of letting the lunatics run the asylum.
It may be worth thinking about how human societies work. It doesn't
take a lot of digging in the literature to discover that there are some
very common group sizes, common to many cultures and seen through
history in many different contexts.
And these group sizes also appear good predictors of when groups will
tend to split.
Smallest is the extended family, the basic unit the most low-tech
hunter-gather tribe, and also the basic group size for many species of
apes and monkeys. Any smaller, and the group is vulnerable to
accidental loss of individuals. Larger, and there are problems of food
supply and socialisaton. Put this as around 25-30 people.
Next size up is uniquely human, the clan. This is about 125 people, and
it happens to be defined by, amongst other things, the way in which the
one-to-many communication allowed by speech enables a social structre to
be maintained. Those troops of baboons use grooming and other
behaviours, which are one-to-one communication modes.
The third group, the largest, is the dialectal tribe. Roughly 600
people with, in the low-tech cultures studied, a common language.
Typically, they get together once a year, for things like trading and
marriages. It's a big enough group that the new adults can expect to
find a choice of not-too-closely-related potential mates. It isn't so
big that the meeting cannot be supported from available food and water
supplies.
If you want an example of these group-sizes in modern life, look at the
structure of an Infantry Battalion -- platoon, company, and battalion.
Here in England the school teachers don't want class sizes to exceed the
size of the smallest, "extended-family" group.
How do the various furry conventions compare to those sizes?
If the sexual angle didn't apply, would there be something else being
picked on as the excuse for a split? Confurence seems to be so big that
I believe that some other excuse would be found.
And my own experience suggests that for a big convention to work there
have to be many fundamental changes in the structure, more than just
having a choice of program items.
--
David G. Bell -- Farmer, SF Fan, Filker, Furry, and Punslinger..
Dr. Skorzy MacFarlaighn
D. A. Graf wrote:
>
> Lance Rund <la...@arclight.net> wrote:
>
> : A valid point. Confurence is not indispensible. It was first, but
> : there is no -entitlement- associated with that. If Confurence wants
> : to stay the biggest and best, wonderful... but that has to be earned.
> : The amount of money and time the fandom has to spend on conventions
> : is finite, and people have to select which convention they go to.
>
> I fully agree. So do many others. I personally feel that more voices
> need to be heard on this, lurkers and the usual posters alike.
OK..here goes.
Yeah, CF is *just* another conference, but it was the "pathfinder" for
the Furry fandom IMHO. It provided a Mecca of sorts for those with
Furry/Anthropomorphic interests to gather, socialize and feel
comfortable with others that shared similar interests.
That's the purpose of any convention, yes?
However, things change, and I think the entity known as Confurence has
adopted a presumed air of still being the beacon for Furry interests.
No way, uh uh, not anymore. Anthrofandom is splintering (is or
has???). There are too many reasons people are attracted to this
fandom. CF cannot provide for all those interests because many of the
Fandom's talents are fed up with the image it portrays and are hungry
for something more suitable.
Many...MANY fans are the same way.
Smaller Anthroconventions that strive to provide a "positive public"
image are going to be attracting much of those that are disgusted with
the bigger conventions. Hopefully the unihibited yahoos that have
infected the larger conventions will stay there...keep their own corner
of the sandbox.
>
> : So...
>
> : With the rise of other conventions, (hopefully) friendly competition
> : could raise the standards. And those who do not will either fall by
> : the wayside or become "specialized". I can envision a scenario where
> : Confurence attracts that portion of furry fandom who want to go wild
> : in the halls (a 'yiff-con' as it were) and everyone else going to
> : other venues with more 'mainstream' behavior. THis is fine, as long
> : as the other conventions are not tarred with Confurence's brush.
Precisely. Confurence will probably remain large because it has the
reputation of being "THE" convention, but I think there will be alot of
"one timers" at that convention that will eventually filter into the
smaller cons.
Confurence will probably become "specialized"...fine.
What is disturbing is that the smaller anthrocons will be tarred by
Confurence's image, either warranted or unwarranted, unless those
smaller cons embrace a wider audience as AAC is attempting to do.
Perhaps in doing so, the smaller, less focused conventions might start a
reputation of their own. (Duckon is well along that pathway already..).
>
> You've been seeing the same thing as well? This is scarey, Lance, we're
> thinking alike here. *grins* But, OTHERS have come to this conclusion as
> well in the last months I've been finding out. Many of the artists, names
> seen as pros or semi pros, see and feel this. Some see this as the signal
> to go elsewhere to where what they persue in the field of anthropomorphic,
> NOT what has come to define "furry" for what seems the majority, can be
> found and enjoyed again as they once did when they first found "furry"
> fandom.
Once must ask him/herself what exactly is it that has given Confurence
and Furrydom its poor image? In the regular scifi crowd, the general
consensus about "Furry fans" are a pack of sexually deprived,
spooge-whacking fanboys. Is this image accurate? Not entirely, since
it describes only a very small part of the fandom. Yet, its the image
people maintain. People are going to remember uglier, more shocking
images than the prouder aspects of this fandom.
The momentum to create a "friendlier" better-imaged Fandom has been
going on for quite awhile, perhaps '97 is the year we see it in it's
infancy?
Again, ask yourself *why* this Fandom's image is ugly? Who's
responsible?
> The tarring, however, is inevitable unless many voices are raised in
> explaining over and over and over again that what is seen at ConFurence is
> not the norm nor standard for other anthropomorphic conventions.
Yes, or the convention goes "above and beyond the call" to embrace
moderation of its participants and not advertise itself as a "100%
furry" convention.
> : A side note: if I get the idea that Confurence is not going to take
> : steps to moderate the behavior of its attendees, I won't go. If the
> : police make a vice raid on Confurence, they will seize the membership
> : list and investigate every name on that list. I don't want to be on
> : such a list, thank you... I have a career to protect.
As do alot of the general fandom... (myself)...
> Agreed. I stated my reasons for pulling all support from ConFurence.
> Other artists and fans have pulled support on the quiet side since I
> announced my own decision. This says something, however, I'm willing to
> say that Mark Merlino and Rod Riley are NOT listening. Their eyes and
> ears are closed, so we who are speaking out shouldn't pretend to be here.
Perhaps nobody is listening because they like how the Convention is? If
that's the case, let them have their convention, but they'll have to
deal with the any consequences. We'll start our own...
>
> : Side note the second: it's been highly educational to see who has
> : stopped talking to me since I stopped drawing furry art. You find out
> : who your friends really are, and who was pretending just because they
> : liked having a source of explicit furry art in their bed.
Ahh! But Lance, what kind of "friends" were you trying to attract? The
ones that took your explicit artwork "in their bed" are perhaps those
type of fans you dislike? Seeing you ONLY as a source of spooge? I
think you've done yourself a favor by halting your furry work. Are you
venturing into other artistic realms perhaps?
I dislike spooge, but loved your artistic style. There is a
preponderance of "spooge monkeys" in this fandom (those that take the
art into their bed) that like nothing more than the graphical, sexual
images the artwork portrays. They could care less about the artistic
quality...there is only ONE thing they need to see in the work.
If you lose these fans, fine, I think you'll be alot happier.
There's also an excess of really *awful* artists out there catering to
the whims of these fans, and the dollars they casually throw out for
their sexual fix.
Drawing spooge is fine, but you're going to have to deal with what it
attracts...
I guess what defines the real "artist" above the background is the one
that can diversify their work and attract attention to it.
Was it Heinlein that said "Specialization is for insects."?
> Such is the price of following one's own Path. I willingly pay it. As
> Lance says, you do find out who your true friends are and which are the
> ones who are just kissing your ass to get what they want for their
> jollies.
What about the new fans you attract because you cull out the spooge
sycophants?
-Skorzy
--
J. Scott Rogers (Dr. Skorzy MacFarlaighn / rat-Biorg Physician)
UMASS Medical Center
Program in Molecular Medicine ** sko...@ma.ultranet.com **
-- ** jeff....@ummed.edu **
"The Home for Tenured Graduate Students" "Confusion will be
"Tales from the Biorg Universe" my epitaph."
http://www.ummed.edu:8000/pub/j/jrogers/ -Robert Fripp
D. A. Graf
Dr. Skorzy MacFarlaighn <sko...@ma.ultranet.com> wrote:
: OK..here goes.
Go for it...*hands him the mike*
: Yeah, CF is *just* another conference, but it was the "pathfinder" for
: the Furry fandom IMHO. It provided a Mecca of sorts for those with
: Furry/Anthropomorphic interests to gather, socialize and feel
: comfortable with others that shared similar interests.
: That's the purpose of any convention, yes?
Yep. Because it was the "pathfinder", as you put it, I've always felt
that CF should give a good example and standard.
: However, things change, and I think the entity known as Confurence has
: adopted a presumed air of still being the beacon for Furry interests.
*nods in agreement*
: No way, uh uh, not anymore. Anthrofandom is splintering (is or
: has???). There are too many reasons people are attracted to this
: fandom. CF cannot provide for all those interests because many of the
: Fandom's talents are fed up with the image it portrays and are hungry
: for something more suitable.
: Many...MANY fans are the same way.
*nods* So I've been finding in these last months.
: Smaller Anthroconventions that strive to provide a "positive public"
: image are going to be attracting much of those that are disgusted with
: the bigger conventions. Hopefully the unihibited yahoos that have
: infected the larger conventions will stay there...keep their own corner
: of the sandbox.
*nods* I've been pushing Duckon and AAC, plus other places where anthro
fans can go to find others who have similar interests, artists they won't
find at CF, and where they won't have to wade thru the high element of
sexual art to find art they like. As for the "uninhibited yahoos" (heh,
like that term), I agree. They have CF, let them keep it, they're welcome
to it. The rest of us want another place to play without our feet
sticking to the floor like in a badly run theatre.
: Precisely. Confurence will probably remain large because it has the
: reputation of being "THE" convention, but I think there will be alot of
: "one timers" at that convention that will eventually filter into the
: smaller cons.
*nods* Agreed. There are signs of this already.
: Confurence will probably become "specialized"...fine.
*nods* Agreed. Let those who want what CF has become keep it.
: What is disturbing is that the smaller anthrocons will be tarred by
: Confurence's image, either warranted or unwarranted, unless those
: smaller cons embrace a wider audience as AAC is attempting to do.
That is where folks such as you and I come in. We spread the word, give
what AAC and these other cons are truly doing, debunking the tarring.
Personally, I feel that in embracing a wider audience, you're opening the
doors to fresher insights and views.
: Perhaps in doing so, the smaller, less focused conventions might start a
: reputation of their own. (Duckon is well along that pathway already..).
*nods* ConDor here in San Diego is also doing that. I've been kicking at
a brick wall with the SDCC programming. They have the opinion that
"furry" equals sex and are these weirdos. What do you expect with panel
titles such as "How do you find it under all that fur?" and being slated
for late in the programming time slots?
Welp, there are always other cons who are friendly.
: Once must ask him/herself what exactly is it that has given Confurence
: and Furrydom its poor image? In the regular scifi crowd, the general
: consensus about "Furry fans" are a pack of sexually deprived,
: spooge-whacking fanboys. Is this image accurate? Not entirely, since
: it describes only a very small part of the fandom. Yet, its the image
: people maintain. People are going to remember uglier, more shocking
: images than the prouder aspects of this fandom.
I've been on a panel with Merlino at ConDor and heard him speaking about
how "furries" are a great way to explore your sensuality. I've over heard
him at his "furry" parties giving the pitch on the fandom and what it's
about, showing these new folks sketchbooks of sexual art. Same old same
old nothing's CHANGED. He gave ME the same damned pitch back in 1984 at
the "furry" party he held at SDCC. That was 13 years ago, who knows how
many times he's given the same or similar pitch to others that "furrys"
are great sexual vehicles? I know he uses my art plus the art of Terrie
Smith, Michele Light, Ken Sample to name a few to push his view of what
the fandom is. And yanno? I don't like being used as a reason to see the
fandom in such a narrow slice as his.
Now, he's not totally to blame for this. Others do it as well. So again
its up to those of us who don't like that to voice its not such a truth
when we meet those who misunderstand and believe these. All you can do,
really, and hope that you make some headway.
: The momentum to create a "friendlier" better-imaged Fandom has been
: going on for quite awhile, perhaps '97 is the year we see it in it's
: infancy?
Looks like it...
: Again, ask yourself *why* this Fandom's image is ugly? Who's
: responsible?
You have above this what I've heard and seen in my own experiences, many
others out there have also had the same. Its many things with the
spearhead being the promoters of CF.
: > The tarring, however, is inevitable unless many voices are raised in
: > explaining over and over and over again that what is seen at ConFurence is
: > not the norm nor standard for other anthropomorphic conventions.
: Yes, or the convention goes "above and beyond the call" to embrace
: moderation of its participants and not advertise itself as a "100%
: furry" convention.
Yep. Stop feeding in itself, stop being incestuous and inbreeding and
expand.
: > : A side note: if I get the idea that Confurence is not going to take
: > : steps to moderate the behavior of its attendees, I won't go. If the
: > : police make a vice raid on Confurence, they will seize the membership
: > : list and investigate every name on that list. I don't want to be on
: > : such a list, thank you... I have a career to protect.
: As do alot of the general fandom... (myself)...
You'e not the only one.
: > Agreed. I stated my reasons for pulling all support from ConFurence.
: > Other artists and fans have pulled support on the quiet side since I
: > announced my own decision. This says something, however, I'm willing to
: > say that Mark Merlino and Rod Riley are NOT listening. Their eyes and
: > ears are closed, so we who are speaking out shouldn't pretend to be here.
: Perhaps nobody is listening because they like how the Convention is? If
: that's the case, let them have their convention, but they'll have to
: deal with the any consequences. We'll start our own...
I've been thinking about this since I dropped that opinion above. Fine,
if that's what they want, they can HAVE it. I'm going elsewhere to find
what I once enjoyed in the anthropomorphic field. ConFurence certainly
doesn't offer it any longer.
[snipped net.offering]
: I dislike spooge, but loved your artistic style. There is a
: preponderance of "spooge monkeys" in this fandom (those that take the
: art into their bed) that like nothing more than the graphical, sexual
: images the artwork portrays. They could care less about the artistic
: quality...there is only ONE thing they need to see in the work.
: If you lose these fans, fine, I think you'll be alot happier.
Hey Skorzy, check out the latest cover to Yarf! Really NICE stained glass
image he did. I really loved it myself. Kudos, Lance!
: There's also an excess of really *awful* artists out there catering to
: the whims of these fans, and the dollars they casually throw out for
: their sexual fix.
Yep. Exactly. I had a few of their names thrown in my face when I voiced
the decision to ease off on doing little to no spooge. *shrugs* Fine.
I'm off to bigger and better things.
: Drawing spooge is fine, but you're going to have to deal with what it
: attracts...
True, very true.
: I guess what defines the real "artist" above the background is the one
: that can diversify their work and attract attention to it.
: Was it Heinlein that said "Specialization is for insects."?
Yes it was Heinlein. And I agree about diversification.
: > Such is the price of following one's own Path. I willingly pay it. As
: > Lance says, you do find out who your true friends are and which are the
: > ones who are just kissing your ass to get what they want for their
: > jollies.
: What about the new fans you attract because you cull out the spooge
: sycophants?
These new fans are slow in finding me, but when they do, I'm grateful for
them and tell them so. They may not buy much, but dammit its nice to know
that the fantasy based anthro works and the general fantasy works I do
now touch others.
Michael Russell
(( snip the notes about CF ))
I had hoped to attend CF sometime, but based on what I have heard
reported about CF7 and CF8, I no longer hope to attend. I will support
smaller cons, like MoreFurCon or Duckon, that appear to have
more control over behaviour. So, I'm a case of an animation and
anthropomorphic fan who has plenty of money to spend at a con who has
been scared away from CF because of the reported behaviour and
associations.
I do not buy R or NC-17 rated artwork and I prefer not to see such.
All
of my commissions have been and will be G rated.
Now, on to why I am replying...
> : > Such is the price of following one's own Path. I willingly pay it. As
> : > Lance says, you do find out who your true friends are and which are the
> : > ones who are just kissing your ass to get what they want for their
> : > jollies.
>
> : What about the new fans you attract because you cull out the spooge
> : sycophants?
>
> These new fans are slow in finding me, but when they do, I'm grateful for
> them and tell them so. They may not buy much, but dammit its nice to know
> that the fantasy based anthro works and the general fantasy works I do
> now touch others.
Yarf 46 is out? I haven't got my copy yet ... Le sigh!
Anyway, I don't understand your reference to "friends"?
I have worked with a several artists on commissions and I have
written
others with simple words of encouragement and how much I enjoy their
work.
In most cases I had hoped to become more a friend, not just some guy
with
money buying a cute, cartooney, humourous commission. In a couple
cases, I
have become friends with the artist -- providing comments about their
published
works, sending encouragement, suggestions for themes, and more. I have
enjoyed
a long friendship with a couple artists long after they completed my
commission.
This is the exception. In most cases, the artist just "disappears".
My knowledge of Lance Rund's work is what he published in early
issues
of Yarf! I thought those drawings were great. Some of my favourites
are his
cute lady tiger on the back cover of issue # 5, again with a cute joke
on the
back of issue # 8, and the cute vixen on issue # 10. (Ok, I have a soft
spot
in my heart for cute vixens.)
My knowledge of your work, Tygger, is a few "pin-up" images that I
saw
somewhere. Either your web site or Foxy's Anthropomorphine 'zine. I
don't
remember where. Anyway, I thought the artwork was skillful and detailed
--
without overwhelming the image. However, I don't buy "pin-up" artwork.
By the way, are you (D A Graf) the same as who wrote "The
Furkindred: Let
Sleeping Gods Lie"? I just finished reading this and I completely
enjoyed
it. It had action, it was funny (I liked the TV references), and it
kept
moving.
But if Lance Rund is back and your [Tygger's] artwork has moved
beyond
"pin-ups", I would like to learn more.
--
Staying Tiny Toon'd,
Michael Russell # Multimedia, AS/400, and AIX
IBM Global Services # e-mail: michael...@vnet.ibm.com
Orlando, FL # or: mrus...@ix.netcom.com
The World of Vicki Fox => http://people.delphi.com/MSRUSSELL/
Richard J. Bartrop
On 15 Feb 1997, D. A. Graf wrote:
> Lance Rund <la...@arclight.net> wrote:
>
> : A valid point. Confurence is not indispensible.
<large snip>
> I fully agree. So do many others. I personally feel that more voices
> need to be heard on this, lurkers and the usual posters alike.
>
Ok, here goes...
> : So...
>
> : With the rise of other conventions, (hopefully) friendly competition
> : could raise the standards. And those who do not will either fall by
> : the wayside or become "specialized". I can envision a scenario where
> : Confurence attracts that portion of furry fandom who want to go wild
> : in the halls (a 'yiff-con' as it were) and everyone else going to
> : other venues with more 'mainstream' behavior. THis is fine, as long
> : as the other conventions are not tarred with Confurence's brush.
>
> You've been seeing the same thing as well? This is scarey, Lance, we're
> thinking alike here. *grins* But, OTHERS have come to this conclusion as
> well in the last months I've been finding out. Many of the artists, names
> seen as pros or semi pros, see and feel this. Some see this as the signal
> to go elsewhere to where what they persue in the field of anthropomorphic,
> NOT what has come to define "furry" for what seems the majority, can be
> found and enjoyed again as they once did when they first found "furry"
> fandom.
>
I know exactly what you mean. Some time ago, I came to the conclusion
that 'Furry' was not what I was. I still do the same things that
attracted me to it, I still draw, muck, and socialize, but I wanted to
distance myself from certain practices that people insisted were part of
being furry, practices that was either uninterested in, or deeply
uncomfortable with. Aside from personal distatste, there was the matter
o the reputation of 'furry', particularly among other fandoms, and among
people who's opinion I do respect. Furthermore, while I can live with
being seen as a little eccentric, a I really don't want people to recoil
in horror.
Brian Henderson wanted to return 'furry' to it's origianl context, and
hile Brian's vision sounds appealling, I think it's a hopeless cause. It
is apparent that a lot o people like the current situation, and that some
feel very threatennned by the thought of any change. Far better to create
a new fandom, or more accurately, gather the old fandom under a new label.
Some people have already done this, under the label 'anthro'. It's
apparent that the two groups involved don't particularly want to be
together anyhow.
> The tarring, however, is inevitable unless many voices are raised in
> explaining over and over and over again that what is seen at ConFurence is
> not the norm nor standard for other anthropomorphic conventions.
>
Agreed. I think the Albany people were ise to label their convention an
'Anthrocon' rather than a 'Furry con'
>
> Personally, I feel that ConFurence has already been spiraling into itself
> since FurryMuck was discovered. Please note, that this is a personal
> view. I will be the first to say that FurryMuck has good folks there.
> And I will be the first to also say in the next breath and sentence that
> FurryMuck has many questionable folks there.
No arugment there. I like Furryspace, and there are some nice places to
socialize, but a lot of the people and places there are pretty vile.
>
> : A side note: if I get the idea that Confurence is not going to take
> : steps to moderate the behavior of its attendees, I won't go. If the
> : police make a vice raid on Confurence, they will seize the membership
> : list and investigate every name on that list. I don't want to be on
> : such a list, thank you... I have a career to protect.
>
> Agreed. I stated my reasons for pulling all support from ConFurence.
> Other artists and fans have pulled support on the quiet side since I
> announced my own decision. This says something, however, I'm willing to
> say that Mark Merlino and Rod Riley are NOT listening. Their eyes and
> ears are closed, so we who are speaking out shouldn't pretend to be here.
When I first heard of Confurence, it piqued my curiousity. Now I'm not so
sure. If it was just a few crazed fundamentalists, i could understand.
But when i see people who's opinion I respect, and people who are a lot
more liberal about such things than I am, complain about the standards o
behaviour, I have to wonder. It's a little like Rush Limbaugh protesting
that the country has gone too far to the right.
> --Tygger
Richard Bartrop
Grey on FurryMUCK
Images: http://www.tigerden.com/Artists/Bartrop
D. A. Graf
Michael Russell <mrus...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
: (( snip the notes about CF ))
[big ol' snip]
*blinks* Whoa...I got this as an email and only just now found it here.
I already answered Michael in email already. I answered his questions
posed to me and if anyone is curious, hey, email me. ;)
Lindgold
Richard J. Bartrop (rbar...@freenet.calgary.ab.ca) wrote:
: When I first heard of Confurence, it piqued my curiousity. Now I'm not so
: sure. If it was just a few crazed fundamentalists, i could understand.
: But when i see people who's opinion I respect, and people who are a lot
: more liberal about such things than I am, complain about the standards o
: behaviour, I have to wonder. It's a little like Rush Limbaugh protesting
: that the country has gone too far to the right.
Y'know, when I first started getting into Furry Fandom, one of my goals
was to get to a Confurence one of these years. Now, I'm not so sure. Reading
all the messages saying how CF has declined over the years, especially the
last one, really made me think if I wanted to go or not. Several people whom
I do want to meet RL have withdrawn support from it, and that was one of the
primary reasons for coming. CF does seem to have scored a bad rep for itself.
Might I go to an AAC instead? Its fresh optimism does sound appealing.
Plus it's at an off-peak time (for me, that is), and I've never been to
the East Coast of the US. More reasons to come.
If AAC makes it to 1998, I might make it my big OE. (Woo! Acronyms!)
--
.....Cheers - Lindgold.
FFH2ad A++>+++ C** D H+ M P R+ T W Z++ Sm RLCT$ a+ caou++ d++ e+ f h i+ p+ sm#
Also known as gra...@iconz.co.nz and gr...@sfmc.sf.org.nz | ^Furcode 1.2
Artwork: http://rat.org/pub/furry/presgran/ SF: http://www.sfmc.sf.org.nz/
"Kryten! Unpack Rachel and get out the puncture repair kit!" - Arnold Rimmer
Dwight J. Dutton
Dr. Cat <c...@bga.com> wrote in article <5e7a56$t...@news3.realtime.net>...
>
> * Anything else I didn't mention we probably can't agree about either.
I don't agree.... ;-)
Actually, it's a given that people will not agree on the answer. You will
never have a 100% consensus on anything, anthro or not.
Confurence belongs to Mark & Rodney, they started it a decade ago (I know,
I was there) and it's becoem whatever they want it to be.
Anthro fandom has gotten large enough to start dividing into splinter
groups (something like an Amoeba) and branching out to other, smaller
conventions and events that will themselves grow over time. If it is
perceived that Confurence is catering to a specific part of the fandom (it
certainly is MY perception that it is) then there is room for other cons
with a different focus.
Ten years ago we had furry parties at conventions that were general
interest sci-fi cons. Anthro fandom being a subset of science fiction
fandom.
Last month I saw parties and events that catered to sub-groups within
anthro fandom. This is happening becasue anthro fandom has now gotten
large enough for those smaller groups to emerge and define themselves.
Eventually, if they contineu to grow, they will split off and form their
own conventions. And in time there is even the chance it will cycle again
from there.
This is neither evil nor good, it's social evolution, it's going to
happen. The splinter groups will initially take the reputation with them
that the main groups had, but then define their own as time progresses.
Does the reputation of furry fandom = the reputation of Science Fiction
fandom? No, and I doubt anyone here would say otherwise. The new, smaller
cons will become distinct in time as well, and at that point the problem
will lessen. Maybe not go away, but it will decline somewhat.
Problem in the meantime we have about the same situation as Star Trek
fandom would have if it was only known by the "K&S" stuff.
Rebekah Groat
In article <5e9em5$157$1...@news.iconz.co.nz>, lind...@iconz.co.nz
(Lindgold) wrote:
:Richard J. Bartrop (rbar...@freenet.calgary.ab.ca) wrote:
:: When I first heard of Confurence, it piqued my curiousity. Now I'm not so
:: sure. If it was just a few crazed fundamentalists, i could understand.
:: But when i see people who's opinion I respect, and people who are a lot
:: more liberal about such things than I am, complain about the standards o
:: behaviour, I have to wonder. It's a little like Rush Limbaugh protesting
:: that the country has gone too far to the right.
:
:Y'know, when I first started getting into Furry Fandom, one of my goals
:was to get to a Confurence one of these years. Now, I'm not so sure. Reading
:all the messages saying how CF has declined over the years, especially the
:last one, really made me think if I wanted to go or not. Several people whom
:I do want to meet RL have withdrawn support from it, and that was one of the
:primary reasons for coming. CF does seem to have scored a bad rep for itself.
Very true. I missed this last cf, but was at the one the year before. I'm
not sure I ever want to go back, considering some of the reports. I've
seen other shows ruined by an influx of non-fans who see a chance for a
cheap party (Boskone the year before the last Noreascon and the statement
that NESFA had to publish in Locus basically disowning Boskone so the
Sheraton wouldn't back out their contract with the worldcon come to mind.)
But the main reason I post today is to post a letter on behalf of Mark
Severson, who has no usenet access (I emailed Ed Kline's letter to him and
several of the more germaine responses.)
What follows is an open letter from Mark Severson. He welcomes responses
by email.
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1997 23:02:49 -0800
From: Mark Severson <mar...@eonet.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: elka...@mailbag.com
Subject: The Ed Kline letter & the comments section
X-URL: http://www.graphXpress.com/main.html
To whom it may concern;
Thanks to some folks I was able to read Ed Klines letter and some of
the comments that have been made since then. I would like to throw my
two cents in and if you feel inclined then by all means throw rocks.
But before you throw rocks I suggest you wake up and think.
I feel that he nailed it. I have attended the last four CF's. The
first one was a bit of a daze, seeing as it was all new to me, I was
able to meet folks I had only talked to on the phone or knew only by
their sigature on their art. I had a great time, I had even purchased
one of those "black books" to collect sketches in. In 95 I still had
a good time for the most part, but I noticed that not all the people I
had seen the first year were there. I figures thinks had come up or
whatever.
At CF7 I returned with scanned copies of the art in book from the
first two years. I wanted to give the artists who had done the works a
copy for their own records and enjoyment. Of the thirty pieces I was
barely able to hand out half, the other artists weren't there. I also
started to feel abit out of place which was a bit on the distrubing
side. If was not as fun as it had been in the past, I saw folks who
were stepping over the line of good taste, I went to the Caberet for the
first and last time. I do not see how you can equate some joker in a
g string and a collar as furry. All I saw was what I would expect to
see at an S & M club.
Now we come to 97, I saw the folks doing the Rocky Horror Picture Show
auditions, at least that's what came to mind to me. What pray tell did
that have to do with furry stuff? Eh? Not a damn thing. I was in the
lobby when Silfur (or whatever he calls himself) came bounding over the
planter in a white g string. That was not appropriate behavior nor
attire, nor was it anything to do with furrys in my opinion. Had he
done in my presence what I heard about later on I would have planted my
shoe where the sun don't shine. I am referring to his running up to
people, turning around, bending over, grabbing his cheeks, (not the ones
on his face) and spreading them then waving this "wonderful" sight in
peoples faces saying "wouldn't you just like some" or something to that
effect. I don't care if you want to screw doorknobs but if you stick in
my face I guarentee I will react and you will not like it, unless of
course you are a masochist.
When I left CF8 I was mad! It was not a furry con! Yes, art was for
sale and folks were in costume but I was feeling more out of place then
ever. It has turned into something that I really feel a true furry fan
would not care to attend. To me furry fandon is about morphs, Bugs
Bunny, Red Shetland, Albedo, Furrlough, not some guy in silk stockings
and a dress, not some bozo running around the lobby in a g-string or
someone being led down the hall in a collar and a leash in leathers. In
a furry costume fine, in stuff that would make biker blush, I think
not. As far as I am concerned CF for all intends and purposes is
dead. It still has the outer shell but the guts have rotted out. Head
counts don't mean squat if less then half the people there even know
what they are attending.
Organized, it was not. The ribbon count for super sponsers by thier
own addmission was short even prior to the start of the con. A lot of
folks, myself included ended up with SS written on our badges by staff.
To me that SS stood for Stupid Suckers. From the horror stories I have
heard at the con and since the only conclusion possible is that security
was a farce. An open Art Show, people wondering around in the dealers
den, what else went down? As for the Art Show itself, the pickup of art
was just as patectic as it was the last time I purchased art at CF5.
Pickup started at 2pm, the credit card machine showed up at 2:45,at 3:30
the line starts to move (I was the 7th person in the credit card line)
at 4pm I finally got back to my room with the two pieces I purchased.
Where I found the message light blinking. The hotel had a message for
me that had been left on Thursday!!!! Let's not forget the "Pet
Auction" frankly from report in Ed's letter I think that for next year
it should be renamed the "Boy Toy Auction" so that the truth in
advertising people don't crack down on the con.
Yep, yer right I'm straight arrow. I find ladies to be quite
fasinating. As for guys, well I like playin cards and B.S.'in while
drinkin a beer.
What it boils down to is one simple thing - respect for others and a
respect for what you are supposadly celabrating. That was why I first
attended a CF, I was going to a place where people enjoyed the same
genre of material as I did, I thought it was a celebration of morphs,
and I really looked forward to it. No more. I saw a great deal of
lack of respect for others. If you want people to accept you then you
better learn that its a two way street. If you get in someones face,
you better expect have it come back. I'm sure that some of you plan on
doing just that by firing off hate mail towards yours truely. Well go
for it. But just think about this first, it wouldn't bother you so much
if it wasn't the truth!
Fire at will.
mar...@eonet.com
_____________________________________________________________________
http://www.graphxpress.com/main.html
http://www.geocities.com/RodeoDrive/1551
Kay Shapero
On <Feb 16 11:09>, "Dr. Skorzy MacFarlaighn" <sko...@ma.ultranet.com>
wrote;
s>Confurence will probably become "specialized"...fine.
s>What is disturbing is that the smaller anthrocons will be tarred
s>by Confurence's image, either warranted or unwarranted, unless those
s>smaller cons embrace a wider audience as AAC is attempting to do.
Two points - yes, ConFurence is only one convention and it's a very good
thing that many more furry cons are being started - not only does it give
various fans a closer con to go to, it allows many more of them to become
involved in running conventions. Experience that can be quite useful.
The second is that you should be aware that after each convention, there
WILL be horror stories floating around the fandom about what individuals
are alleged to have done at the convention. These will NOT be the fault of
ConFurence; most of the time they won't even be the fault of the actual
concom of the convention in question. They will be the result of human
nature and the various consequences of rumor (see my earlier posts on the
subject.) and will happen EVEN IF the events described did NOT happen.
Conclusion? By all means support your local furry con! Get involved in
running it if you can, attend it, and enjoy it. If you want to go to more
than one, do that too. These are multiple parties, not competing
corporations. And remember - this is a hobby. Hobbies are for fun.
D. A. Graf
Rebekah Groat <elka...@mailbag.com> wrote:
: What follows is an open letter from Mark Severson. He welcomes responses
: by email.
: Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1997 23:02:49 -0800
: From: Mark Severson <mar...@eonet.com>
: MIME-Version: 1.0
: To: elka...@mailbag.com
: Subject: The Ed Kline letter & the comments section
: X-URL: http://www.graphXpress.com/main.html
: To whom it may concern;
: Thanks to some folks I was able to read Ed Klines letter and some of
: the comments that have been made since then. I would like to throw my
: two cents in and if you feel inclined then by all means throw rocks.
: But before you throw rocks I suggest you wake up and think.
[snip]
My gods...
I KNOW Mark Severson personally, have spoken to him many times over the
phone, talked to him at CF. He's a quiet spoken, gentle man and this is
the FIRST I have ever seen him THIS livid!
It really makes me wonder just who else is this angered with the con and
who else will speak up....
Just my own two cents on this.
--Tygger
--
******************************************************************************
gr...@primenet.com Artshow Director, Albany Anthrocon
www.av.qnet.com/~canuss/tygger www.av.qnet.com/~canuss/tygger/gk.htm
******************************************************************************
"I need a bigger gun...."
Saraenae Kohiino, Guardian Knights #1
Gary Burke
In article <elkabong-170...@msn-4-2.binc.net>,
Rebekah Groat <elka...@mailbag.com> wrote:
>From: Mark Severson <mar...@eonet.com>
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>To: elka...@mailbag.com
>Subject: The Ed Kline letter & the comments section
>X-URL: http://www.graphXpress.com/main.html
>
> To whom it may concern;
>auditions, at least that's what came to mind to me. What pray tell did
>that have to do with furry stuff? Eh? Not a damn thing. I was in the
>lobby when Silfur (or whatever he calls himself) came bounding over the
>planter in a white g string. That was not appropriate behavior nor
>attire, nor was it anything to do with furrys in my opinion. Had he
>done in my presence what I heard about later on I would have planted my
>shoe where the sun don't shine. I am referring to his running up to
>people, turning around, bending over, grabbing his cheeks, (not the ones
>on his face) and spreading them then waving this "wonderful" sight in
>peoples faces saying "wouldn't you just like some" or something to that
>effect. I don't care if you want to screw doorknobs but if you stick in
Um, I have to say this, whatever you opinions of CF may be, and you are
entitled to them, that I can guarantee you that Silfur did not do what
you are describing at the con. I know Silfur, I live with Silfur, I
am Silfur's ex-SO, and while he is very bouncy and can cross the line
occasionally what with scritching people he doesn't know, the concept
of him doing or saying that is completely alien. Despite what people might
think, Silfur is NOT a slutty individual only going to the con for sex. He
certainly gets propositioned enough, but that is not what his purpose
is for being at the con. And I would consider the bunny costume
he was in while wearing that G-string to be highly furry. (okay, the costume
was mostly bodypaint, but it was well executed.) Silfur is a VERY furry
person and like bunnies more than any individual I know. I have seen
and watched the legends around him grow since myself and Andrew Murphy-mee
basically brought him into the fandom in early 1995. Things have been
attributed to Silfur that would make sailors blush. And I can tell you
with absolute certainty that they are 95% inaccurate. And yet people BELIEVE
them, because they WANT to believe them. I find it fascinating.
> When I left CF8 I was mad! It was not a furry con! Yes, art was for
>sale and folks were in costume but I was feeling more out of place then
>ever. It has turned into something that I really feel a true furry fan
>would not care to attend. To me furry fandon is about morphs, Bugs
>Bunny, Red Shetland, Albedo, Furrlough, not some guy in silk stockings
It is still all those things. And the guy in the dress thing was
established as being hotel security.
>and a dress, not some bozo running around the lobby in a g-string or
>someone being led down the hall in a collar and a leash in leathers. In
>a furry costume fine, in stuff that would make biker blush, I think
>not. As far as I am concerned CF for all intends and purposes is
>dead. It still has the outer shell but the guts have rotted out. Head
>counts don't mean squat if less then half the people there even know
>what they are attending.
>Auction" frankly from report in Ed's letter I think that for next year
>it should be renamed the "Boy Toy Auction" so that the truth in
>advertising people don't crack down on the con.
Mm-hmm, I noticed a lot of the so-called 'boy toys' selling for 5-10 bucks
too, it wasn't exactly as described by ed kline. (I was DJing and saw the
whole thing.)
> Yep, yer right I'm straight arrow. I find ladies to be quite
>fasinating. As for guys, well I like playin cards and B.S.'in while
>drinkin a beer.
Good for you. There are plenty like you in furry fandom still. I fully
support your heterosexuality, you can do whatever you like in the privacy
of your own home, but at a con, you should leave that behind. We have our
public image to consider.
>doing just that by firing off hate mail towards yours truely. Well go
>for it. But just think about this first, it wouldn't bother you so much
>if it wasn't the truth!
Nope, I don't hate you at all. I just wanted to correct a misconception,
a false anecdote which seems to be endemic to this fandom, and people are
placing WAY WAY too much accuracy on third hand stories. "I have never
been to CF, but because I blindly believe everything I hear from people,
I will NEVER GO and you should all be ARRESTED!" "I went to cf2 and
it was fun, then I went to cf8 and I had a HORRIBLE time, YOU PEOPLE SUCK!"
"I saw someone wearing a collar, that must mean they're being led back
to someone's hotel room for SORDID SEX, this must go on ALL THE TIME at
CF, CLEANSE the FANDOM!"
etc. etc. If you don't have a good time at CF, maybe it's easier to
start another con that won't have these problems because it lays
everything out that people must do and not do right from the start,
and avoids people thinking they can do whatever the hell they want.
A con that will make sure everyone who's there is just there to enjoy
furries and not anything else. It would be a lot easier than trying
to reform cf, which seems in most people's eyes to have become a parody
of itself.
Anyways, I digress. The main point of my reply is "Silfur did not spread
his ass cheeks at anyone, because I know him REALLY well, and he would
be very unlikely to do something that was just purely obscenely sexual
rather than innuendo and teasing, which he likes LOTS more and is very
good at. Plus he has lots to do with furries 'cause he IS a furry,
and furry isn't just about the buying and selling of art, much as some
might like it to be."
furplay
I've just had a very SCARY realization:
Is it somehow possible that Silfur and Chester are RELATED?!?!?!?
Or worse yet, that they're one and the SAME (you NEVER see them both
together in the same room at the same time, you know)?!?!?!?!
Please Glen, ask Terrie if it is so!!!!!
Shitting my undies in terror at the thought,
furplay
D. A. Graf
Mark Severson asked me to forward this to the net for him....
From mar...@eonet.com Sun Feb 23 02:39:02 1997
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 20:08:46 -0800
From: Mark Severson <mar...@eonet.com>
To: gr...@primenet.com
Subject: Re: Confurence comments.
The following is a reply which I sent to a Mr Burke, seeing as
he did not see fit to respond to me directly I was fortunate to
have have someone forward it to me. I felt it was only proper to
allow those of you who saw his reply to me to see my response.
Again for those of you who wish to comment, either negatively or
positively concerning my previous comments or the ones below my
email address and my name are listed below. Fire away.
mar...@eonet.com
Mark Severson
If you were at the con, you might remember me as the fat guy in the
demin vest with the black hat covered in pins. (I know, I know there
were a lot of us fat guys running around. But I was the only one I
saw with a 10 pound hat!)
Mr Burke,
First of all I am rather disappointed in you. My email address
was listed at the base of the letter which I requested to be posted
to AFF. Had it not been for another person on AFF I would have
never seen your reply. I have in fact received one response to
date, directly concerning my letter. I am sure you will be
disappointed to here that the person who did use my email address
which was plainly posted agreeded with me. On to my reply to your
comments.
As I said in my letter which was posted to AFF for me I did not
see him perform the act. I do not know you from Adam (or Eve) but
I will give you benefit of doubt. Let us say he did not do that.
I did see him boucing around in the lobby in a g-string. When I
saw him I did notice some white streaks on him but I could not
tell what the heck he was. I stand by my statement that his
running around the lobby in a g-string was not proper and was in
fact totally tasteless! I don't give a damn if he was suppost to
be a "Bunny" or not. To me he was way out of line. That is my
opinion and I will stick by it. If the information I was given
concerning his other actions is confirmed by others then I stand
by what I said previously. To put it bluntly, had he or anyother
person performed such an act in my view I would have kicked their
ass, literally.
As to the the "boy toys" sale you saw it one way and Ed Kline
saw it another. Was he correct in stating that the top money
getter was a person who made it rather obivious that he was
available for "other" things or not and did that person go for
over $150? What was the highest amount one of the females went
for? What did the vaste majority of the auction consist of?
You were very limited in your details friend.
As to your "Good for you" that cuts both ways. I don't recall
hearing about a guy and a gal in the lobby trying to see how far
they could stuff their tounges down each others throat every time
a couple of guys walked in the front door. And yes I do have this
first hand not second or third. So YOU leave it behind too. If
you want to have a gay con or even a gay furry con then by all
means go for it, just don't expect me to help support it. I will
not, that is my right. As far as I understood CF was suppost to
be a furry con. I repeatjust where pray tell do guys running
around in dresses, and people leather being lead around by leashes
not in any costume) tie into a furry con? You don't seem to
address that, you just want your "freedom." Well, guess what,
I want my "freedom" too. I want the freedom to go to a con which
is suppost to be about, a FURRY con! Do you honestly think that
people could get away with the kind of crap they were pulling at
CF at a Trekie con? It is suppost to be a celebration of furries,
not gays, not bi's, not hetro's, not even beastiality!
As for the male individual running around in a dress do you
honestly expect me to beleive anyone is going to take him
seriously as security? Give me a break! I saw the guy and I
don't remember him EVER even remember him having on a badge that
said security. If some joker came up to me in drag and said he
was security my response would have been something to the effect
that "Ya, and I'm Kaptain Kangaroo." If a person is going to be
part of the security staff then they should look it, not like he
is ready to take a walk down Time Square.
I use to go to CF to have fun, after this last one forget it.
I am not interested in supporting what bothers me. From what I
have heard from others, both fans and some of artists who are
gracious enough to communicate with me it bothered them also.
Consider this, please really think about it. There would not be
this uproar to start with if all was right in the world. If it
were mearly the minor thing you seem to think it is you might
hear a few grumbles. But having been there FOUR years running and
seeing it slowly happening, and then having my feeling confirmed by
speaking to others who also attended in person or talking
to them by phone or email it should be obvious to even a blind
person that it has gotten way over the edge. Beleive it or not
those of us you call straights or whatever like to get together
too. It may come as a total shock to you but we also, at least
I can speak for myself don't care what the hell you do in YOUR
bedroom. But when it gets dragged out into the middle of the
floor then you had better expect a negative reaction.
I saw it, I'm reacting. The con, as far as I am concerned
has three options, continue things as is and change the name to
reflect its true meaning, call it the GCF (Gay Furry Con) for all
I care then everyone will know what to expect. Those of us who
are not interested will not attend and you and your ilk can do
what ever you want. The second option is to let it die.
Third, clean it up, bring it back to being a real furry con.
Everyone is welcome to attend but if you must do something like
the RHPC routine or be lead in leathers on a leash, keep
it in your room. Let the rest of us that are there for the
furry stuff enjoy what we came for, what it was originally for.
And NO I DO NOT THINK THAT FURRY MEANS ONLY BUYING AND SELLING
THE ART! To me furry use to mean things like those I mentioned
in my letter, Bugs Bunny, Red Shetland, Usagi Yojimbo, folks
dressed up in furry costumes, people discussing how they feel
various creatures might appear as a morph, its Cheetha in Gold
Digger, its Grimm in Mother Goose & Grimm and yes it does include
buying art or selling art but that is not the MAIN thing. The main
idea to me was the celebration of the genre. Frankly at this point
that is not the main reason for CF. God knows what CF's main
reason for being is. If as word has it Merlino only advertised it
on the net on gay chat lines then I think what he wants it to be
is self explanitory. Thanks to the actions of persons in the past
and at this con in particular "furvert" is associated with furry.
I am tired of the discusted looks when I tell someone in a comic
shop I like furry stuff. The "Furvert" label is very wide spread,
when I first got back into comics back in 89 after a 16 year hiatus
it was a Red Shetland comic that brought me back into comics. For
several years after that I never heard the furvert. Hell, it was
hard to even find furry material. Then a couple years ago it first
popped up and the looks and the way folks talked to me on the phone
even changed sometimes when I mentioned that I liked furries.
In the last couple of years I have seen things at the con which
made me understand just where the label came from. I think I would
be fairly safe in saying it is not due entirely to the fact that
a fair portion of the art is that of nude fem morphs. I have
found and or purchased copies of art that go back quite a way
and as I said earlier this "Furvert" crap didn't pop up until the
last couple of years. I may be isolated from other other fans
location wise but I do have the ability to travel and use a phone.
So what pray tell is the cause of this "furvert" BS? EH? So sir,
you may have the label "furry" I gladly relinquise it to you.
As of now I consider myself an "Anthro" fan. That is a person
who will go to cons were the reason it is being held is to
celebrate the genre I sick of seeing destroyed in the name of
"freedom" I also should be free to go somewhere and enjoy that
which I drove for two days and over 1200 miles to see. This last
con I was not free to do so. It was a con, but not the kind of
con I had to gone to see. I would love to see a con where folks
were there to celebrate "antros" and nothing else, not being
straight, not being bi, not being gay. Just antros, you know what?
I bet we would have a good time and everyone would get along.
Scary thought eh?
sola...@eden.com
>Mark Severson asked me to forward this to the net for him....
(This reply c.c.'ed to Mr. Severson. Steve Gattuso, or someone else with
Ed Kline's e-mail address, please feel free to forward this to him as well;
some of the comments in here concern his earlier letter also.)
> As I said in my letter which was posted to AFF for me I did not
>see him perform the act. I do not know you from Adam (or Eve) but
>I will give you benefit of doubt. Let us say he did not do that.
>I did see him boucing around in the lobby in a g-string. When I
>saw him I did notice some white streaks on him but I could not
>tell what the heck he was. I stand by my statement that his
>running around the lobby in a g-string was not proper and was in
>fact totally tasteless! I don't give a damn if he was suppost to
>be a "Bunny" or not. To me he was way out of line. That is my
>opinion and I will stick by it. If the information I was given
>concerning his other actions is confirmed by others then I stand
>by what I said previously. To put it bluntly, had he or anyother
>person performed such an act in my view I would have kicked their
>ass, literally.
While I agree in general with the sentiment that there is some public
behavior at ConFurence that is getting _way_ out of hand... may I
respectfully suggest that the use of second, third, or fourth-hand
information that "our side" seems to have fallen into is _not_ helping us
come to a resolution, or even helping in getting the "other side" to admit
there _is_ a problem? (This is not directed specifically at you, BTW; your
post just happened to be the one that prompted me to sit down and write
something I've had on my mind for a while now.)
It seems to me that a lot of accusations are being leveled on the basis
that "everyone knows..." or "someone told me...", but no one seems willing
or able to actually PROVIDE SOURCES for these things.
Now, _I_ saw Silfur running around in his bodypainted bunny get-up... and I
agree, that was somewhat beyond the pale in terms of appropriate public
behavior, and I certainly don't defend or condone it. HOWEVER - we _do_
still have in this country a quaint little notion called "the right to face
one's accuser"... so unless your friend, or someone else who actually
witnessed FIRSTHAND the alleged incident, is willing to PUT THEIR NAME to
the accusation, I for one intend to be _very_ skeptical of this allegation
at the very least, and I encourage others to do the same.
Ditto the statement made by Ed Kline in his letter, that "It is well known
that [Mark Merlino] [has] been on the Internet conversing with members of
alternative lifestyles and encouraging their involvement with the
convention." Given that to date, _no one_ has produced even a _single_
Usenet posting to this effect, no one has produced a single IRC log, or
even claimed to have been a direct witness to it, I can only assume that -
in the absence of direct evidence - it isn't _that_ "well known" after all.
(Now if _you_, Mr. Kline, _were_ in fact the witness to these alleged
conversations or postings, and I failed to interpret that from your letter,
then I offer my apologies.)
In other words - let's dispense with the anonymous accusations couched
behind "everyone knows" or "someone told me", and start either naming names
and/or producing some direct evidence to back this stuff up, OK?
Otherwise, all you're doing, IMNSHO, is _weakening_ your arguments with
accusations that can't be proven, or even discussed rationally because we
have no way of judging the reliability of the accuser(s).
Gary Burke
In article <5epa33$k...@nnrp1.news.primenet.com>,
D. A. Graf <gr...@primenet.com> wrote:
>Mark Severson asked me to forward this to the net for him....
>
>
>
>From mar...@eonet.com Sun Feb 23 02:39:02 1997
>Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 20:08:46 -0800
>From: Mark Severson <mar...@eonet.com>
>To: gr...@primenet.com
>Subject: Re: Confurence comments.
>
> The following is a reply which I sent to a Mr Burke, seeing as
>he did not see fit to respond to me directly I was fortunate to
>have have someone forward it to me. I felt it was only proper to
>allow those of you who saw his reply to me to see my response.
>Again for those of you who wish to comment, either negatively or
>positively concerning my previous comments or the ones below my
>email address and my name are listed below. Fire away.
>
>mar...@eonet.com
>Mark Severson
>
>
> First of all I am rather disappointed in you. My email address
>was listed at the base of the letter which I requested to be posted
>to AFF. Had it not been for another person on AFF I would have
>never seen your reply. I have in fact received one response to
>date, directly concerning my letter. I am sure you will be
>disappointed to here that the person who did use my email address
>which was plainly posted agreeded with me. On to my reply to your
>comments.
<lengthy snip>
>I bet we would have a good time and everyone would get along.
>Scary thought eh?
I already replied to this in private email, there's no sense going
over in this newsgroup things that have been gone over eight BILLION
times and will be gone over eight BILLION times more. To sum up my
position however, hoping to push the discussion in a slightly new direction:
1) A person's bid level at the pet auction depends on how much they 'work
it' on stage; i.e. make themselves look like fun outgoing attractive people
and not stand there like a nervous lump. Many pets advertised their
limits as being very open to suggestion and were male and fairly cute, and
yet only sold for 5-10 bucks. And at other cons I have seen females who
blew the doors off silfur's bid level, just because they took the
oppurtunity to be cute and outgoing on stage.
2) Silfur was in a COSTUME when he had the G-string on, a very nice bodypaint
scheme which took several hours to apply, a tail and ears, and was one of
the furriest performers at the Cabaret, for which he was dressed (but just
took a quick spin around the lobby where you saw him). Calling the bodypaint
"some white streaks" is an insult to Monika Livingston's amazing makeup
job.
And finally:
3) The reason comic shop owners roll their eyes at mention of 'furry' is
not because of fan behaviour at CF (why would they go if they hate furries??)
but because of the abysmal state of furry comics, the only link they have to
this fandom. Most furry titles are either badly drawn and spoogy, fairly
well drawn and spoogy, fairly well drawn and boring, or poorly drawn with
a thirdhand anime-ripoff storyline. Plus the high concenctration of
anthology titles prevents readers from growing to know and love individual
characters, which tend to blend into one sea of attractive cats and foxes.
Compare 'Zu' or 'Genus' to a quality independent comic like 'Scud' or
comics like 'Bone' or 'Strangers in Paradise' or 'Astro City', and you
will see the art and writing level is generally lightyears beyond in the
non furry titles. And Bone for example is still written and drawn by ONE
guy. I will concede that Usagi Yojimbo is pretty good but tends to be
fairly repetitive. And I must STRESS very highly that I LOVE furries
themselves, I just think that 99% of the furry comics out there are not
doing furries justice.
-Gary "I'll trade every issue of Katmandu I own for one new issue of Sam and
Max"
Daniel Markey
:
ong-170297...@msn-4-2.binc.net>:
Distribution:
Alright.... there comes a point where I have to set records straight. I
have spoken for myself in the past where I saw nothing wrong with my
actions, or where I felt that I had erred and owed appology. I will not
deny or try to inappropriately justify anything that I have done or will
conceivably do at any Furry Convension, but I do see need to comment
where I see false account of my activities.
Rebekah Groat (elka...@mailbag.com) wrote:
: Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1997 23:02:49 -0800
: From: Mark Severson <mar...@eonet.com>
: MIME-Version: 1.0
: To: elka...@mailbag.com
: Subject: The Ed Kline letter & the comments section
: X-URL: http://www.graphXpress.com/main.html
<snip snip snip>
: that have to do with furry stuff? Eh? Not a damn thing. I was in the
: lobby when Silfur (or whatever he calls himself) came bounding over the
: planter in a white g string. That was not appropriate behavior nor
: attire, nor was it anything to do with furrys in my opinion. Had he
: done in my presence what I heard about later on I would have planted my
: shoe where the sun don't shine. I am referring to his running up to
: people, turning around, bending over, grabbing his cheeks, (not the ones
: on his face) and spreading them then waving this "wonderful" sight in
: peoples faces saying "wouldn't you just like some" or something to that
: effect. I don't care if you want to screw doorknobs but if you stick in
: my face I guarentee I will react and you will not like it, unless of
: course you are a masochist.
What is true in this account:
I wore a G-string in public. I was in FULL body paint on my way to the
Cabaret. I had glued to my tailbone a rabbit's tail and was wearing grey
and white body paint. You could not have missed seeing that from 50 feet
unless you were too blind disern a nakked person to one fully clothed.
Monika Livingston had done a WONDERFUL job of the makeup for us at the
furledance and I was DELIGHTED about the way it looked. With all of the
time I've been spending at the gym and that makeup I looked like
something out of an anthro drawing and I wanted more people to have an
opportunity to see it than those who attended the furledance. I would
have attended the poolside costume dance party if I was not being painted
up at that time. I was hoping to hit more parties after the show but by
the time it finished most parties had wound themselves down. :( I was
covering my nauty bits as well as any speedo bathing suit would. You
could hardly call my flanks obscene as they were completely covered in
fur paint. Any kid over 5 who can go into a comic store would see worse
in a marvel comic. I don't think that what I did was obscene or by any
means innapropriate to a furry con. I looked like a furry, I wanted to
share that. It's too bad you couldn't see past your conceptions of me
and enjoy what I was trying to do.
What was inncorrect:
I NEVER at any convension bent over and made an obscenely offensive
spectical of myself in the manor described in this email. I would, in
fact , like to hear WHERE you heard about this later on as I'd like to
speak with whomever accounted to it occuring. If anyone found something
I did offensive, by all means let us all know so that I can be held
accountable for my actions. Slanderous fabrication and lying are not any
way to support an argument.
I'm sorry to rant like this, but I felt that I needed to stand up for
myself on this one point. A few furries emailed me asking me whether or
not this was true. Upon clarifying the facts they did express the entire
thing seeming a little out of character. It's quite a reasurance knowing
that there are people out there who do try and take a level headed
appproach at weighing facts and creating their own oppinions.
Silfur Bunny
(Dan Markey)
Cybskunk
I don't know what the image is supposed to be, but I'll tell you what the
image is:
1) About five years ago, I mentioned CF to a gamer friend. His response
was "Oh, you mean 'FagCon'?"
2) About three years ago, I entered the art show at ConDor, a small San
Diego-area con. After posting my panel of furry prints, I went around the
corner as two females came up to my panel. Their overheard comment?
"Look! Another skunkfucker!"
Mer'rark
Cybskunk (cybs...@aol.com) wrote:
: I don't know what the image is supposed to be, but I'll tell you what the
: image is:
: 1) About five years ago, I mentioned CF to a gamer friend. His response
: was "Oh, you mean 'FagCon'?"
That's what in the professional rings is known as an asshole. Not
that I'm trying to say CF doesn't have an image problem to grapple with,
but Christ, a 'FagCon'? Even if CF turned into the most perfect con in
the world, who'd need the likes of him.
[So that was a knee jerk reaction. I don't like rude people.]
: 2) About three years ago, I entered the art show at ConDor, a small San
: Diego-area con. After posting my panel of furry prints, I went around the
: corner as two females came up to my panel. Their overheard comment?
: "Look! Another skunkfucker!"
Same thing. More immature ilk. Of course it's possible they
encountered our kind of immature ilk and they clashed, resulting in what
you saw there.
Even way back when, when I didn't know jack about this genre, whenever
I saw bits and peices of it, I thought it was different. Weird, yeah. I
never thought it was sick or twisted. Of course I like to think I'm at
least a little open minded about new and varied forms of art.
I think though that if that were my friend saying that, and I was with
her, I'd bap her. I'd smile though, because I'd know she was kidding.
Uhm, I think.
--
Turned into my worst phobia. It's a crazy man's utopia.
If you're lost no one can show ya, but it sure was glad to know ya!
Bye bye!
-- Axl Rose (but people keep saying it's Alice Cooper!)
Jazmyn Concolor
In article <19970304153...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
Cybskunk <cybs...@aol.com> wrote:
>I don't know what the image is supposed to be, but I'll tell you what the
>image is:
>
>1) About five years ago, I mentioned CF to a gamer friend. His response
>was "Oh, you mean 'FagCon'?"
>Diego-area con. After posting my panel of furry prints, I went around the
>corner as two females came up to my panel. Their overheard comment?
>"Look! Another skunkfucker!"
Most of this attitude can be traced to a handful of 'SF' artists or comic
book artists who started a rumor that CF was a con for people who had sex
with animals...I tried to correct one of these idiots at a worldcon and was
verbally attacked in the dealers room by a raving 'Jesus Freak' artist who
refused to believe anything but her own warped imagination. Claiming 'So and So'
was commissioned by a 'skunkf**ker' to do art involving sex with horses, so
ALL 'furries' MUST be that way.. Her views were so narrow you could slice
cheese with them.. Concidering her attempts to have certain artists works
banned from art shows, claiming to be 'protecting the inocent', I see her as
nothing but a busybody with no life and won't buy her art if I was paid to
take it...(And no..I'm not refering to any furry artists here, this was a
mainstream SF/Fantasy artist)
I traced the rumor back to its source however and confronted the person,
who claimed they no longer attack 'furries', but by then the dammage was
already done..
guitar
cybs...@aol.com (Cybskunk) writes:
>I don't know what the image is supposed to be, but I'll tell you what the
>image is:
>1) About five years ago, I mentioned CF to a gamer friend. His response
>was "Oh, you mean 'FagCon'?"
Not very long ago, I mentioned CF to a friend who attends many
SF conventions, including just about every WorldCon in the U.S. and
the U.S. alternatives when the WorldCon is held in another country.
His response was, "Huh?" He'd never heard of it.
>2) About three years ago, I entered the art show at ConDor, a small San
>Diego-area con. After posting my panel of furry prints, I went around the
>corner as two females came up to my panel. Their overheard comment?
>"Look! Another skunkfucker!"
Did you correct the two ladies?
See, that's what I think is the real problem here. It's not what
people inside the fandom think, it's those outside. Nobody is trying
to tell them the stereotypes that the small portion of them who do
know about the fandom have are wrong. People here are too busy flaming
each other to care about dispelling the stereotypes, except when they
find it expedient to mention it in posts. I have shown people around
FurryMUCK. We didn't find huge orgies, there was only one T|D game on
at the time (and it had degerated to people just talking, not playing)
and the majority of people were sitting in the West Corner talking...
Babylon 5! THe people who were watching over my shoulder found all of
this... Boring! Blew some stereotypes out of the water. I know this
will mean people will flame me because they can't drop the 'FurryMUCK
is nothing but SEX!' line, but many people see it different. Just as
many people see CF differently. Some people were offended. Many were
not. A few of the people who have posted complaints have posted them
about every CF, not just this one.
I admit, there are problems in the fandom that should be corrected
but they are not lifestylers, nor gay nor anyone in general. It's a few
extremists, but they are on both sides. Some of the people who are
trying to stamp out the problems are just as much problems themselves.
Just look at some of the stories that have been repeated ad nauseum
about CF8. Many have been debunked but the same people keep bringing
them back up. My only guess as to why is so anyone who is reading this
for the first time, or who hasn't read the group in a while will read
the lies and assume them to be true, which means the people who are
bitching about the problems are spreading them! DUH!
The point of this rather long and seemingly pointless rant is that
people are too busy complaining about the problems to fix them. I have
been flamed and EMailbombed before for suggesting we need to work
together, first to educate against the stereotypes then talk to those
who perpetuate it, but I will suggest it again. Besides, if enough of
the 'mundanes' know what the fandom isn't, they will know what it is.
Of course, they will be one up on many of the people in it, if previous
wars are any indication. :)
guitar
<banana> (just had to be said, thank you, Dr. Cat :)
no one in particular
Cybskunk wrote:
>
> I don't know what the image is supposed to be, but I'll tell you what the
> image is:
My reply is by the numbers and to anybody
out there who is image conscious:
1.I've said it before and I'll say it again:
TREK CONS GET A WORSE RAP AND THERE'S
NOTHING ANYBODY CAN DO ABOUT IT!Who really cares
who is what gender or orientation?Stop worrying,
already.
2.Skunkfucker?Unless I've suddenly become a toon
and gotten lucky with Fifi LaFume,I don't think
so.Again:
STOP WORRYING!
And I thought the people I used to play Dungeons
and Dragons with were worried about image.Grab
a slice of banana bread and calm down.Relax.PLEASE.
Stormwind
Jazmyn Concolor <jaz...@netcom.com> wrote:
>Cybskunk <cybs...@aol.com> wrote:
>>I don't know what the image is supposed to be, but I'll tell you what the
>>image is:
>>
>>was "Oh, you mean 'FagCon'?"
>>Diego-area con. After posting my panel of furry prints, I went around the
>>corner as two females came up to my panel. Their overheard comment?
>>"Look! Another skunkfucker!"
>
>book artists who started a rumor that CF was a con for people who had sex
>with animals...
gee, and here i was under the distinct
impression that one of the people responsible
for starting the concept that furry is all
about sex had amongst their number one mark
merlino, con staff member of CF, who aired this
view just recently at another con.
and people wonder how rumors start. hmph.
--
stormwind
hell's amazon
lord of the frozen realm
Richard de Wylfin
In article <jazmynE6...@netcom.com>, jaz...@netcom.com (Jazmyn
Concolor) wrote:
> In article <19970304153...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
> Cybskunk <cybs...@aol.com> wrote:
> >I don't know what the image is supposed to be, but I'll tell you what the
> >image is:
> >
> >1) About five years ago, I mentioned CF to a gamer friend. His response
> >was "Oh, you mean 'FagCon'?"
> >2) About three years ago, I entered the art show at ConDor, a small San
> >Diego-area con. After posting my panel of furry prints, I went around the
> >corner as two females came up to my panel. Their overheard comment?
> >"Look! Another skunkfucker!"
>
>
> Most of this attitude can be traced to a handful of 'SF' artists
What an irony. . . SF can stand either for 'science fiction' or. . .
^ ^
o-o
+
richard de wylfin http://dwylfin.home.ml.org
Richard de Wylfin
Karl Jorgensen
In alt.fan.furry Stormwind <ama...@kisio.engr.sgi.com> wrote:
: gee, and here i was under the distinct
: impression that one of the people responsible
: for starting the concept that furry is all
: about sex had amongst their number one mark
: merlino, con staff member of CF, who aired this
: view just recently at another con.
: and people wonder how rumors start. hmph.
Complaining is easy.
Tell me what you're doing to dispel the rumor and then maybe I'll be
impressed.
___________________________________________________________________
Karl Xydexx Jorgensen, Project Director (xyd...@smart.net)
The Furry Fandom Welcome Wagon: An Introduction To Furry Fandom
Visit our homepage at http://www.smart.net/~xydexx/welcome.htm
Richard Chandler
I heard a worse example, when some girl at Philcon saw a Furry Party flyer
and her friend explained to her that it was Kiddy Porn (No, she wasn't
makng a pun). Seems the theory is that cute cartoon animals are
attractive to children, and when you add sexual elements to them, you have
a recipie for seducing the prepubescent set.
--
On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog... but they can tell right
off the bat if you're an idiot! -- Me
http://www.teleport.com/~mauser/ Gallery Web Page
"Yeah, I've got ADD, wanna make something of.... oooh, cool. Look!"
Harik A'ttar
In article <5fuabr$3kj$1...@kelly.teleport.com>,
mau...@kelly.teleport.com (Richard Chandler) writes:
>
>I heard a worse example, when some girl at Philcon saw a Furry Party flyer
>and her friend explained to her that it was Kiddy Porn (No, she wasn't
>makng a pun). Seems the theory is that cute cartoon animals are
>attractive to children, and when you add sexual elements to them, you have
>a recipie for seducing the prepubescent set.
<gag> I've heard that as well. I just point the moron saying it to Anime
and other non-kiddy cartoon works.
Yet another side-affect of those half hour toy commercials...
--Dan
Urthwyse
On 10 Mar 1997, Harik A'ttar wrote:
> In article <5fuabr$3kj$1...@kelly.teleport.com>,
> mau...@kelly.teleport.com (Richard Chandler) writes:
> >
> >I heard a worse example, when some girl at Philcon saw a Furry Party flyer
> >and her friend explained to her that it was Kiddy Porn (No, she wasn't
> >makng a pun). Seems the theory is that cute cartoon animals are
> >attractive to children, and when you add sexual elements to them, you have
> >a recipie for seducing the prepubescent set.
>
> <gag> I've heard that as well. I just point the moron saying it to Anime
> and other non-kiddy cartoon works.
Actually, they probably get a lot of the association from anime,
since much of it really makes Japanese male society look like a collection
of pedophiles. I've heard people who lived there say that's not too far
off the mark, but I make no claim to the accuracy either way. Still,
since anime has a fair number of anthropomorphic characters, they might
draw some associations from there.