Catch E.R. Tonight?

71 views
Skip to first unread message

Mephit, Floyd

unread,
May 3, 2001, 10:59:20 PM5/3/01
to
I assume I'm not the only one who watched e.r. tonight on NBC. (actually,
it's still on here). Two guys got into a fight at a con (wasn't it a con?),
both wearing fursuits (kangaroo and opossom). They referred to themselves
as 'furries'. I wonder how many "what the hell?"s were collectively blurted
out in that moment.. The nurse knew what that meant (sorta) and explained
that as someone who dresses up in animal costumes. Apparently 'scritching'
turned into molestation. And just now a tender explanation from the
kangaroo to Dr. Weaver; and wouldn't you know it, she just walked in on the
opossom guy masturbating with the 'pawpet' that a patient gave her. (of
course). I wonder why this subject was brought on the show (and especially
why it was given as much airtime as it was). I hardly ever post but I was
just too suprised not to mention it. I imagine that I don't even have to
give my opinion, it should be obvious (and shared, I hope).


-Brad

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Brad Patrick (Floyd Mephit), Baton Rouge, LA
FMS2admsw/F2as A- C- D H M P- R+ T++ W- Z Sm+ RLM/MH/S a21 cbdn++ d e+ f h-
iwf++ j+ p+ sm++
email: floyd...@hotmail.com, ICQ# 100483312, ph# 225-205-4295

Sarenthalanos

unread,
May 3, 2001, 11:20:58 PM5/3/01
to

Mephit, Floyd <floyd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9ct5u2$iph$1...@raccoon.fur.com...

> I assume I'm not the only one who watched e.r. tonight on NBC. (actually,
> it's still on here). Two guys got into a fight at a con (wasn't it a
con?),
> both wearing fursuits (kangaroo and opossom). They referred to themselves
> as 'furries'. I wonder how many "what the hell?"s were collectively
blurted
> out in that moment.. The nurse knew what that meant (sorta) and explained
> that as someone who dresses up in animal costumes. Apparently
'scritching'
> turned into molestation. And just now a tender explanation from the
> kangaroo to Dr. Weaver; and wouldn't you know it, she just walked in on
the
> opossom guy masturbating with the 'pawpet' that a patient gave her. (of
> course). I wonder why this subject was brought on the show (and especially
> why it was given as much airtime as it was). I hardly ever post but I was
> just too suprised not to mention it. I imagine that I don't even have to
> give my opinion, it should be obvious (and shared, I hope).

http://www.nbci.com/LMOID/bb/fd/0,946,-0-2176,00.html?shc.nbci.0.er.2176

5/3/01
FEAR OF COMMITMENT
Due to a clerical error, a startled Abby discovers that her suicidal mother
(Oscar-winning guest star Sally Field) is due in court for a competency
hearing and she rushes to testify that she should not be released -- but the
older woman musters an alarmingly masterful display of sanity before the
judge. Meanwhile, Dr. Weaver gives heartbreaking news to a sassy homeless
woman who once hosted a children's show that Weaver viewed as a child. Dr.
Benton steps in to help a junior high school teacher who was once his mentor
and now suffers a cardiac arrest. A busy Benton also injures his hand while
helping a fallen biker and learns that an injured Carla has checked into the
ER with his young son Reese.
TV-PG

=================

Interesting plot twist. One of the most notable all year, from the looks.
Perhaps I should start watching that show. Anyone else witness this
remarkable episode?

-Sar


Cerulean

unread,
May 3, 2001, 11:23:44 PM5/3/01
to
I think I'm finally going to throw in with the doomsayers on this one.
There's nothing we can do now but watch it all go to pieces.

--
___vvz /( Cerulean = Kevin Pease http://cerulean.st/
<__,` Z / ( DC2.~D GmAL~W-R+++Ac~J+S+Fr++IH$M-V+++Cbl,spu
`~~~) )Z) ( FDDmp4adwsA+++$C+D+HM+P-RT+++WZSm#
/ (7 ( S>J37) - ,,'a)ew!J6 ay+ 77!> ue) 6u!y+oN,,

Hollie

unread,
May 3, 2001, 11:33:18 PM5/3/01
to
On Thu, 3 May 2001 20:20:58 -0700, "Sarenthalanos"
<sarent...@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote:

>
>Interesting plot twist. One of the most notable all year, from the looks.
>Perhaps I should start watching that show. Anyone else witness this
>remarkable episode?
>
>-Sar

Sure did! I thought it was a very funny comic relief to an otherwise
intense episode.

BTW, are you the same Sar who posts on LKF and Lukaholics Anonymous?

aki.
(sneaux miaoux and Goran Visnjic/Luka Kovac fan)

AfterFox

unread,
May 3, 2001, 11:38:57 PM5/3/01
to
Man, I missed it but my friend told me all about it. That sounds like a pile
full of shit that a writer pulled off from all the bad press furries have been
getting.

I for one, definately am not "pleased" with the way furries were portrayed right
there.

AfterFox

Sarenthalanos

unread,
May 3, 2001, 11:37:00 PM5/3/01
to

Hollie <mal...@IDONTLIKESPAM.concentric.net> wrote in message
news:3af22279...@news.concentric.net...

>
> Sure did! I thought it was a very funny comic relief to an otherwise
> intense episode.
>

Hmmm, I'll have to give it a look. It's on in a half-hour here.

> BTW, are you the same Sar who posts on LKF and Lukaholics Anonymous?
>
> aki.
> (sneaux miaoux and Goran Visnjic/Luka Kovac fan)

Can't say that I am.

-Sar


Joe Strike

unread,
May 3, 2001, 11:55:37 PM5/3/01
to
I think I posted back when the VF story first ran that lotsa media/entertainment
types read the magazine, & we could shortly expect some sitcom family's wacky
neighbor or relative to show up walking around in a fursuit for a cheap laff or
two. Guess I was wrong - it happened on 'E.R.' & not on a sitcom. (Thanks a lot,
VF.) Sorry I missed the episode, though (one of countless dozens of series I
never watch - gives me more time to read aff) - it would've been interesting to
see just how wrong they got it.

Here's the brilliant suggestion - how about some LA-based fur volunteering to
become a 'technical advisor' to film or TV shows that want to feature furry
themes/story lines? You know, the same way they get a professional person
(doctor, lawyer, cop) or special interest group (gays, ethnic minorities, Native
Americans etc) to advise them when they feature those kind of characters in
their productions. At least this way we could avoid people just cribbing
inaccurately from an inaccurate magazine article they happened to read.
-J

Rebecca Gallant

unread,
May 4, 2001, 12:18:23 AM5/4/01
to
Personally, I thought it portrayed both sides of the issue rather well.

There are those that appreciate the genre as a part of sci-fi/fantasy and those
who make it a lifestyle.

I thought they did their research rather well and was even surprised that they
even made an effort to distinguish that there is a difference.

Hell, I was just surprised to see it portrayed in a main stream show at all!

I say kudos to the writers.

Well, that's my .02 cents anyway.

-Becky

"Mephit, Floyd" wrote:

--
******Welcome to my worlds!*******

Gallantry Web Design
http://www.gallantrywebdesign.com

Becky's Wildlife and Fantasy Art
http://www.wildlife-fantasy.com

Quantum Muse
http://www.quantummuse.com

Wild Speculation
http://www.wildspeculation.com


AfterFox

unread,
May 4, 2001, 2:07:18 AM5/4/01
to
Okay I must eat some crow for a sec.

I got the chance to see it and it wasn tall that bad.

People I've been talking to have been saying it's absolutely horrible, a tragedy for
furry. I dunno. the roo guy was far more present than the possum and he didnt
really say any bad things or was portrayed in a negative manner.

*shrug* It'll be forgotten later on, I'm sure.

Heh, only bad thing about this is I hafta explain myself to my coworkers *again* ;)

After (nono, it's a hobby, you see...) Fox

Richard Lowman

unread,
May 4, 2001, 2:07:28 AM5/4/01
to

Mephit, Floyd wrote in message <9ct5u2$iph$1...@raccoon.fur.com>...
>I assume I'm not the only one who watched E.R. tonight on NBC. (actually, it's

still on here).
>Two guys got into a fight at a con (wasn't it a con?), both wearing fursuits
(kangaroo and opossom).
>They referred to themselves as 'furries'. I wonder how many "what the hell?"s
were collectively blurted out in that moment....

I was about half-asleep at the time, and then came awake fully at the word....

>The nurse knew what that meant (sorta) and explained that as someone who
dresses up in animal costumes. Apparently 'scritching' turned into >molestation.
And just now a tender explanation from the kangaroo to Dr. Weaver; and wouldn't
you know it, she just walked in on the opossom >guy masturbating with the

'pawpet' that a patient gave her. (Of course).

A former kids TV host homeless and dieing of cancer....

Dr. Weaver-"Mr. Wiskers!...."

>I wonder why this subject was brought on the show (and especially why it was
given as much airtime as it was). I hardly ever post but I was just >too
suprised not to mention it. I imagine that I don't even have to give my opinion,
it should be obvious (and shared, I hope).

Yeah, I think that I have a good idea where the idea came from--a magazine
perhaps and because of the fact that the writers had to come up with something
current before going out on strike.

.....and so it goes.

DishRoom1

unread,
May 4, 2001, 2:34:10 AM5/4/01
to
Mephit, Floyd wrote--

>I assume I'm not the only one who watched e.r. tonight on NBC. (actually,
>it's still on here). Two guys got into a fight at a con (wasn't it a con?),
>both wearing fursuits (kangaroo and opossom). They referred to themselves
>as 'furries'. I wonder how many "what the hell?"s were collectively blurted
>out in that moment.. The nurse knew what that meant (sorta) and explained
>that as someone who dresses up in animal costumes. Apparently 'scritching'
>turned into molestation. And just now a tender explanation from the
>kangaroo to Dr. Weaver; and wouldn't you know it, she just walked in on the
>opossom guy masturbating with the 'pawpet' that a patient gave her. (of
>course). I wonder why this subject was brought on the show (and especially
>why it was given as much airtime as it was). I hardly ever post but I was
>just too suprised not to mention it. I imagine that I don't even have to
>give my opinion, it should be obvious (and shared, I hope).
>

I'm not a big fan of "ER", so I didn't watch the episode in question. (I was
watching "Primetime Live" on ABC, opposite of NBC, instead.) So I didn't see
for myself how "ER" depicted furries. Therefore I have no opinion. If the show
portrayed us in a negative light, we can write to NBC and the "ER" producers
mail explaining more about our fandom.

John Shughart

DishRoom1

unread,
May 4, 2001, 2:39:40 AM5/4/01
to
Rebecca Gallant wrote--

>Personally, I thought it portrayed both sides of the issue rather well.
>
>There are those that appreciate the genre as a part of sci-fi/fantasy and
>those
>who make it a lifestyle.

>I thought they did their research rather well and was even surprised that
>they
>even made an effort to distinguish that there is a difference.
>
>Hell, I was just surprised to see it portrayed in a main stream show at all!
>

Hey, Rebecca. :x) I hope that the "ER" episode went as you said, because I
didn't ever watch it that night.

Would you please explain a bit about what you watched for me?

John Shughart

Marc Fuller

unread,
May 4, 2001, 2:52:42 AM5/4/01
to
Joe Strike wrote:
>

[snip]

>
> Here's the brilliant suggestion - how about some LA-based fur volunteering to
> become a 'technical advisor' to film or TV shows that want to feature furry
> themes/story lines? You know, the same way they get a professional person
> (doctor, lawyer, cop) or special interest group (gays, ethnic minorities, Native
> Americans etc) to advise them when they feature those kind of characters in
> their productions. At least this way we could avoid people just cribbing
> inaccurately from an inaccurate magazine article they happened to read.
> -J
>

I don't think it would work. In the case of professionals, the writers
care about technical accuracy, and the genuine ethnic groups are large
enough and organized enough to be a legal pain in a libel/slander suit.
Furries fall in the same category as sci-fi fans, at best, as far as the
writers are concerned. I.e, a generally defined but non-cohesive bunch of
goof-balls and freaks that they can write in as anything from comic relief
to "example of citizen gone tragically wrong."

Marc Fuller

Akai

unread,
May 4, 2001, 2:59:45 AM5/4/01
to
"Mephit, Floyd" wrote:
>
> I assume I'm not the only one who watched e.r. tonight on NBC.

<kersnippen>

I'm on the west coast here so I just finished watching the episode about
a half hour ago. Never watched the show before but found it generally
entertaining.

The treatment of the fursuiters came across to me as being on the same
level of any other fetish, a better known one being costume-wearing
sci-fi fans. No better, no worse. Something odd to lighten up the tone
of the episode in contrast to some of the more serious bits. Whoever
wrote the episode knows the terminology well enough although it appears
no research was done beyond reading the Vanity Fair article (or
something similar). One who has never heard of "furries" before may be
led to belive that the hobby is all about fursuiting but at least there
was nothing presented to cause a panic either.

Personally I'd be more concerned if one of the news magazine shows like
"60 Minutes" or "Dateline" decided to do an expose.

--

-Akai


"Joseph Javorsky, respected scientist. Now a fiend prowling the
wastelands,
a prehistoric beast in a nuclear age. Kill, kill just to be killing."

-The Beast of Yucca Flats

MiMiC_x9

unread,
May 4, 2001, 2:55:33 AM5/4/01
to
It's not so bad... BDSM is showcased wayyyyyyy more than anything like
this (Ikea commercial, TV, "Meet the parents, etc). Do people riot due
to these "horrible displays of independence"? No, of course not. Why? As
people in today's society are far too stressed about the big problems in
their everyday lives than to worry about what goes on behind closed
doors. Tolerance is a slow growing thing indeed... but everything is
accepted eventually. All it takes is time.

MiMiC

--
.:Welcome to a Wonderland of Caffinated Goodness:.

+===ICQ : 65079305===+

.:. "Codename: Birthdark" .:.
A furry story of intrigue, humor, and femme bashing (yay!)
http://www.FurNation.com/MiMiCs_Universe/ (DOWN ATM!)
http://members.home.net/mimic-x9/ (MIRRORED HERE!)

FFS3amwAC-D+H++M+PR++T+++W>++++$ZSm++RLU/BM/CT/LWa-cnuw++++
d++e->++++f-h*>--iw++>wf+++j---p*>+sm#

Marc Fuller

unread,
May 4, 2001, 3:00:12 AM5/4/01
to
DishRoom1 wrote:
>
> Mephit, Floyd wrote--

>
>
> I'm not a big fan of "ER", so I didn't watch the episode in question. (I was
> watching "Primetime Live" on ABC, opposite of NBC, instead.) So I didn't see
> for myself how "ER" depicted furries. Therefore I have no opinion. If the show
> portrayed us in a negative light, we can write to NBC and the "ER" producers
> mail explaining more about our fandom.
>
> John Shughart

And they'll do the same thing as VF - ignore the umpteen-hundred (or dozen,
or whatever) literate, calm, rational letters, in favor of getting
something juicy out of whatever psycho-nutjob hatemail they get. (And they
will get it from someone.) "Furry fandom" isn't organized enough for them
to care about legally, and isn't large enough for them to care about
alienating politically. The fandom isn't important enough for them to care
about doing accurate research. Since the spooge-meisters and
plushie-humpers are the ones that will get the biggest reaction from the
viewing public, that is how furry will be portrayed. They don't mind
insulting Trekkies, and they're a lot better organized at the moment.

Marc Fuller

Furplay

unread,
May 4, 2001, 4:34:38 AM5/4/01
to
This seems odd. Perhaps even false.

You see, I own a "ReplayTV" (please forgive the following, since I know
it sounds like a brag when it's not meant to be), of which one of it's
nifty functions is to create a "theme channel" (you type in a keyword,
set the "channel", and the unit will scour it's database (based from the
gist.com TV system) for any and all programs containing that keyword in
the actor/director/show name/show description categories [as well as
search each new listing update once it downloads it from the network
each night] and would set itself to record that show).

Ever since I heard about Mister Duanne's sellout of furry fandom to Mtv,
I've had a "furry" and a "furries" channel standing by to snatch it as
soon as it airs. And so far, it's been quiet on the furry front.

If the media's out to ruin furrydom, they have'nt been advertising it (yet).

[Now when The 700 Club starts doing something on "furries". THAT should
be a weird bit of vid]

--
"Who's driving? Oh my God! Bear is driving!! How can that be?????"

Furplay

unread,
May 4, 2001, 4:43:51 AM5/4/01
to
Rebecca Gallant* wrote:
>
> Personally, I thought it portrayed both sides of the issue rather well.
>
> There are those that appreciate the genre as a part of sci-fi/fantasy and those
> who make it a lifestyle.
>
> I thought they did their research rather well and was even surprised that they
> even made an effort to distinguish that there is a difference.
>
> Hell, I was just surprised to see it portrayed in a main stream show at all!
>
> I say kudos to the writers.
>
> Well, that's my .02 cents anyway.
>
> -Becky


I'm just talking total bollocks based on what Mephit wrote, but the hint
that 'scritching" was a lead-up to molestation, and someone having a
wank with a hand puppet (oh, imagine the bloody horror that would ensue
if Darell cought this guy doing THAT at CF).

Um, where's the distinguishing that there is a difference?

--
"Who's driving? Oh my God! Bear is driving!! How can that be?????"

* must.......resist.......making........"Goofus and Gallant" references!!

Tara

unread,
May 4, 2001, 4:50:13 AM5/4/01
to
AfterFox wrote:

> Man, I missed it but my friend told me all about it. That sounds like a pile
> full of shit that a writer pulled off from all the bad press furries have been
> getting.
>
> I for one, definately am not "pleased" with the way furries were portrayed right
> there.
>
> A

> fterFox

Hi Afterfoxy! :D

Goodness, isn't that feeding the sterotypes. :/ I've never encountered a
truly insightful and well researched plot.

It's no different than -10 years ago when blacks were portrayed as bank robbers and
hispanics portrayed as drug dealers. +10 years from now furries won't be portrated
as
satan worshippers and child molesters.

But I'm sure some other group will still be sterotyped +20 years from now, it's too

bad writters can't just learn to stop sterotyping. :/

I have a scrip for ER: two writers get send to the ER on fire, everyone watches as
they
burn to death in slo-motion for an hour. ^.^

I'd watch that!

--
Sincerely, ,"-_ \|/
-Capt. Taura M. , O=__ --X--
..__ ,_JNMNNEO=_ /|\
OMNOUMmnne. {OMMNNNEEEEOO=_
UOOOBIOOOEOMMn. 'LONMMMMNNEEEOOO=.__..,,..
UUOOEUUOOOOOOOObe '"=OMMMMWNEEEOOOOO,"=OEEEOO=,._
OOUUUIEEIOONNOIUbe. "7OMMMMNNNNNWWEEEEOOOOOO" "'.
EEBNNMMMNWNWWEEIMMNe. __ 7EMMMNNNNNWWWEEEEEEEOO. " .
NNMMMMWWWMMMWEINMMMNn "=BBEEEEMMMMMMMMNNNWWWEEOOOOO=._ .
http://furry.ao.net/~learfox/

Tara

unread,
May 4, 2001, 4:55:46 AM5/4/01
to
Rebecca Gallant wrote:

> Personally, I thought it portrayed both sides of the issue rather well.
>
> There are those that appreciate the genre as a part of sci-fi/fantasy and those
> who make it a lifestyle.
>
> I thought they did their research rather well and was even surprised that they
> even made an effort to distinguish that there is a difference.
>
> Hell, I was just surprised to see it portrayed in a main stream show at all!
>
> I say kudos to the writers.

I don't inject opinion unless I feel my prescription can be an improvement,
in this case it could have. How to get furs into the ER from a con, why not
a stage act on bad or a fur suit catch on fire? Something more creative would
be fine as long as it wasn't so negative, the arguement wasn't all that too much
but I feel the segment was too much portraying `nasty tree-huggers' with very
extreme character.

First rule is to not portray something obscure from mainstream from distant
corners.

Furplay

unread,
May 4, 2001, 4:51:44 AM5/4/01
to
DishRoom1 wrote:
>
>
> I'm not a big fan of "ER", so I didn't watch the episode in question. (I was
> watching "Primetime Live" on ABC, opposite of NBC, instead.) So I didn't see
> for myself how "ER" depicted furries. Therefore I have no opinion. If the show
> portrayed us in a negative light, we can write to NBC and the "ER" producers
> mail explaining more about our fandom.
>


*sigh* You guys never learn, do you?

Nebulous

unread,
May 4, 2001, 7:38:58 AM5/4/01
to
Are you telling me that you think that people were watching anyting but
'Survivor' last night?


--
Nebulous Rikulau
My furcode
FFCs4a A- C* D H+ M- P++ R+ T+++ W Z+ Sm RLRB/AT a+ cn++ d-- e+ f h+ i+ j+
p+ sm-

Brian O'connell

unread,
May 4, 2001, 7:57:57 AM5/4/01
to
Yup, the normal, beer swilling, sports watching, wife beating
barcolounger lounging lowest common denominator is laughing at us now... I
make the proposal that we dissolve furry fandom, burn all furry
material, and commit ritualistic suicide immediately...


Either that, or evolve a sense of humor... Your choice...

--
Reverse the e-mail's spelling to reply...

Nashoba

unread,
May 4, 2001, 8:36:37 AM5/4/01
to
I couldn't help but do the unfortunate act of watching the nature-aweful
show, and what made it worse was the 'furry' content... or lack thereof.
Well, I guess all who decided to open their muzzles to Vanity Fair got
what they deserved here. Seems like the producers of E.R. had fun
putting this one together after they saw all the plush-screwing,
"weird-sex" supposed 'furs' in Vanity Fair.

I try to stay out of politics because I am very busy and have site
members to take care of, but I do have my opinions at times too. And my
opinion on this is: everyone who took part in the Vanity Fair article,
thanks for nothing...

--
Nashoba
FurNetwork.net, Owner

Joe Strike

unread,
May 4, 2001, 8:54:30 AM5/4/01
to
You're absolutely right & I have to confess my suggestion was somewhat
tongue-in-cheek. An organized protest by any established special interest group would
get a lot of press attention & make a studio or network very nervous, whereas if
anyone even noticed a protest by furries, it would be as material for another snide
throwaway gag

Joe Strike

unread,
May 4, 2001, 9:00:38 AM5/4/01
to
Don't you remember Monty Python's 'mouse party' sketch? I wonder the Pythons
had any idea they were onto something when they wrote that 25+ years ago

Furplay

unread,
May 4, 2001, 9:23:37 AM5/4/01
to
Joe Strike wrote:
>
> Don't you remember Monty Python's 'mouse party' sketch? I wonder the Pythons
> had any idea they were onto something when they wrote that 25+ years ago


Eek!

Kimba W. Lion

unread,
May 4, 2001, 10:24:14 AM5/4/01
to
What a great idea! As always, call for other people to do what you want
while you do the important business of blaming other people for your
complaint.

Kimba

magnwa

unread,
May 4, 2001, 12:08:02 PM5/4/01
to
Nashoba wrote:

<negativity snipped>

> Nashoba
> FurNetwork.net, Owner
>
Some people take themselves far too seriously. IF you want to make a
difference in this world, make a difference. Being tagged a furry won't
stop that.

Sheesh. Grow up, stop fighting over stupid stuff, and make a difference or
sit down and shut up. :)

Magnwa


Joe Ekaitis

unread,
May 4, 2001, 12:40:18 PM5/4/01
to
"Fur-turama". . .now THAT was pure genius. :)

--
Joe Ekaitis
JoeEk...@anthro-animal-art.com
http://anthro-animal-art.com
"Mephit, Floyd" <floyd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9ct5u2$iph$1...@raccoon.fur.com...

Joe Ekaitis

unread,
May 4, 2001, 12:43:16 PM5/4/01
to
Uh, how much cyanide for each quart of Kool-Aid?

"Brian O'connell" <1lla...@tsewsu.ten> wrote in message
news:9cu5j9$lok$1...@raccoon.fur.com...

Dean L. Norton

unread,
May 4, 2001, 1:24:33 PM5/4/01
to

Joe Ekaitis wrote:

> "Fur-turama". . .now THAT was pure genius. :)

My wife was watching ER..I was outside tending to my bonsai grove. She come out
to tell me what was going on...all I could think of was "Man...folks will have a
field day on AFF.." I did come in on the guy in the suit "supposedly" yankin'
off with a puppet...I found it more amusing than anything. But you know...they
probably pull those dumb costumes out of some Hollywood backstage vault because no
real died-in-wool fursuiter would wear those ugly things!!

==========================================
BLATANT PLUGS v1.1 & v2k.5can be found at:
http://www.deanleenorton.com
Also, visit my Delphi Discussion Forum at:
http://www.delphi.com/deanleenorton/
==========================================


Jak Crow

unread,
May 4, 2001, 2:34:16 PM5/4/01
to
Tara <foxSWAPEM...@furry.ao.net> wrote:

> Hi Afterfoxy! :D

> Goodness, isn't that feeding the sterotypes. :/ I've never encountered a
> truly insightful and well researched plot.

> It's no different than -10 years ago when blacks were portrayed as bank
> robbers and hispanics portrayed as drug dealers. +10 years from now
> furries won't be portrated as satan worshippers and child molesters.

Please. Furry is nothing but an interest group. It's a HELL of a
LOT different than the opression ethnic groups have suffered for YEARS. To
even compare the jokes made at furs' expense to racism is ridiculous.

> But I'm sure some other group will still be sterotyped +20 years from
> now, it's too

Yes, but I'm sure what happens to that group won't be an horrible
and shocking as what's been done to a CERTAIN GROUP of furs

> bad writters can't just learn to stop sterotyping. :/

Certain furs need to realize how funny they are to the rest of the
world.

> I have a scrip for ER: two writers get send to the ER on fire, everyone
> watches as they burn to death in slo-motion for an hour. ^.^

Wow, how enlightened of you.

Bender

Jak Crow

unread,
May 4, 2001, 2:36:04 PM5/4/01
to
Marc Fuller <kat...@mindspring.com> wrote:
<snip>

> Furries fall in the same category as sci-fi fans, at best, as far as the
> writers are concerned. I.e, a generally defined but non-cohesive bunch of
> goof-balls and freaks that they can write in as anything from comic relief
> to "example of citizen gone tragically wrong."

Which is pretty much correct! :)

Jak Crow

unread,
May 4, 2001, 2:38:10 PM5/4/01
to
Caballito <cam...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Similar to what the BDSM crowd has gone through.. they've been the
> "feature" on several episodes of Law and Order: Special Victim Unit.
> Seems to be a popular place to screw with out-of-the-ordinary sexual
> interests, makes for interesting stories (read: anything to do with
> sex that might titillate a jaded audience.) I wouldn't be surprised
> to see furry get "honorable" mention there, if the writer or writers
> have seen the VF article. Feh. As one person put it on
> soc.subculture.bondage-bdsm (paraphrasing): "it's like where the cops
> draw their guns every episode, everything is exaggerated for the drama
> in the story." The problem is, way too many people believe the sh*t
> they see on the tube is an accurate reflection of reality.


Oh good. Compare furry to BDSM. That'll REALLY HELP.

Sarenthalanos

unread,
May 4, 2001, 2:41:03 PM5/4/01
to

Caballito <cam...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3af3ece2...@news.alltel.net...
(snip)

> The problem is, way too many people believe the sh*t
> they see on the tube is an accurate reflection of reality.


Actually, for some people I'd hazard a guess that whatever dreck they see on
the tube IS their reality.

-Sar


Jak Crow

unread,
May 4, 2001, 2:43:06 PM5/4/01
to
Marc Fuller <kat...@mindspring.com> wrote:

> And they'll do the same thing as VF - ignore the umpteen-hundred (or dozen,
> or whatever) literate, calm, rational letters, in favor of getting
> something juicy out of whatever psycho-nutjob hatemail they get. (And they
> will get it from someone.) "Furry fandom" isn't organized enough for them
> to care about legally, and isn't large enough for them to care about
> alienating politically. The fandom isn't important enough for them to care
> about doing accurate research. Since the spooge-meisters and
> plushie-humpers are the ones that will get the biggest reaction from the
> viewing public, that is how furry will be portrayed. They don't mind
> insulting Trekkies, and they're a lot better organized at the moment.


Just throw in some refereneces to BDSM and racian and I'm sure
you'll get their attention in a letter writing campaign.

Jak Crow

unread,
May 4, 2001, 3:35:43 PM5/4/01
to
Marc Fuller <kat...@mindspring.com> wrote:

> And they'll do the same thing as VF - ignore the umpteen-hundred (or dozen,
> or whatever) literate, calm, rational letters, in favor of getting
> something juicy out of whatever psycho-nutjob hatemail they get. (And they
> will get it from someone.) "Furry fandom" isn't organized enough for them
> to care about legally, and isn't large enough for them to care about
> alienating politically. The fandom isn't important enough for them to care
> about doing accurate research. Since the spooge-meisters and
> plushie-humpers are the ones that will get the biggest reaction from the
> viewing public, that is how furry will be portrayed. They don't mind
> insulting Trekkies, and they're a lot better organized at the moment.


Just throw in some refereneces to BDSM and racism and I'm sure

Akai

unread,
May 4, 2001, 4:50:09 PM5/4/01
to
Joe Strike wrote:
>
> Don't you remember Monty Python's 'mouse party' sketch? I wonder the Pythons
> had any idea they were onto something when they wrote that 25+ years ago
>
>

"....and then they started passing around the cheese..."

Been quite a while since I've seen that one. It seems that the fetish
aspect of costume wearing has been around for a while. There is that
scene in the "Shining" with the dog suit as well.

Akai

unread,
May 4, 2001, 4:56:34 PM5/4/01
to
Caballito wrote:
>
> On Fri, 04 May 2001 03:34:38 -0500, Furplay <mhi...@radiks.net>
> wrote:
> <snip>

> >If the media's out to ruin furrydom, they have'nt been advertising it (yet).
> >
> >[Now when The 700 Club starts doing something on "furries". THAT should
> >be a weird bit of vid]
> I'm trying to picture Pat Robertson wearing a fursuit... but I can't
> decide which animal best represents "buffoon"... Probably just himself
> with a beaver cap or something. ;)
>
> Caballito

"And now we have a story about a young man who says a fox costume led
him down the path of bizarre sexual practices and Satanic rituals, but
when he felt there was no way out he discovered the healing power of
God...right after these messages."

G. Raymond Eddy

unread,
May 4, 2001, 6:02:08 PM5/4/01
to
Marc Fuller wrote:

> I don't think it would work. In the case of professionals, the writers
> care about technical accuracy, and the genuine ethnic groups are large
> enough and organized enough to be a legal pain in a libel/slander suit.

> Furries fall in the same category as sci-fi fans, at best, as far as the
> writers are concerned. I.e, a generally defined but non-cohesive bunch of
> goof-balls and freaks that they can write in as anything from comic relief
> to "example of citizen gone tragically wrong."

Which means we could eventually see an episode of /Law and Order/
where a fursuiter is found dead in a back alley with his heart blown
through with a shotgun, and they prosecute a fanatic who's read the
Burned Fur Manifesto.

--
___________ G. Raymond Eddy g e d @ r g t n t
(_ _ _ 748 N. Lisbon St. r d y b i h . e (zigzagged)
(__ __)__)(_/ Carrollton, OH 44615-1126 ICQ: #10322859
___________/ http://www.bright.net/~greddy

PeterCat

unread,
May 4, 2001, 7:23:56 PM5/4/01
to
"Nebulous" <lum...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

> Are you telling me that you think that people were watching anyting
> but 'Survivor' last night?

According to the Associated Press, "Survivor" was seen by 36.4 million
people, twice as many as watched "Friends" -- and the follow-on
interview show with Bryant Gumbel was the first program on any network
to beat a first-run episode of "ER" since the drama's first season
(1994). Ratings for "ER" weren't given in the article, but a CBS press
release says the "Survivor" special had 28.01 million viewers. Last
week's episode of "ER" had 17.8 million viewers.

--
The Furry InfoPage! http://www.tigerden.com/infopage/furry/
pete...@Furry.fan.org (PeterCat) Rhal on FurryMUCK (come cuddle!)
--
"I can't believe what he's doing with those shiitake mushrooms!"
Watch "Iron Chef," Fridays and Saturdays at 10pm (ET) on Food Network!

Mephit, Floyd

unread,
May 4, 2001, 8:16:29 PM5/4/01
to

"G. Raymond Eddy" <gre...@bright.net> wrote in message
news:3AF326E0...@bright.net...

>
> Which means we could eventually see an episode of /Law and Order/
> where a fursuiter is found dead in a back alley with his heart blown
> through with a shotgun, and they prosecute a fanatic who's read the
> Burned Fur Manifesto.
>
> --
> ___________ G. Raymond Eddy g e d @ r g t n t

I was just thinking about that when e.r. was on, that sometime in the future
an episode of Law and Order: SVU would feature 'furry' or fursuiting as the
fetish du jour. I would not be suprised in the least..watch for it.

Mephit, Floyd

unread,
May 4, 2001, 8:45:43 PM5/4/01
to

"Brian O'connell" <1lla...@tsewsu.ten> wrote in message
news:9cu5j9$lok$1...@raccoon.fur.com...
> Yup, the normal, beer swilling, sports watching, wife beating
> barcolounger lounging lowest common denominator is laughing at us now... I
> make the proposal that we dissolve furry fandom, burn all furry
> material, and commit ritualistic suicide immediately...
>
>
> Either that, or evolve a sense of humor... Your choice...
>
> --

Suicide? Please no. I'm not really upset about the whole thing, just
disappointed. And yeah, I admit I couldn't help but laugh (it was funny, I
thought) but overall I wish it hadn't been on the show in the first place;
I'm sorta the 'leave well enough alone' type.

I also think it's funny that the average e.r. viewer is a wife-beater..oh
wait, maybe that's not so funny afterall.

Charles Melville

unread,
May 4, 2001, 9:37:18 PM5/4/01
to

Nebulous wrote:

> Are you telling me that you think that people were watching anyting but
> 'Survivor' last night?
>

I know -I- was. I was watching DIE HARD WITH A VENGEANCE.

--
-Chuck Melville-
http://www.zipcon.net/~cpam/index.htm


Charles Melville

unread,
May 4, 2001, 9:40:21 PM5/4/01
to

Caballito wrote:

> On Fri, 04 May 2001 03:34:38 -0500, Furplay <mhi...@radiks.net>
> wrote:
> <snip>
> >If the media's out to ruin furrydom, they have'nt been advertising it (yet).
> >
> >[Now when The 700 Club starts doing something on "furries". THAT should
> >be a weird bit of vid]
> I'm trying to picture Pat Robertson wearing a fursuit... but I can't
> decide which animal best represents "buffoon"... Probably just himself
> with a beaver cap or something. ;)

I don't know about Pat Robertson... but Pat Boone might do it.

Charles Melville

unread,
May 4, 2001, 10:04:30 PM5/4/01
to

Akai wrote:

> Joe Strike wrote:
> >
> > Don't you remember Monty Python's 'mouse party' sketch? I wonder the Pythons
> > had any idea they were onto something when they wrote that 25+ years ago
> >
> >
>
> "....and then they started passing around the cheese..."
>
> Been quite a while since I've seen that one. It seems that the fetish
> aspect of costume wearing has been around for a while. There is that
> scene in the "Shining" with the dog suit as well.
>

Not to mention HOTEL NEW HAMPSHIRE, with Natasjia Kinski in the bear suit.

Atara

unread,
May 4, 2001, 11:52:58 PM5/4/01
to
cp...@zipcon.com (Charles Melville) wrote in <3AF3594E...@zipcon.com>:

>
>
>Nebulous wrote:
>
>> Are you telling me that you think that people were watching anyting but
>> 'Survivor' last night?
>>
>
> I know -I- was. I was watching DIE HARD WITH A VENGEANCE.

I didn't watch anything last night - I went for a walk with my husband. The
weather here is beautiful!

... for now. Until the mosquitos and the canker worms and the ticks come out.
*sigh*

--
Atara
"Draco Dormiens Nunquam Titillandus."
http://www.FurNation.com/Atara/

DishRoom1

unread,
May 5, 2001, 12:19:29 AM5/5/01
to
Charles Melville wrote--

>Nebulous wrote:
>
>> Are you telling me that you think that people were watching anyting but
>> 'Survivor' last night?
>>
>
> I know -I- was. I was watching DIE HARD WITH A VENGEANCE.

I watched "Who's Line Is It Anyway" and "Primetime Live".

John Shughart

Dr. Cat

unread,
May 5, 2001, 1:14:00 AM5/5/01
to
Cerulean <ma...@cerulean.st> wrote:
: I think I'm finally going to throw in with the doomsayers on this one.
: There's nothing we can do now but watch it all go to pieces.

The way Star Trek fandom went to pieces after the Shatner "Get a Life" skit
on Saturday Night Live portrayed them as 30 year old losers living in mom's
basement who had never even kissed a girl? Just like the Star Trek stuff
we'll have no more cons, zines, newsgroups, fan websites, mucks, nothing?
Dang, it was fun while it lasted. Seeya.

*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*
Dr. Cat / Dragon's Eye Productions || Free alpha test:
*-------------------------------------------** http://www.furcadia.com
Furcadia - a graphic mud for PCs! || Let your imagination soar!
*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*

(Disclaimer: Hey wait a minute. Star Trek fandom is still here! Cerulean
tricked me! Dang it! Give me that Furry Fandom membership card back!)

(Disclaimer disclaimer: They do have that whole "trekkies vs. trekkers"
schism though. Maybe this TV exposure will doom us to have conflicts
between people called stuff like "lifestylers" and "burned furs", and...
Oh wait a minute. So what's the problem we're going to have because of
this tv show again? Oh, some people will think we're weirdo perverts?
Well that'll be new, I don't think any of us have any preparation in how to
deal with that totally novel and unexpected reaction.)

Dr. Cat

unread,
May 5, 2001, 1:46:09 AM5/5/01
to
Joe Strike <joes...@nyc.rr.com> wrote:
: Don't you remember Monty Python's 'mouse party' sketch? I wonder the Pythons

: had any idea they were onto something when they wrote that 25+ years ago

Damn them, they ruined the fandom years before the fandom even EXISTED!
No wonder we've always had such problems, it's their fault!

*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*
Dr. Cat / Dragon's Eye Productions || Free alpha test:
*-------------------------------------------** http://www.furcadia.com
Furcadia - a graphic mud for PCs! || Let your imagination soar!
*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*

(Disclaimer: My friend from Spain (actually he lives in the Netherlands now
even though he's a Spaniard originally) brought a copy of the Mouse Problem
sketch on videotape to Confurence with him. But of course it was in PAL
format, not NTSC. There's a moral to that story somewhere, or an immoral,
but I don't know what it is. Fill in your own.)

ilr

unread,
May 5, 2001, 2:35:46 AM5/5/01
to
> I have a scrip for ER: two writers get send to the ER on fire, everyone watches as
> they
> burn to death in slo-motion for an hour. ^.^
>
> I'd watch that!
>

Ehh, pass, that's a little too flambayant for my taste
-Ilr


Timmy Ramone

unread,
May 5, 2001, 2:54:25 AM5/5/01
to
Damn -- I didn't have a chance to tape it! :)

-----

/* efdtt.c Author: Charles M. Hannum
<ro...@ihack.net> */
/* Thanks to Phil Carmody <fat...@asdf.org> for additional
tweaks. */
/* Length: 434 bytes (excluding unnecessary
newlines) */
/* Usage is: cat title-key scrambled.vob | efdtt
>clear.vob */

#define m(i)(x[i]^s[i+84])<<
unsigned char
x[5],y,s[2048];main(n){for(read(0,x,5);read(0,s,n=2048);write(1,s
,n))if(s[y=s[13]%8+20]/16%4==1){int
i=m(1)17^256+m(0)8,k=m(2)0,j=m(4)17^m(3)9^k
*2-k%8^8,a=0,c=26;for(s[y]-=16;--c;j*=2)a=a*2^i&1,i=i/2^j&1<<24;for(j=127;++j<n
;c=c>y)c+=y=i^i/8^i>>4^i>>12,i=i>>8^y<<17,a^=a>>14,y=a^a*8^a<<6,a=a>>8^y<<9,k=s
[j],k="7Wo~'G_\216"[k&7]+2^"cr3sfw6v;*k+>/n."[k>>4]*2^k*257/8,s[j]=k^(k&k*2&34)
*6^c+~y;}}

Brian O'connell

unread,
May 5, 2001, 3:58:02 AM5/5/01
to
Well, you know what they say... Immolation is the sincerest form of
flattery...;)

--
Reverse the e-mail's spelling to reply...


"ilr" <i...@rof.net> wrote in message news:9d062k$rrl$1...@raccoon.fur.com...

Tara

unread,
May 5, 2001, 4:31:34 AM5/5/01
to
Jak Crow wrote:

> > It's no different than -10 years ago when blacks were portrayed as bank
> > robbers and hispanics portrayed as drug dealers. +10 years from now
> > furries won't be portrated as satan worshippers and child molesters.
>
> Please. Furry is nothing but an interest group. It's a HELL of a
> LOT different than the opression ethnic groups have suffered for YEARS. To
> even compare the jokes made at furs' expense to racism is ridiculous.

Yes, furry fans are far fewer than racial divisions of humans. But why is that
compare
`ridiculous'? Who's yard stick are you using to measure that to determine that
it is `ridiculous'?

You may appreciate writers portraying something that you participate in an
extreme
fashion of behavour (furries having an argument at a con and doing wierd
things).
But is this the best medical related portrait of furry fans that writers for a
TV show
on network TV can come up with?

> > But I'm sure some other group will still be sterotyped +20 years from
> > now, it's too
>
> Yes, but I'm sure what happens to that group won't be an horrible
> and shocking as what's been done to a CERTAIN GROUP of furs

Yer white, arn't you?


> > bad writters can't just learn to stop sterotyping. :/
>
> Certain furs need to realize how funny they are to the rest of the
> world.

*giggles at you* :)

> > I have a scrip for ER: two writers get send to the ER on fire, everyone
> > watches as they burn to death in slo-motion for an hour. ^.^
>
> Wow, how enlightened of you.

I love it when you take my sarcasim seriously.

--
Sincerely, ,"-_ \|/
-Capt. Taura M. , O=__ --X--
..__ ,_JNMNNEO=_ /|\
OMNOUMmnne. {OMMNNNEEEEOO=_
UOOOBIOOOEOMMn. 'LONMMMMNNEEEOOO=.__..,,..
UUOOEUUOOOOOOOObe '"=OMMMMWNEEEOOOOO,"=OEEEOO=,._
OOUUUIEEIOONNOIUbe. "7OMMMMNNNNNWWEEEEOOOOOO" "'.
EEBNNMMMNWNWWEEIMMNe. __ 7EMMMNNNNNWWWEEEEEEEOO. " .
NNMMMMWWWMMMWEINMMMNn "=BBEEEEMMMMMMMMNNNWWWEEOOOOO=._ .
http://furry.ao.net/~learfox/

Jak Crow

unread,
May 5, 2001, 5:18:39 AM5/5/01
to
Tara <foxSWAPEM...@furry.ao.net> wrote:
> Jak Crow wrote:

>> > It's no different than -10 years ago when blacks were portrayed as bank
>> > robbers and hispanics portrayed as drug dealers. +10 years from now
>> > furries won't be portrated as satan worshippers and child molesters.
>>
>> Please. Furry is nothing but an interest group. It's a HELL of a
>> LOT different than the opression ethnic groups have suffered for YEARS. To
>> even compare the jokes made at furs' expense to racism is ridiculous.

> Yes, furry fans are far fewer than racial divisions of humans. But why
> is that compare `ridiculous'?

Because saying furs are being treated in a way similar to racism
belittles the seriousness of racism. Now if you want to compare the
ridicule furs experience to, say, trekkies or rabid b5 fans, that would be
way more appropriate.

> Who's yard stick are you using to measure that to determine that it is
> `ridiculous'?

How about the world at large? The "world of furry" is unimportant
to the rest of the planet. If "furry" ceased to exist tomorrow, no one
would notice. I have never understood why people try and make the fandom
out to be more than it is.

> You may appreciate writers portraying something that you participate in an
> extreme fashion of behavour (furries having an argument at a con and
> doing wierd things). But is this the best medical related portrait of
> furry fans that writers for a TV show on network TV can come up with?

What? A pretty accurate representation of many furs? What's the
matter? Too close to home?

>> > But I'm sure some other group will still be sterotyped +20 years from
>> > now, it's too
>>

>> Yes, but I'm sure what happens to that group won't be as horrible


>> and shocking as what's been done to a CERTAIN GROUP of furs

> Yer white, arn't you?

Yes I am. You like playing race cards a lot, don't you?

>> > bad writters can't just learn to stop sterotyping. :/
>>
>> Certain furs need to realize how funny they are to the rest of the
>> world.

> *giggles at you* :)

You're not the rest of the world babe. You're one of the furs on
the receiving end of said laughter.

>> > I have a scrip for ER: two writers get send to the ER on fire, everyone
>> > watches as they burn to death in slo-motion for an hour. ^.^
>>
>> Wow, how enlightened of you.
>
> I love it when you take my sarcasim seriously.

I know sarcasm. When you get around to actually using some, let me
know.

Jak Crow

unread,
May 5, 2001, 5:19:18 AM5/5/01
to
Sarenthalanos <sarent...@nospamhotmail.com> wrote:

I agree with this post.

Cerulean

unread,
May 5, 2001, 8:13:45 AM5/5/01
to
Quoth Dr. Cat:

>Cerulean <ma...@cerulean.st> wrote:
>: I think I'm finally going to throw in with the doomsayers on this one.
>: There's nothing we can do now but watch it all go to pieces.
>
>The way Star Trek fandom went to pieces after the Shatner "Get a Life" skit
>on Saturday Night Live portrayed them as 30 year old losers living in mom's
>basement who had never even kissed a girl?

Everybody already knew what Star Trek is, and what Star Trek fandom
is. "Furry" is being introduced to the public. "There's these people
who have a fetish for dressing up as animals and wanking into puppets,
and they're called furries." People believe the first thing they hear,
so don't expect that definition to ever be corrected.

Incidentally, I think it's ironic that fursuiters are the ones
inevitably caught in the spotlight, because as a whole they seem to be
the one group that hasn't been caught up in the politics of the
fandom. They tend to enjoy what they do, both as an Art and as part of
their Life, and they haven't let themselves be pressured into picking
sides or even acknowledging that the line exists.

This, unfortunately, will likely change when people start to think of
costumes as a source of embarrassment (now that there IS observable
mainstream media attention and not just imagined public perceptions
that could be pinned on anyone), and hence a target for blame. The
early signs are already here, with everyone talking about the tattooed
fellow. And a few prominent pundits already illogically associate the
wearing of tails with every kind of person they despise. Fursuiters
are in danger of being branded across the board with the catch-all
label of "lifestyler" (which means, to those who use it that way,
anyone who "doesn't belong in the fandom") sooner or later. In a few
years, furry fans with short memories will be talking about how
fursuiters that have been in the fandom for decades "invaded from
outside and attached themselves."

If you think this is unlikely, think of the average exclusionist fan's
assumptions today about any person they see carrying around a plush
animal. People who used to think it was just fun to have a plushie
with them are avoiding the association now if they don't fit the
stereotype, and in this way the furry fandom slowly degenerates until
only the living stereotypes will remain.

--
___vvz /( Cerulean = Kevin Pease http://cerulean.st/
<__,` Z / ( DC2.~D GmAL~W-R+++Ac~J+S+Fr++IH$M-V+++Cbl,spu
`~~~) )Z) ( FDDmp4adwsA+++$C+D+HM+P-RT+++WZSm#
/ (7 ( S>J37) - ,,'a)ew!J6 ay+ 77!> ue) 6u!y+oN,,

Cerulean

unread,
May 5, 2001, 8:22:03 AM5/5/01
to
Quoth G. Raymond Eddy:

> Which means we could eventually see an episode of /Law and Order/
>where a fursuiter is found dead in a back alley with his heart blown
>through with a shotgun, and they prosecute a fanatic who's read the
>Burned Fur Manifesto.

Well, that presupposes too much knowledge on the part of the writers.
I don't think they would do that one until after it's happened for
real.

Joe Strike

unread,
May 5, 2001, 10:55:19 AM5/5/01
to
And in the new movie "Town & Country" Warren Beatty apparently spends some time
inside a polar bear suit. (Seen a couple of publicity stills, not the movie yet)


> .... There is that

Dr. Cat

unread,
May 5, 2001, 7:19:55 PM5/5/01
to
Furplay <mhi...@radiks.net> wrote:
: If the media's out to ruin furrydom, they have'nt been advertising it (yet).

Dang, Furplay is saying something POSITIVE about whether furry fandom's
being ruined or not?

Have I wandered into a strange parallel universe by accident?

Man, now I gotta find a Star Trek rerun to watch so I can see if
Mr. Spock has a beard.

*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*
Dr. Cat / Dragon's Eye Productions || Free alpha test:
*-------------------------------------------** http://www.furcadia.com
Furcadia - a graphic mud for PCs! || Let your imagination soar!
*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*

(Disclaimer: Except for that one parallel universe episode, with the
clean-shaven, non-murderous version of Spock.)

Dr. Cat

unread,
May 5, 2001, 7:38:08 PM5/5/01
to
Jak Crow <new...@werewolves.org> wrote:
: Please. Furry is nothing but an interest group. It's a HELL of a

: LOT different than the opression ethnic groups have suffered for YEARS. To
: even compare the jokes made at furs' expense to racism is ridiculous.

Again with this common objection "You can't compare A to B, they're too
different!"

You can compare anything to anything else. Whether it sheds light on the
current subject of discussion depends on what you choose, why, and what
comparisons you make.

Suggesting "you can't make a meaningful point by comparing an extreme thing
to a mild thing" is just yet another version of this whole "Don't compare A
to B" fallacy. Consider the following example:

Mrs. Straw Man: "I don't believe you about that whole 'slap in the face at
a con' incident, I simply can't believe that any human being would ever be
rude or physically violent towards another."

Mr. Excessive Analogy: "Why no, you're provably wrong. Look here, Hitler
ordered the killings of millions of jews and homosexuals, which were then
actually carried out, that's both rude and violent. These ten books prove
that this happened." *thump of ten heavy hardback books hitting the table*

Mrs. Straw Man: "Why good heavens, you're right. I'm so stupid!"

...while proof of somebody being mildly rude and slapping someone at any
time in human history ALSO would have proven Mrs. Straw Man to be wrong,
the far more nasty and violent example proves her ludicrous claim to be
wrong as well. Were she to claim "Your Hitler example doesn't prove that
humans are sometimes violent to other humans for the simple reason that it
is so much more severe than the slapping-people-at-cons behavior under
discussion that it doesn't apply", she'd simply be wrong. She might try
to come up with some OTHER reason to show that the slapping incident in
question was a fabrication, but that first reason she tried was
successfully defeated by that Godwin's-Law-invoking example.

Amusingly enough, my OWN example here is an example of my same principle.
Somebody might foolishly claim that I've proven nothing because I chose
an example of ridiculous claims that real people would likely never make,
and that maybe only claims that ridiculous can be in any way addressed
by examples that are much more extreme than the case under discussion.

...if in fact, it were true that only ridiculous claims can be clarified
in any way by extreme examples, I would have indeed have engaged in some
kind of sneaky trick here, trying to prove something that isn't true.
But the fact is, many many sorts of common claims, opinions, and
discussions contain statements or beliefs that can meaningfully be explored
or clarified by comparisons to things far more extreme. And people do so
in conversation every single day. I will leave it as an excercise to each
reader to construct in their own mind one example of such an analogy
applying to some sort of discussion, debate, or argument.

If you can imagine such an example, you needn't attack my Mrs. Straw Man
story for not adequately proving my case, as you now have your own better
support for my argument. If you absolutely cannot think of any such
example, only then should you post here saying that you think perhaps no
such example can exist, and that I'm trying to defend the usability of
extreme examples more than they in fact deserve.

*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*
Dr. Cat / Dragon's Eye Productions || Free alpha test:
*-------------------------------------------** http://www.furcadia.com
Furcadia - a graphic mud for PCs! || Let your imagination soar!
*-------------------------------------------**-----------------------------*

(Disclaimer: But then I'll probably just think up and post a more
reasonable example, and make you look silly.)

(Footnote: Apples and oranges are both roughly spherical, though not
precisely so. Apples tend to deviate a bit more from a spherical shape
than oranges do. They're both fruits, contain seeds, and are sometimes
eaten by human beings, but humans are more likely to eat the skin of an
apple than that of an orange. Apples are generally red, yellow, or green
in color, whereas oranges are orange-colored. Oranges also contain more
vitamin C than apples do. People drink the juice of both fruits, but
generally only use the juice of apples to ferment and drink that way, or
make a "sauce" of the mashed up pulp. Oranges are more acidic than apples,
whereas apples are more crunchy than oranges. Both are available at many
supermarkets.)