Problems/Furry 2
cop...@teleport.com
>From: qu...@netcom.com (D.M. "Quozl" Falk)
>Subject: Re: Problems/Furry 2
>Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 06:11:37 GMT
>: And they exist in every fandom. In this respect, furry fandom is certainly
>: not alone, but name another fandom that takes their x-rated fanzine material
>: and puts it into comic form and tries to put it on comic shop shelves. I
>: don't care about the fanzines as that is not what we are presenting to the
>: general public as a representation of ourselves.
>Let's see-- The ONLY X-rated Furry comics in comic shops are Genus and
>Omaha. I'll grant you Genus, but *****NOT***** Omaha! Otherwise, no
>X-rated "fanzine"-quality comics ever appear in comic shops. The vast
>majority of fanzine material remains at cons, or direct from their
>publishers, or via mail order from the *only* small-press specialty
>service (that happens to concentrate on Furry stuff), Mailbox Books.
>Forgot to add "Wild Kingdom", but having seen the first two issues of WK,
>there is a very high level of quality in that. (Will be looking out for
>#3...)
But not all the sex is confined to those few. Katmandu had very graphic sex
in its second issue( which IMHO massively detracted from the story rather
than adding anything other than a thrill for them that like their fantasy
life graphic); Shanda the Panda has two issues heavily centered on sex.
Then there's the obsession with lesbian furries. In Wild Life, Furrlough
and Shanda the Panda we find individual stories, continuing stories and plot
threads on the subject. Not to mention the very ludicrous Tank Vixens. And
I took these all over to some ladies I know. Only Shanda the Panda was
liked by any of them, the rest being condemned as stereotypical male sex
fantasies about lesbians. Shanda got good reviews because the characters
were well-developed and seemed real to them.
>: I had this nightmare once of all the fandom groups holding up signs of what
>: they wanted the public to see. The Star Trek fans held up a big picture of
>: the Enterprise. Anime fans held up a picture of a giant robot piloted by a
>: cute girl. Furry fans held up a giant picture of a furry orgy.
I can believe it. Though I think I'd rather see a giant picture of almost
anything by Mel White.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The preceding has been a commentary on the world by Copper Squirrel
Cop...@Teleport.com All opinions are mine, not yours or anybody else's.
ARS GRATIA VITAE
Gerrit Heitsch
> Dr. Cat said about Problems/furry 2
> DC> Well, there's all the Disney comics out there... Even made Carl
> DC> Barks well known, in spite of many many years laboring in obscurity
> DC> on comics that didn't have his name on them. Fans had already
> DC> started recognizing his particular style and looking for his work
> DC> even then.
>
> True, but Carl Banks was never part of furry fandom, was he?
Maybe Barks wasn't, but I'm not so sure about Don Rosa, who's
also working for Disney. At least he knows about Rhudiprrt,
if you don't believe that, check out Rhudiprrt #3 one page after the
end of the main story.
But that leads to my only point of criticism about Don Rosa's
work. He's a good artist in almost every way and his work is very
detailed with lots of hidden gags, but he's not good in
drawing Felines, no matter which member of the feline family.
Gerrit
--
Gerrit Heitsch Moenchweg 16 71088 Holzgerlingen Germany
Logical adresses: UUCP: ger...@laosinh.s.bawue.de FIDO: (2:246/1216.9)
One day man will look at his world and see something very strange:
Absent animals.
Last words of Ambrosius in 'Francis' (Felidae II) by Akif Pirincci
Thomas Armo
pe...@bonkers.taronga.com (Peter da Silva) wrote:
>In article <95011006...@ectech.com>,
>Thomas Armo <thoma...@ectech.com> wrote:
>>My pompous-ass Margaret Thatcher on steroids act has been consciously
>>designed by me to make fun of the artificial constraints and
>>limitations under which usenet newsgroups function.
>
>Oh, you're role playing?
>
>When someone continually insists on playing the role of an asshole,
>it's hard to defend it as just being a role. You *chose* to be a jerk,
>instead of just doing what came naturally. How... enlightening...
"You worthless acid-sucking piece of illiterate SHIT! Don't EVER
send this kind of brain-damaged swill around here again! If I had
the time, I'd come out there and drive a fucking wooden stake
through your skull! Why don't you get a job, wino? Like maybe
punching tickets or delivering the Shopping News. You FurryMUCK
assholes are all the same -- just like those cocksuckers
at ConFurence. I could kill those bedwetting geeks for sending
me this tedious and embarrassing tissue of delusions . . . and I
wouldn't mind killing you, too. Stick this post where it belongs: up
your ass."
This is a reproduction of the actual rejection formletter Dr. Hunter S.
Thompson sent to anyone submitting an unsolicited manuscript to Rolling
Stone magazine. Changes have been made to the original article by me
where appropriate.
In article <3f1bgh$1...@boris.eden.com>,
c...@eden.com (Dr. Cat) wrote:
>You know, attempts to make fun of things like this pop up with some
>frequency in the newsgroups... The vast majority of them are so poorly
>written that it's easy to mistake them for the rantings of a moron who
>actually believes what he's saying, and most people do. Apparently
>it's beyond the abilities of most to write sarcasm in a way that it's
>clear that it is sarcasm. Anyway, if you want a newsgroup where you
>can hang around with like-minded chums, you might try
>alt.syntax.tactical. I hope you like it, as it would be a relief to see
>you move elsewhere.
I was serious when I said that you should leave Mr. Martin alone.
In article <95011006...@ectech.com>,
Thomas Armo <thoma...@ectech.com> wrote:
>In article <pdbD1z...@netcom.com>,
>p...@netcom.com (Dave Bryant) wrote:
>>Are you capable of admitting error as well, in a civilized fashion and
>>without casting aspersions?
>
>Yes I am.
ky...@netcom.com (Lynn Onyx), I hope I wasn't out of line with that crack
about selling t-shirts at Philcon bearing the caption "*cute
panda smile* eats razor blades." It was my reaction to Malcomson
posting to affm his wistful wish that someone would bust both Joel Furr
and yours truly in the mouth.
>>>tagline<<< * "Mind if I add m'six sense worth?," Sy the psionic spy
asked.
Peter da Silva
Thomas Armo <thoma...@ectech.com> wrote:
>This is a reproduction of the actual rejection formletter Dr. Hunter S.
>Thompson sent to anyone submitting an unsolicited manuscript to Rolling
>Stone magazine. Changes have been made to the original article by me
>where appropriate.
Yes, I've never seen any indication that would refute the Hunter Thompson
is an asshole theory eithr.
Tygger
: Then they are not mainstream comic books, are they? How many times do I have
: to say this? I know there are a few comic shops out there that carry
: fanzines, but none of these are professionally marketed productions, they are
: provided by their makers, not by a reputable distributor.
*LAUGHS*
Okay...hold on to your keyboard, here we go...
Flipping through Previews catalog (Sept 94) from DIAMOND DISTRIBUTORS:
Eros: Alazar's Bondage, Alexis, Blazing Foxholes, Birdland, Gaby and the
Goat, Harem Nights, Hot Nights in Rangoon, Karate Girl, Leather Boy,
Mistress of Bondage, Nefarismo, Ramba, Sheedeva, Spore Whores, Venus With
a Hot Crotch, Young Witches. CAPITOL CITY also carried these titles as
well as OTHER distributors.
Titles from off the top of my head that have sex in them: A*Bomb,
Battlebinder Plus, Emblem, Amazing Strip, Love Bites, Butterscotch,
Emmanuelle, Penthouse Comix, Shorts, Click!, The Great Adventure,
Perchance to Dream, and MANY more in the European market, the original
Vampirella, and the list goes on.
I'll be honest here. I fully expect you to NOT see, to be BLIND and DEAF
to what I've just given you.
: I was a part of Star Trek fandom for 10+ years (although now, with the
: take-over DS9 and TNG have done, I wouldn't touch it). I've also seen
: Elfquest fandom, anime fandom and general SF fandom from inside, and
: particularly in anime fandom, as an organizer of cons, etc, and ran the first
: two anime video rooms at CF0 and CF1. I'm not saying that furry fandom is
: "bad" or that other fandoms are "good", as this simply is not the case.
: However, both anime and furry fandom have different perceptions in the
: mainstream fandoms; anime has overcome their perception problems by and large,
: furry fandom has not, and apparently has no interest in doing so.
Nononono...this is what YOU see, due to YOUR blindness to the LARGE
amount of proof that shows YOU wrong.
: Anime fandom did something incredibly wise when they started bringing over
: comics, however. Instead of bringing over "Little Girl Orgy"-style comics,
: they brought low-sex, high-adventure stories like Area 88, Mai, Lone Wolf &
: Cub, etc, which sparked a revolution in the comic industry. If you look at
: furry fandom's first offerings, however, we see a much different picture. It
: is nothing that is likely to impress people, nothing that will change the way
: people think about fur fans, and, in fact, I think it does more to hurt our
: credibility than anything else.
You are so fucking BLIND!!! LOOK at the Gold Key comics, the Harvey
comics, Disney comics. ALL of these PREDATE Viz, ALL of these had furry
subjects, and ALL of these had NO SEX!! I'm willing to be you don't even
COUNT these as furry comics, DO YOU?
: The fact of the matter is that I do keep requesting someone to prove me wrong,
: and produce a single comic book from any other fandom that has the same level
: of sex as almost 40% of furry comics do. I keep hearing about fanzines, but
: these are not comics. If I'm so wrong, it should be pretty easy to prove it,
: shouldn't it?
I JUST DID in the above paragraph. GO to your local comic store and look
up these books. CLEAR out the mud and shit that you want to see from
your eyes and actually LOOK. Or...are you afraid of being proven wrong?
To be shown that your stand is acutually on shakey ground?
: If you've been reading the messages here, most people *DO* agree with me. You
: seem to have a very all-or-nothing, black-or-white pattern of thinking. I do
: not particularly like where fur fandom is today, and I don't see good things
: for the future. I do, however, strongly feel that fur fandom is worth saving,
You don't WANT to see good things. IF you had, then you wouldn't have
NEEDED prrof.
: that it can be saved, and that it should be saved. I do not, as would be
: clear to anyone who actually reads what I have said, advocate getting rid of
: all sex. Heck, I used to receive most of the x-rated furry fanzines in
: production, as well as contributing to several. The fact of the matter is
: that we need to produce something *OTHER* than sex, not something in *PLACE*
: of sex. If someone asked you to show them what fur fandom was all about, what
: would you show them? I've been asked several times, and have been rather hard
: pressed to come up with some good general interest material, particularly in
: good sizable numbers.
*LAUGH* Something other than sex HAS been produced MANY years ago and is
STILL being produced today! Again, you are being BLIND and DEAF to it.
*LAUGH!* I have NO problem in giving good interest material. Disney,
Warner Bros. cartoons, Hanna-Barbarra, children's books, novels, etc. IT
IS THERE! YOU are blind to it!
: What I want for furdom is to be able to see it in the mainstream. Why is it
: that at every con in the world, they have anime video rooms, but not one,
: outside of those geared specifically for furries, have con-organized furry
: video rooms, or furry parties? Or invite furry artists because they are furry
: artists? Or give any kind of official recognition to fur fandom?
Parties at cons, from what I've seen, aren't con oraganized usually.
Also, based on when I was gathering info from cons on their artshows, I
mentioned I was a furry artist and they were glad to hear it. They
WANTED the furry art there. Official recognition? What in the hell do
YOU consider to be that?
: Someone said here recently that they were almost rejected from an art show
: simply because they mentioned that they do furry art. Granted, the art show
: director believed, unfairly, that all furry art was spooge, but if that is the
: image we are presenting to the world, who can really blame him?
We AREN'T, Brian. MANY people out there are WORKING very hard to promote
furry fiction which is NOT sexually oriented. AND the fandom IS responding!
Are YOU doing anything besides bitching on the Net?
The only thing I have seen is that you are blind, deaf, and ignorant and
have a VERY narrowminded view of fur fandom. You see only one aspect of
the fandom very clearly and lament how there is much of nothing else. I
and others HAVE given you proof but you still DO NOT SEE. Fine. Stay
blind. I don't care.
This will be my last words on the matter with you. HOWEVER, IF you will
get out of the hole you're in and finally LOOK for yourself for the good
in fur fandom and expand your horizons, then I'm willing to talk more.
Tygger!
--
******************************************************************************
"But I'm in it til it's over and I just can't stop
If you wanna get it done, You got to fight for yourself"
Exerpt from "Everything Louder than Everything Else"
Meat Loaf, Bat Out Of Hell:Back Into Hell
Artist/Writer/Furrys/Non Furrys/Non Erotica/Implied Erotica/Soft Erotica
Has a print listing and GIFS! (ftp to solluna.org, directory pub/tygger)
Shows Illos At Cons (shameless plug!)/Tygger of many and varied fandoms
creator of Guardian Knights, an anthology comic, released in SEPT `95!
Tygger
[...]
: Using conventions as an excuse for sweaty snugglebunnies... well, I've
been to serious computer conventions that got pretty bloody wild.
Hey, remember the Tailhook scandal?
[clink clink]
TTFN!
Jeffrey J. Mancebo
: True, but Carl Banks was never part of furry fandom, was he? My point is that
: none of the well-known furry artists are working and making a decent living
: off their art. You don't see Terrie Smith doing comics for Dark Horse, Ken
: Sample inking for Marvel or Jim Groat lettering for DC, do you?
boojum cocks his head.. "Don't be silly.. There ARE artists making
a living off their art in Furry Fandom. And a decent living as well. For
starters, there is Larry Dixon. Who is both an attendee at ConFurence and
on FurryMUCK (Although WHO he is there I have no idea, nor would I tell if
I did.. He doesn't need clueless people pouncing on him.)"
"Larry Dixon made a living at his Art befor he married Mercedes
Lackey aparently. Weather or not SHE is part of Furry Fandom (Just because
Mr. Dixon is part of Furry Fandom doesn't mean she is) I don't know. If
she IS part of Furry Fandom, then she is another making a living off their
'Art' (Her books)."
"Now then, answer me this.. How many members of Star Trek Fandom are
making a decent living off their art? I'm sure there are some out there,
but by NO means do the majority of them make what I'd call a decent
living. That is how it goes when you are an artist. Please Note, Just
because an Artist draws Star Trek Characters, works on the series, or
works on the Star Trek Comic Books doesn't make them a part of Fandom.
If doing any of these things DOES make them part of Star Trek Fandom,
then anyone who works on Sonic, or on Any Comic with a furry in it is
ALSO part of Furry Fandom. And the amount of artists making a living at
it just went up."
boojum the brown bunny
cop...@teleport.com
>Then they are not mainstream comic books, are they? How many times do I have
>to say this? I know there are a few comic shops out there that carry
>fanzines, but none of these are professionally marketed productions, they are
>provided by their makers, not by a reputable distributor.
>What I want for furdom is to be able to see it in the mainstream. Why is it
>that at every con in the world, they have anime video rooms, but not one,
>outside of those geared specifically for furries, have con-organized furry
>video rooms, or furry parties? Or invite furry artists because they are furry
>artists? Or give any kind of official recognition to fur fandom?
This desire to be "mainstream" seems to me to be at the center of your
dislike for furry fandom as it now stands. However, for most furfen, main-
stream is not what they want. I myself read furry comix not for the sex,
but as alternative to the boring crud of the mainstream of comix. I don't
want something like the X-(fill in the blank) and I don't think most of the
people in fur-fandom do either. This doesn't mean that there isn't boring
crud in furry comix as well, but that it provides an outlet for the anomie
caused by the solely revenue-producing guidelines of the mainstream comix
industry. The only unifying factor in Furry Fandom is anomie. In general,
most of the furfen I have talked to and met at furry parties at cons and over
FurNet and other echoes see themselves as isolated from the mainstream
of their own will.
Yes, furry comix could be better without all the emphasis on sex in the
scripts and the artwork, but if that were all eliminated then we may as well
stick to Donald Duck which is as sex-nuetral as you can get. And if all
furfen really wanted was sex pics we'd all be pawing through Playboy and
others of that ilk.
If you really want it to be mainstream, the answer is not in badgering
us with your complaints, but to actually do something about it. This means
writing or drawing or organizing a fan group of your own, put out your own
fanzine( fanzine does not equal poor quality of contents, especially in this
age of computers) and promote furry fandom of the type you'd like to see. As
Dale Carnegie put it, "Don't criticize, condemn or complain. Show them what
they can gain by changing."
Herman Miller
says...
>
>Listen: We don't need to be accepted by other, so-called "mainstream"
>fandoms, nor do we need to be accepted by the "outside world" at large-
>Most could care less one way or the other. Let's put it this way: to the
>average person out there, SF/Trek/anime/whatever fandom doesn't amount to
>a hill of beans, no matter how many SF/Trek//anime/whatever books/videos
>they have... Many in SF fandom *still* don't consider Trek fandom as
>legitimate SF fandom, and so on and so forth... IT SIMPLY DOESN'T MATTER
>EXCEPT TO THOSE ALREADY IN IT!
That sounds right on to me. Of course, there will always be new fans
attracted to furry images and stories, but in my opinion they've always been
furry (they just never knew it). However, the outside world IS the outside
world, and they can have some really crazy ideas about non-conformists.
Look at the attempts to regulate rap music, despite the fact that it's
protected speech! Some people probably *still* think D&D is satanic devil
worship. So it's worth at least being aware about how "they" perceive
furrydom. You never know when some unenlightened political entity might
want to legislate against us.
Claws and stripes furever! :>
--
Thryomanes (Herman Miller) | "For a successful technology, reality must
(hmi...@origin.ea.com) | take precedence over public relations, for
(thryo...@aol.com) | Nature cannot be fooled." - R. P. Feynman
(hmi...@io.com) +--------------------------------------------
D.M. Quozl Falk
Tyg? Censoring herself? That's a first! 'Though I fully share her
sentiment, as she has read my reply to what she replied to.....
....Quozl!
--
//////======////////// |Dennis M. Falk |221 Huntoon St.|TTA/Animaniacs/WB
/ @ ) \\\\\\\\\\ |aka "Quozl Mephit"|Eureka, CA |TaleSpin/CnD-RR
*___(_____(___| |(qu...@netcom.com)|95501-4115 USA |Fifi/Babs/Minerva
Supporting your right to own a pet Mustelid! (Skunks, ferrets, otters, minks..)
D.M. Quozl Falk
: In article <quozlD2...@netcom.com>, qu...@netcom.com (D.M. Quozl Falk)
: >
: >Listen: We don't need to be accepted by other, so-called "mainstream"
: >fandoms, nor do we need to be accepted by the "outside world" at large-
: >Most could care less one way or the other. Let's put it this way: to the
: >average person out there, SF/Trek/anime/whatever fandom doesn't amount to
: >a hill of beans, no matter how many SF/Trek//anime/whatever books/videos
: >they have... Many in SF fandom *still* don't consider Trek fandom as
: >legitimate SF fandom, and so on and so forth... IT SIMPLY DOESN'T MATTER
: >EXCEPT TO THOSE ALREADY IN IT!
: That sounds right on to me. Of course, there will always be new fans
: attracted to furry images and stories, but in my opinion they've always been
: furry (they just never knew it). However, the outside world IS the outside
: world, and they can have some really crazy ideas about non-conformists.
: Look at the attempts to regulate rap music, despite the fact that it's
: protected speech! Some people probably *still* think D&D is satanic devil
: worship. So it's worth at least being aware about how "they" perceive
: furrydom. You never know when some unenlightened political entity might
: want to legislate against us.
There are many that, regardless *what* type of image you try to put out,
will have their own image of (such-and-such) fandom, positive or
negative, and most often, it'll be negative. People are more likely to
believe anything negative, even if two people (one speaking positively,
the other negatively) tried to convince a third person, the third person
will believe in the negative, because if there's *anything* negative to
say, then there's something wrong with what they're talking about, and
they'll accept the negative more readily. This is true with a certain
Steve Martin's reputation. Sure, he earned it in the beginning, but few
are willing to give him a chance now, to prove he's not as bad as he was
then, because that's all anyone will listen to is his bad side.
Hmph... I had always thought of this idea of bringing Furry fandom to the
Donahue show.... It would indeed piss off the likes of Jesse Helms, no
matter whether sex is brought in or not! ("Furries are Satanic Demons!
They must be eradicated!")
: Claws and stripes furever! :>
Hehe... Hehehehehe.... *Definitely* skunks! ;)
shad...@castlebbs.com
Quote...quote...quote...
TY>Brian Henderson (brian.h...@ectech.com) wrote:
BH>: Then they are not mainstream comic books, are they? How many times do I
BH>have
BH>: to say this? I know there are a few comic shops out there that carry
BH>: fanzines, but none of these are professionally marketed productions, they
BH>are
BH>: provided by their makers, not by a reputable distributor.
TY>*LAUGHS*
TY>Okay...hold on to your keyboard, here we go...
TY>Flipping through Previews catalog (Sept 94) from DIAMOND DISTRIBUTORS:
TY>Eros: Alazar's Bondage, Alexis, Blazing Foxholes, Birdland, Gaby and the
TY>Goat, Harem Nights, Hot Nights in Rangoon, Karate Girl, Leather Boy,
TY>Mistress of Bondage, Nefarismo, Ramba, Sheedeva, Spore Whores, Venus With
TY>a Hot Crotch, Young Witches. CAPITOL CITY also carried these titles as
TY>well as OTHER distributors.
TY>Titles from off the top of my head that have sex in them: A*Bomb,
TY>Battlebinder Plus, Emblem, Amazing Strip, Love Bites, Butterscotch,
TY>Emmanuelle, Penthouse Comix, Shorts, Click!, The Great Adventure,
TY>Perchance to Dream, and MANY more in the European market, the original
TY>Vampirella, and the list goes on.
TY>I'll be honest here. I fully expect you to NOT see, to be BLIND and DEAF
TY>to what I've just given you.
BH>: I was a part of Star Trek fandom for 10+ years (although now, with the
BH>: take-over DS9 and TNG have done, I wouldn't touch it). I've also seen
BH>: Elfquest fandom, anime fandom and general SF fandom from inside, and
BH>: particularly in anime fandom, as an organizer of cons, etc, and ran the
BH>: first
BH>: two anime video rooms at CF0 and CF1. I'm not saying that furry fandom is
BH>: "bad" or that other fandoms are "good", as this simply is not the case.
BH>: However, both anime and furry fandom have different perceptions in the
BH>: mainstream fandoms; anime has overcome their perception problems by and
BH>: large,
BH>: furry fandom has not, and apparently has no interest in doing so.
TY>Nononono...this is what YOU see, due to YOUR blindness to the LARGE
TY>amount of proof that shows YOU wrong.
BH>: Anime fandom did something incredibly wise when they started bringing over
BH>: comics, however. Instead of bringing over "Little Girl Orgy"-style comics
BH>: they brought low-sex, high-adventure stories like Area 88, Mai, Lone Wolf
BH>: Cub, etc, which sparked a revolution in the comic industry. If you look a
BH>: furry fandom's first offerings, however, we see a much different picture.
BH>: It
BH>: is nothing that is likely to impress people, nothing that will change the
BH>: way
BH>: people think about fur fans, and, in fact, I think it does more to hurt ou
BH>: credibility than anything else.
TY>You are so fucking BLIND!!! LOOK at the Gold Key comics, the Harvey
TY>comics, Disney comics. ALL of these PREDATE Viz, ALL of these had furry
TY>subjects, and ALL of these had NO SEX!! I'm willing to be you don't even
TY>COUNT these as furry comics, DO YOU?
BH>: The fact of the matter is that I do keep requesting someone to prove me
BH>: wrong
BH>: and produce a single comic book from any other fandom that has the same
BH>: level
BH>: of sex as almost 40% of furry comics do. I keep hearing about fanzines, b
BH>: these are not comics. If I'm so wrong, it should be pretty easy to prove
BH>: it,
BH>: shouldn't it?
TY>I JUST DID in the above paragraph. GO to your local comic store and look
TY>up these books. CLEAR out the mud and shit that you want to see from
TY>your eyes and actually LOOK. Or...are you afraid of being proven wrong?
TY>To be shown that your stand is acutually on shakey ground?
BH>: If you've been reading the messages here, most people *DO* agree with me.
BH>: You
BH>: seem to have a very all-or-nothing, black-or-white pattern of thinking. I
BH>: do
BH>: not particularly like where fur fandom is today, and I don't see good thin
BH>: for the future. I do, however, strongly feel that fur fandom is worth
BH>: saving
TY>You don't WANT to see good things. IF you had, then you wouldn't have
TY>NEEDED prrof.
BH>: that it can be saved, and that it should be saved. I do not, as would be
BH>: clear to anyone who actually reads what I have said, advocate getting rid
BH>: all sex. Heck, I used to receive most of the x-rated furry fanzines in
BH>: production, as well as contributing to several. The fact of the matter is
BH>: that we need to produce something *OTHER* than sex, not something in *PLAC
BH>: of sex. If someone asked you to show them what fur fandom was all about,
BH>: what
BH>: would you show them? I've been asked several times, and have been rather
BH>: hard
BH>: pressed to come up with some good general interest material, particularly
BH>: good sizable numbers.
TY>*LAUGH* Something other than sex HAS been produced MANY years ago and is
TY>STILL being produced today! Again, you are being BLIND and DEAF to it.
TY>*LAUGH!* I have NO problem in giving good interest material. Disney,
TY>Warner Bros. cartoons, Hanna-Barbarra, children's books, novels, etc. IT
TY>IS THERE! YOU are blind to it!
BH>: What I want for furdom is to be able to see it in the mainstream. Why is
BH>: that at every con in the world, they have anime video rooms, but not one,
BH>: outside of those geared specifically for furries, have con-organized furry
BH>: video rooms, or furry parties? Or invite furry artists because they are
BH>: furry
BH>: artists? Or give any kind of official recognition to fur fandom?
TY>Parties at cons, from what I've seen, aren't con oraganized usually.
TY>Also, based on when I was gathering info from cons on their artshows, I
TY>mentioned I was a furry artist and they were glad to hear it. They
TY>WANTED the furry art there. Official recognition? What in the hell do
TY>YOU consider to be that?
BH>: Someone said here recently that they were almost rejected from an art show
BH>: simply because they mentioned that they do furry art. Granted, the art sh
BH>: director believed, unfairly, that all furry art was spooge, but if that is
BH>: the
BH>: image we are presenting to the world, who can really blame him?
TY>We AREN'T, Brian. MANY people out there are WORKING very hard to promote
TY>furry fiction which is NOT sexually oriented. AND the fandom IS responding!
TY>Are YOU doing anything besides bitching on the Net?
TY>The only thing I have seen is that you are blind, deaf, and ignorant and
TY>have a VERY narrowminded view of fur fandom. You see only one aspect of
TY>the fandom very clearly and lament how there is much of nothing else. I
TY>and others HAVE given you proof but you still DO NOT SEE. Fine. Stay
TY>blind. I don't care.
TY>This will be my last words on the matter with you. HOWEVER, IF you will
TY>get out of the hole you're in and finally LOOK for yourself for the good
TY>in fur fandom and expand your horizons, then I'm willing to talk more.
TY>Tygger!
*Sigh* ...Sorry to add all the quotes here Tygger...I couldn't figure
out how to snip out quotes in this one...and still explain or at least
try to show what I see from Mr. Henderson's diatribes...if that's makes
any sense... |>
Any rate...All I can tell from Mr. Henderson is his attempt, though
rather futile, to equate furry fandom to that of back alleys and men in
overcoats wanking off to furry erotica...if that's ALL he'll ever see,
then no one can change him in his views, perhaps he got snubbed by an
overworked artist at a con or something, or someone did a "drive-by"
shooting on his collection of plushies...who knows...?!?!
By in large, the artists and writers at furry cons HAVE to eat, and a
few of us DO have our own families with little children to feed...my
fiancee' and I are in the midst of trying to concieve children, and for
me to make some extra $$$ anyway I possibly can within my OWN moral
limits, will be done...no matter the subject...if some "furry fans"
don't like what I or any other artist have...then they can go to the
next artists...or leave the con...it's called freedom of choice..you, as
a fan/buyer have the choice to buy what YOU want..and I <and Tygger> as
artists have the right to draw whatever we want, and to sell whatever we
want within reason.
If NO ONE liked furry art..or to DRAW furry art...then Cons like CF6
would not be in exsistance...as it stands, ConFurence <and others>
are there...the majority HAS spoken...and the majority of fans WILL
GO...no matter what...now, until the majority has another say and furry
fandom dies off, only then will artists and writers adjust to fit the
current criteria...however, I don't see that happening for QUITE a
while...judging from the tremedous outcome of CF6 this last weekend..!!
So Mr. Henderson...Think this through a little bit before posting
again...the majority of us on this net <alt.fan.furry> do listen to most
of our fans, and we do want to hear what they do have to say,
however..trying to bring about a change in something that's technically
still in it's infancy is a bit, how shall I say...like a parent/grown-up
trying to get the child to attend a top of the line, overseas private
school, when all the child REALLY wants to do is attend the public
school around the corner with his friends...There's a growing process
that most things have to go through...and forcing an abrupt change can
cause your "child" to go into an even more "pronounced" rebellion..which
in some cases can bring about some pretty interesting change! ;>
Also Mr. Henderson...the majority of us artists AREN'T forcing our stuff
down your throat...again, if it's something you don't like, just say no,
and don't come to FurryCons..period..! Simple as that.. ;) "Out of
sight...out of mind!"
..and thank you Tygger for your insights!! You hit the nail on the
head!! :)
-Dean L. Norton
3RD MILLENNIUM ENTERPRISES
--
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| THE CASTLE bbs - Los Angeles, CA, USA - 50 Lines! +1 818.985.6075 |
| 36 CD ROMs - 2,3 and 4 player DOOM! Internet: in...@castlebbs.com |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
Dr. Cat
> Dr. Cat said about Problems/furry 2
> DC> Well, there's all the Disney comics out there... Even made Carl
> DC> Barks well known, in spite of many many years laboring in obscurity
> DC> on comics that didn't have his name on them. Fans had already
> DC> started recognizing his particular style and looking for his work
> DC> even then.
>
> True, but Carl Banks was never part of furry fandom, was he?
So someone complains about how artists who are doing furry work can't
make it in mainstream comics, and I provide a counter-example, and you
think it's important that the artist doesn't come to furry cons? Donald
Duck is definitely an anthropomorphic animal, as is Scrooge McDuck. Some
furry fans like the work Barks did with those characters a great deal,
and they're able to do so whether Barks has any interest in or awareness
of furry fandom at all. And it does illustrate the point I was making,
that an artist drawing furry stories can achieve mainsream comic book
success. So what's your point?
***********************************************************************
Dr. Cat / Dragons's Eye Productions ** Come play DragonSpires!
******************************************** ftp.eden.com pub/dspire
(Dragonspires is a graphic mud for PCs.) ** has everything you need!
Mark Freid
>From: brian.h...@ectech.com (Brian Henderson)
>Subject: Re: Problems/Furry 2
>Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 21:20:00 GMT
>Dr. Cat said about Problems/furry 2
>DC> Well, there's all the Disney comics out there... Even made Carl
>DC> Barks well known, in spite of many many years laboring in obscurity
>DC> on comics that didn't have his name on them. Fans had already
>DC> started recognizing his particular style and looking for his work
>DC> even then.
>True, but Carl Banks was never part of furry fandom, was he? My point is that
>none of the well-known furry artists are working and making a decent living
>off their art. You don't see Terrie Smith doing comics for Dark Horse, Ken
>Sample inking for Marvel or Jim Groat lettering for DC, do you?
Yeah, but with Society today, you have to realize that:
A) Comic Books are generally thought of as "something for kids" by the general
public
B) Therefore, Kids Buy them.
C) Kids are most likely to go for Marvel/DC/Dark Horse because they can get a
reaction like "Cool. He kicks ass" or "Damn! Look at those tits!"
D) Kids are less likely to get Furry stuff, because most kids think of animals
as nothing more than things that move so that you can shoot them, or run them
down or hit them with a large, blunt object (Huh Huh...)
Less people (i.e. adults) buy furries. ergo, DC/Marvel/Dark Horse won't print
furries (in general), ergo... well... you get the picture.
-Mark
Mark Freid
>: Someone said here recently that they were almost rejected from an art show
>: simply because they mentioned that they do furry art. Granted, the art show
>: director believed, unfairly, that all furry art was spooge, but if that is the
>: image we are presenting to the world, who can really blame him?
>We AREN'T, Brian. MANY people out there are WORKING very hard to promote
>furry fiction which is NOT sexually oriented. AND the fandom IS responding!
I'll have to agree with you on that. I mean, sure there's a good amount of
furry "spooge" ("spooge"?) But theres a good amount of "spooge" in any genre!
At the CF6 art show, there was a regular section and an "NC-17" section. The
"NC-17" section was practically EMPTY!
-Mark
cop...@teleport.com
>By in large, the artists and writers at furry cons HAVE to eat, and a
>few of us DO have our own families with little children to feed...my
>fiancee' and I are in the midst of trying to concieve children, and for
>me to make some extra $$$ anyway I possibly can within my OWN moral
>limits, will be done...no matter the subject...if some "furry fans"
Like Groat refusing to do a drawing of Red Shetland as a "she-male"( whatever
that is) even when offered large amounts of money, Yes? We each have to
make our own moral choices.
>Also Mr. Henderson...the majority of us artists AREN'T forcing our stuff
>down your throat...again, if it's something you don't like, just say no,
>and don't come to FurryCons..period..! Simple as that.. ;) "Out of
>sight...out of mind!"
What? And allow this furversion to flourish without his superior moral in-
sight? :)
The world is full of people who want to make the decisions for other people,
regardless of whether or not they want that person to decide for them. This
sort of person never seems to realize that the best way to influence is in
the open market. You don't like what's out there, make your own and sell it!
Jeffrey J. Mancebo
: -Dean L. Norton
: 3RD MILLENNIUM ENTERPRISES
boojum grins and waves! "Hi Dean! Thank you for the bunnies in
my bunny sketchbook!!!"
boojum the brown bunny
Dr. Cat
: Listen: We don't need to be accepted by other, so-called "mainstream"
: fandoms, nor do we need to be accepted by the "outside world" at large-
: Most could care less one way or the other. Let's put it this way: to the
: average person out there, SF/Trek/anime/whatever fandom doesn't amount to
: a hill of beans, no matter how many SF/Trek//anime/whatever books/videos
: they have... Many in SF fandom *still* don't consider Trek fandom as
: legitimate SF fandom, and so on and so forth... IT SIMPLY DOESN'T MATTER
: EXCEPT TO THOSE ALREADY IN IT!
Amen to that. Anyone remember the William Shatner "Get a Life" sketch on
Saturday Night Live? I still think that's the defining piece that shows
how the majority of people outside of all fandoms think of Star Trek fans
- if they bother to form an opinion on the subject at all. And I think
there are more than a few in SF&F fandom that have that opinion too to
some extent. Heck, even *I* get a little suspicious when I hear someone
likes Star Trek *that* much! But I don't spoil their fun. Nor would I
be somehow doing things to help them have MORE fun if they were to
somehow convince me they were less geeky. Why should they care what I
think? They can ignore me, I can ignore them. Works great. I enjoy
watching the shows and movies, but not enough to want to spend time
talking about them with other people that watch them. So they're not
'losing' me by not having a better reputation, as I wouldn't attend cons
or participate in newsgroups or zines regardless. What's the big deal?
Tygger
: Quote...quote...quote...
: *Sigh* ...Sorry to add all the quotes here Tygger...I couldn't figure
: out how to snip out quotes in this one...and still explain or at least
: try to show what I see from Mr. Henderson's diatribes...if that's makes
: any sense... |>
OKay, I'll forgive you this once. *winkgrin*
: Any rate...All I can tell from Mr. Henderson is his attempt, though
: rather futile, to equate furry fandom to that of back alleys and men in
: overcoats wanking off to furry erotica...if that's ALL he'll ever see,
: then no one can change him in his views, perhaps he got snubbed by an
: overworked artist at a con or something, or someone did a "drive-by"
: shooting on his collection of plushies...who knows...?!?!
*laughs* Who does know? He asks for prrof, we give it, he changes the
criteria, we give him more proof, he just ignores or changes the criteria
again. I'll admit to being a bit hot headed in my last posting to him
but it's people like him that bring out my temper the quickest. From
what I can see, he hasn't even BOTHERED to LOOK for ANY good in fur
fandom. I mean, I found all that proof in just a few moments of stepping
back and looking. Geeze...
: By in large, the artists and writers at furry cons HAVE to eat, and a
: few of us DO have our own families with little children to feed...my
: fiancee' and I are in the midst of trying to concieve children, and for
: me to make some extra $$$ anyway I possibly can within my OWN moral
: limits, will be done...no matter the subject...if some "furry fans"
: don't like what I or any other artist have...then they can go to the
: next artists...or leave the con...it's called freedom of choice..you, as
: a fan/buyer have the choice to buy what YOU want..and I <and Tygger> as
: artists have the right to draw whatever we want, and to sell whatever we
: want within reason.
*noddles* Yep! I'm the sole provider for my family right now and I've
started taking commissions again as well as gearing up to send art out to
cons. I fully understand and agree with what you're saying here! And,
from what I saw at the con, many other fen do as well.
: If NO ONE liked furry art..or to DRAW furry art...then Cons like CF6
: would not be in exsistance...as it stands, ConFurence <and others>
: are there...the majority HAS spoken...and the majority of fans WILL
: GO...no matter what...now, until the majority has another say and furry
: fandom dies off, only then will artists and writers adjust to fit the
: current criteria...however, I don't see that happening for QUITE a
: while...judging from the tremedous outcome of CF6 this last weekend..!!
*grin* I rather doubt that fur fandom will die off anytime soon. I saw
badges in the 800's and Jaz said the last was 880. Furtastican was a
success and promises to be again, Duckon furry contingent is growing, I
know of other cons, TINY little cons with only 200 or so attending, who
have heard of furry art as were very pleased to have my art there. Furry
fandom, when not judged on just its sexual aspect, is a nice place to
be. That's something Henderson and his ilk need to see.
: So Mr. Henderson...Think this through a little bit before posting
: again...the majority of us on this net <alt.fan.furry> do listen to most
: of our fans, and we do want to hear what they do have to say,
: however..trying to bring about a change in something that's technically
: still in it's infancy is a bit, how shall I say...like a parent/grown-up
: trying to get the child to attend a top of the line, overseas private
: school, when all the child REALLY wants to do is attend the public
: school around the corner with his friends...There's a growing process
: that most things have to go through...and forcing an abrupt change can
: cause your "child" to go into an even more "pronounced" rebellion..which
: in some cases can bring about some pretty interesting change! ;>
*LAUGH* VERY apt example, Dean! As a parent of two kids, I KNOW how
that goes! And it's VERY true of fur fandom or ANY fandom in its
infancy. It's also called Growing Pains. Fur fandom is expanding,
reaching out and there will be clashing and squabbles and such. Its only
natural BUT nothing can be FORCED. Things just have to grow at their own
pace. I've done this. I've gone through the growing pains of expanding
from mainly sexual art to now non sexual. I was scared as hell BUT it
paid off! I'm now more confident and at ease and have found a larger
slice of fandom to touch with my art. Just flipping thorugh my old
Previews catalog, I find MANY new furry comics, not all of them sexual
either. Who knows how many more will be popping up? Fur fandom can't be
FORCED to grow in this way or that, it can only be GUIDED gently.
: Also Mr. Henderson...the majority of us artists AREN'T forcing our stuff
: down your throat...again, if it's something you don't like, just say no,
: and don't come to FurryCons..period..! Simple as that.. ;) "Out of
: sight...out of mind!"
BINGO! Exactly! Don't like it, turn the page. If all he can see is the
sex, then he should go out and search for the non sex in fur fandom. So
far, all I see is him lamenting and bitching and not looking. He's NOT
trying to expand and is just in a rut (no pun intended), a deep hole and
shouting to the sky, and totally ignoring the fact there's a tunnel
beside him that can and does lead out. I found that tunnel and it led
me out to greater possibilities. I'm even more inspired than ever before
and just can't wait to share what I've found.
: ..and thank you Tygger for your insights!! You hit the nail on the
: head!! :)
Thanks! Just simply stepping back and looking, hon, nothing more. Hell,
if I, a very absent minded and hectic and at times very dense Tygger, can
find it, I'm sure he can too. IF he looks.
Dr. Cat
: of sex. If someone asked you to show them what fur fandom was all about, what
: would you show them? I've been asked several times, and have been rather hard
: pressed to come up with some good general interest material, particularly in
: good sizable numbers.
If I felt it was appropriate to show a particular individual non-sexual
furry material only, I could and would show them: Fission Chicken,
Fusion, Samurai Cat, Critters, Stinz, The Dreamery, Lynx Ynx, Captain
Jack, Usagi Yojimbo, Space Usagi, and prints, gifs, and sculptures by
Joy Marie Ledet, Eric Shwartz, Terrie Smith, Michelle Light, Lela Dowling,
Real Musgrave, 'Manda Dee, Shon Howell, Steve Martin, Daphne Lage, and
many others. Some of those artists have done sexual pieces, some of them
have not. But each and every single one of them has done one or more
non-sexual pieces that I have purchased and could show to someone curious
about what "furry art" is.
This is all off the top of my head, without "cheating" by going around my
apartment to actually LOOK at what I have. And I'm not listing all the
"non-fannish" things I could show someone to explaing what furry art is
either, like Lion King, Ninja Turtles, Sonic the Hedgehog, Captain
Carrot, Biker Mice From Mars, Calvin and Hobbes, Krazy Kat, Swak Kats,
Talespin, Winnie the Pooh, Gummi Bears, Mickey Mouse, Bugs Bunny,
Animaniacs, Secret of Nimh, Watership Down (well ok, that's fannish),
This all comes from the mind and keyboard of someone who happens to love
erotic art and doesn't think it's a problem. If someone who does think
it's a problem can't think up much to show potential fans when I can,
they're just not trying very hard...
***********************************************************************
Dr. Cat / Dragons's Eye Productions ** Come play DragonSpires!
******************************************** ftp.eden.com pub/dspire
(Dragonspires is a graphic mud for PCs.) ** has everything you need!
P. S. Mythical Creations. Jordan Greywolf. Eric Elliot. Ken Macklin.
Cerebus the Aardvark. Quack. Adolescent Radioactive Black-Belt
Hamsters. This years puppet show at Confurence. The Beauty and
the Beast tv series. Michael Whelan. All of the costumes I saw
at Confurenc this year except one. Inherit the Earth. I could
keep this up ALL night!
Dr. Cat
: and the attitudes of the 60s. There really isn't anything today driving furry
: artists other than money, which I think that people like R. Crumb, Spain
: Rodriquez, Will Eisner, Larry Todd, Bill Griffith and Vaugn Bode would be
: embarassed by.
You really hurt your credibility when you overstate your case like this.
I'm sure there are furry artists who are driven by the desire for quality
AND they want to make lots of money. Or want to express their feelings
and opinions through their art and they want to make money. Or they want
to increase the popularity of furries and they want money. Or some
combination of more than two motivations. I seriously doubt there are
many who ONLY want to make money and have no other motivations at all.
Maybe not any. And I'm sure there are some who don't want to make money
at all - such as the ones who have never charged any money for their
work, ever.
Frankly, an artist would have to be either naive or stupid to choose
furry art as their medium if their only goal was to make money. It's not
a big money-making area compared to a lot of other things they could be
drawing. So whether they have moneymaking as a motivator or not, I would
think just about ALL furry artists also have the motivator of wanting
to draw something that they personally like, and they happen to like
pictures of furries.
If you've really gotten so cynical that you must speak in indefensible
absolutes ("isn't anything today driving furry artists other than money")
maybe you should be looking towards the need to heal your own cynicism
before you try to help promote the fandom.
D.M. Quozl Falk
[...]
: Hamsters. This years puppet show at Confurence. The Beauty and
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
grumble...grumblegrumble.....grumble....grumble....grumblegrumblegrumble....
I HOPE SOMEONE MANAGED TO GET THIS ON TAPE!!!!!!!
grumble.....................................................................
....Quozl!
(Friggin' floods and mudslides....)
Skant
[snip]
: The fact of the matter is that I do keep requesting someone to prove me wrong,
: and produce a single comic book from any other fandom that has the same level
: of sex as almost 40% of furry comics do. I keep hearing about fanzines, but
: these are not comics. If I'm so wrong, it should be pretty easy to prove it,
: shouldn't it?
It's very hard to 'prove you wrong', because every time someone sites hard
evidence, you declare it invalid and go on ranting for someone to prove you
wrong. Tuning out and ignoring the opposition is not an effective method of
enforcing your point.
: SS> If the majority of the furry population felt as you did, then furry
: SS> wouldn't have the 'problems' you indicate. Either that, or everyone
: SS> would have left.
: If you've been reading the messages here, most people *DO* agree with me. You
Ummmm... yeah... sure... uhuh... }:> It's gotta look that way when you
turn a blind eye and ignore anyone who disagrees with you. As far as I can
tell, it looks like a handful of people that agree (more or less) with your
views on the matter who keep posting up a storm and a buncha people that
post counter arguments. Sometimes the posts total more on one side or the
other, but my impression is that they've totalled more on the side
disagreeing with you. However, I point out that none of this means anything
at all.
Only a small percentage of furdom is on a.f.f. And that percentage is not a
meanful cross section of the furry community. This is further biased in
that the number of people that actually post and how often they post is
absolutely unrepresentive as a cross section of the furry community.
Therefore, it really doesn't matter who 'wins' this shouting match. It's
just a small puddle next to a lake.
So no... you have no evidence that most people *DO* agree with you
whatsoever.
Perhaps I am simply not as...rrr... bold as you are.
: seem to have a very all-or-nothing, black-or-white pattern of thinking. I do
Oh. (?!)
(Now there's something I'm not often accused of)
: not particularly like where fur fandom is today, and I don't see good things
: for the future. I do, however, strongly feel that fur fandom is worth saving,
: that it can be saved, and that it should be saved. I do not, as would be
I haven't seen where fur fandom has indicated any desire to be 'saved'.
I've seen where a few people think that they need to change the rest of
furry fandom for its own good. Is this what you are talking about?
I didn't see masses of furries at Confurence indicating a desire to be
saved. Heck. I didn't see any furries indicating a desire to be saved.
(Poor foxes being attacked by Tygger excepted };> )
Most all of them seemed to be having a grand ol' time. How odd.
: clear to anyone who actually reads what I have said, advocate getting rid of
: all sex. Heck, I used to receive most of the x-rated furry fanzines in
Your tone in this regard tends to be inconsistently anti-sex. Sometimes
I've seen you say things that are perfectly clear and good points, and at
other times you say things which are pretty much out of it and somewhat
irrational. Almost like there are two different people that post from your
account? (Dr. Henderson and Mr. Hyde!) }:>
: production, as well as contributing to several. The fact of the matter is
: that we need to produce something *OTHER* than sex, not something in *PLACE*
: of sex. If someone asked you to show them what fur fandom was all about, what
I agree with your point. However, I disgree in that I believe this is
already how things are. Furry fandom creates lots of stuff which is *OTHER*
than sex.
: would you show them? I've been asked several times, and have been rather hard
: pressed to come up with some good general interest material, particularly in
: good sizable numbers.
Ummmm. I don't have any problem. Do you only subscribe to and buy the
dirty stuff or something? I myself buy mostly the dirty stuff, and I have
no shortage of non-erotic works. I've seen tons of stuff in either
category.
--
_________________________________________________________________________
| ////////////// The evil nasty wicked bad Skant Dragon! \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ |
| "I am going to blow up the Earth!! It obstructs my view of Venus!!" |
| "Holy chameleon attack dwagins, Batman!" }:> sk...@netcom.com |
|_________________________________________________________________________|
Skant
: :[snipped]
: You keep saying Furry fandom needs to be "saved", and everyone else has
: been pointing out that Furryfandom is *growing*, not dying. You keep
: saying everyone agrees with you, and I see most saying otherwise, trying
: to show you why.
: You have been showing at least to me, that you have a very closed mind. I
: can't say for others, though, but that's how I see it coming from you.
: I'm just about ready to give up *trying* to get you to see what I and
: others have been trying to say to you, because you don't seem to be
: listening.
I don't argue with Brian for the purposes of trying to change his mind. I
know he won't, since he becomes irrational to prove his points when they are
threatened. No. The only point is to provide counter argument so that
others who are reading don't think Brian speaks for the rest of us.
Dr. Cat
: : Hamsters. This years puppet show at Confurence. The Beauty and
: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: grumble...grumblegrumble.....grumble....grumble....grumblegrumblegrumble....
: I HOPE SOMEONE MANAGED TO GET THIS ON TAPE!!!!!!!
Some guy taped part of it, though I don't think he got the whole thing.
If you want to try to find him, I'll tell you the one thing I remember
about him - he was the one sitting to the right of me in the audienc.
Hope that helps. ;)
Matthew Cody
Tygger is doing commissions?! Cool!!! Now all that needs to happen is for
Tygger to come bouncing to Akon 6 and I'll be one happy furry. :)
BTW, I would like to introduce myself. I'm known to many as P.J
Silverfox. This is my first posting to this area. I've been reading all
of your posts now for the past several weeks and feel comfortable enough
now to make my existance known.
P.J Silverfox
P.S Does anyone know about CF East? I've heard about it but, I have'nt
seen any info.
Brent Eric Edwards
>Brian Henderson (brian.h...@ectech.com) wrote:
>: and the attitudes of the 60s. There really isn't anything today driving furry
>: artists other than money, which I think that people like R. Crumb, Spain
>: Rodriquez, Will Eisner, Larry Todd, Bill Griffith and Vaugn Bode would be
>: embarassed by.
>
>furry art as their medium if their only goal was to make money. It's not
>a big money-making area compared to a lot of other things they could be
>drawing. So whether they have moneymaking as a motivator or not, I would
>think just about ALL furry artists also have the motivator of wanting
>to draw something that they personally like, and they happen to like
>pictures of furries.
>
Yipe! The two of us are agreeing. How is that possible?
Jim Groat is one of our most famous artists: he's had several comics
(Equine, Red Shetland, and others) for a number of years. When his
new child arrived (congrats again, Jim!), we passed around a hat for
him at CF6 -- because we knew that he couldn't easily afford the
c-section on the money he makes from his comics.
Tygger is another one of our famous artists. We had to pass the
hat for her, as well, to get her to a con in Chicago.
If anyone feels that furfandom is a quick way to make money, they're
nuts. It may help a little bit -- a good artist can make enough for the
plane fare, the hotel room, and food during the con, and maybe a bit
extra -- but it's hardly a way to get rich.
Brent Edwards
Timothy D Fay
>Hmph... I had always thought of this idea of bringing Furry fandom to the
>Donahue show.... It would indeed piss off the likes of Jesse Helms, no
>matter whether sex is brought in or not! ("Furries are Satanic Demons!
>They must be eradicated!")
The only problem is that the audience probably couldn't tell which group of
right-wing, gun-toting loonies are the furries...
--
Reply to: fayx...@maroon.tc.umn.edu
-- http://www.tc.umn.edu/nlhome/m279/fayxx001 --
"My mental facilities are TWICE what yours are -- you pea brain!"
-Percival McLeach
Jeffrey J. Mancebo
: Perhaps if you can contain that gigantic intellect of yours for a microsecond
: or two, maybe you can enlighten the Great Unwashed as to why the CF artshow
: has to be separated into two sections. I mean, if erotic "furry" art is not
: a problem, why ghettoize all these wonderful and sensitive works of sexual
: expression?
boojum *giggles*, "Given your signature file do you have room to talk
about intellect? Anyway, the erotic work ISN'T being Ghettoized. It is
seperated for two reasons."
"First of all most furries realise that not all furries want to see
erotic works. By seperating the erotic from the non-erotic we give the
viewers the choice of what the do and don't wan't to see."
"Second of all, may parents want to let their children see what sort
of art is in the Art show. Children are NOT allowed to see erotic art
(by law). By seperating the erotic stuff we can allow children in to
see the non-erotic art."
"While you might want to stop all production of erotic furry art, I DO
recognize that different people enjoy viewing different things. I don't
force my furry art onto people who don't like furry art, I don't force my
erotic furry art onto people who don't like erotic furry art, I don't force
my music onto those who don't like my music. The rules are very simple. Do
your best to allow others the freedom to choose what they do and don't enjoy
without giving UP what you enjoy."
boojum the brown bunny
YSEN...@delphi.com
>.... : I HOPE SOMEONE MANAGED TO GET THIS ON TAPE!!!!!!!
> Some guy taped part of it, though I don't think he got the whole thing.
I taped the first half (up to the duet) when my batteries died. There were
at least two others videotaping, but I don't remember who they were.
- Ysengrin
Rainbow V 1.10 for Delphi - Test Drive
Jonathan L Miller
: Timothy D Fay (fayx...@maroon.tc.umn.edu) wrote:
: : Dr. Cat (c...@eden.com) wrote:
: : Perhaps if you can contain that gigantic intellect of yours for a microsecond
: You have a small penis, don't you? }:>
Jeeze, go away for a few months, come back and what do we have? The best
answer to one of Tim's posts I've ever seen! Congrats Skant, on finally
getting to the bottom of the biggest mystery on aff...what makes Tim Fay
tick?
(Seriously Tim, all in fun...ya know I love ya, big guy. Ok, maybe love
is stating it way too highly. How about "Ya know I'm continually amused
by you." Yeah, that sounds good.)
Hi everybody! *wave*
jonathan.
Karwood
Barooo? Taping? :) As in highlights that I missed?
Remind me to start collecting other people's videotapes so I can edit this
highlights tape together...
-- Karwood
Someday I'm gonna change my tagline....
David Schuman
>>erotic art and doesn't think it's a problem. If someone who does think
>>it's a problem can't think up much to show potential fans when I can,
>>they're just not trying very hard...
>
>has to be separated into two sections. I mean, if erotic "furry" art is not
>a problem, why ghettoize all these wonderful and sensitive works of sexual
>expression?
art, Furry or not. To me erotic art is defined as art that shows sexual
acts or want of sexual acts, art that just shows a naked body is not
erotic unless the body is posed in a sexialy explicit manor, it's the
diffrence between an @desc that calls attention to the fact that the
character is naked as opposed to the desc that does not mention clothes.
I find people who go into public areas on the muck with erotic
descriptions deplorable, but I do not complain, because I just do not LOOK!
(it's called freedom of choice.) The argument about childern to me is
BULL$#:+, The net itself is full of "erotic" stuff, and any child tat has
access to the net has access to erotica. The only way to stop that is to
censor the net, and that is not only costly and impossible, but
(americanly, I know that not everyone here is american) unconstitutional
under the 1st ammendment.
As for the art issue, I believe there should be two seperate areas,
because "erotic" art, anywhere (in the U.S.) is controlled, why should it be
any diffrent if it's furrys, not humans.
>
> "My mental facilities are TWICE what yours are -- you pea brain!"
> -Percival McLeach
Does this mean you have two peas for a brain?