SAVAGE VS. THE FURRIES: WE WIN!

17 views
Skip to first unread message

Joe Strike

unread,
Aug 20, 2002, 11:05:36 PM8/20/02
to
Kinda, sorta... here's the germane quote from this week's
entirely-dedicated-to-the-topic-of-furries column:

...While I did make one wee mistake in my column about furries (for the
record: not all furries are into fursuited sex or "modified" stuffed
animals), in no way did I imply that there was something wrong with
being a furry."

The dialog continues thru the rest of the column, with several furs
taking issue with Savage's previous column (for some reason he didn't
run my letter, the bastard - but he ran yours, Ostrich...) & ends with
the following zinger:

"Someone who gets rock hard or dripping wet when dressed up like a fox
or raccoon or a chipmunk makes a rough sort of sense. But someone who
fantasizes about being an animal or hangs out with people who do without
the excuse/cover of sexual fetish or compulsion? That's just sick."

I guess in Savage's book it's better to be a fursuit sex fiend than a
lifestyler - which might put him in the same camp as some aff posters
(JUST A JOKE - DON'T FLAME ME!!!)

Link to his column:

http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0234/savage.php

Madain

unread,
Aug 21, 2002, 11:51:26 AM8/21/02
to

If the furries are doing nothing wrong, then why does this kind of stuff
keep popping up?

"Sorry, Dan, but your "AIDS scared them away from sex and into fucking
Pluto" theory is way off. When I first moved to Silicon Valley the housing
market was tight and I had to rent a room in a house full of strangers. I
wound up with a "furry" roommate. He spent all his money and free time
traveling all over the country to go to furry "conventions" to buy "art"
(read: "cartoon animal porn"). He was, by any social standards, a freak. He
could barely hold a conversation with me because I didn't know the furry
lingo. Everyone he brought into the house was a different "animal" with a
different fetish. My theory: Furries are often too ugly or socially awkward
to score with "normal" people. When they find their "culture" on the
Internet it gives them something to belong to. And if you're a sweaty,
overweight, and socially awkward dude on the outside, it must be liberating
to fantasize about being a beautiful and majestic centaur inside. I'm still
good friends with one furry guy I met through my ex-roommate. He's pretty
much normal, except that he wishes he was a cute, skinny, fuzzy animal
because he's got some body issues that get in the way of real relationships
with his fellow human beings. Those body issues are what prevented him from
having healthy friendships and what drove him to finding friends online in
the first place. Needless to say, I don't live with furries anymore. Now I
rent a room with a good, wholesome, God-fearing gay man, and I only have to
listen to conversations about how to hook up in 30 minutes or less on
gay.com. -We're All Terrifying Freaks "

-From another Savage column

I would take a good long look within before saying that the enemies are
prejudicial. They may just be trying to help.

-Esper


Joe Strike

unread,
Aug 21, 2002, 2:09:54 PM8/21/02
to
Sorry if I gave anyone the impression I consider Savage (or anyone) an 'enemy'
of furryism (whatever that is). There's certainly enough here in Furryworld to
make the most open-minded person do a double-take; never mind fursuit sex, I'm
sure there's plenty of mundanes out there who'd be freaked by the mildest furry
cheesecake pin-ups. Furry isn't like WWF or NFL fans or even Trekkers. No
matter whether you're a fursuit sex fiend, a 'lifestyler' who considers himself
a raccoon trapped in a human body, or just have a complete set of 'Pogo'
reprints, it's all based on the make-believe premise of intelligent,
anthropomorphised animals. That by definition puts us out of the mainstream and
an easy target for hoots of derision. (Nobody puts down guys who watch 12 NFL
games a week, because what they're overly into is considered 'normal' to start
with.) And yes, here in the realm of make-believe we probably have more than
our share of folks who feel less than at home in the real world.

My problem is when Savage blithely spreads the misinformation that furry =
fursuit sex, or the letter writer you reprint gives *his* deep analysis of
what's wrong with furries & makes the same mistake - that *all* furries are
socially maladjusted misfits. I'm not sure how such misperceptions - how
focusing on 1 strata of furry folks, whether it's 3 or 30% of the total, 'help'
us. (Unless one is considering banishing all the 'sweaty, overweight, and
socially awkward dudes' from the scene - as if such a thing were even possible
- to make us look better to the guy who wrote that letter.) The thing to do, or
at least the thing I try to do when I talk to folks 1 on 1, is to let them know
the wide, wide range of folks into the furry scene & the many, *many* forms
furry self-expression & interest can take.

Akal Ashata Alis

unread,
Aug 21, 2002, 2:10:23 PM8/21/02
to

Wow... not all furry people are overweight. Jeeze. But I do see what he
means. Lots of people take to the net for a lack of social skills. Anonymous
as it can be, people get a nice kick out of doing stuff with other people in
their own little fantasy.
In my case, well.. I'm way too light to fall into that overweight
catagory (maybe 130?). Still......


A'A'Alis
One fox, No time.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.371 / Virus Database: 206 - Release Date: 6/13/02


Swipecat

unread,
Aug 21, 2002, 3:01:36 PM8/21/02
to
Joe Strike <joes...@nyc.rr.com> wrote --
> ..

> The dialog continues thru the rest of the column, with several furs
> taking issue with Savage's previous column (for some reason he didn't
> run my letter, the bastard - but he ran yours, Ostrich...) & ends with
> ..

Too goddamn right he ran Ostrich's letter. Ostrich seems determined to
torpedo furrydom's reputation. I mean that seriously. How could
anybody have expected Dan to react other than the way he did:

Ostrich:
> Your correspondent seeking a modified fursuit should look at
> www.fursuitsex.com, a fairly new business, run by a fur, to produce and
> distribute fursuit sex videos. They sell the suits once the video is made.

Dan Savage:
> I'm a little reluctant to print your letter, Ostrich, because I'm afraid that
> supply won't be able to keep up with demand. I mean, think of all the people
> out there just dying to own an actual fursuit that some COMPLETE STRANGER
> wore while shooting a porn video. Anyway, I checked out the Web site you
> mentioned, and it's not for the faint of heart. There's something about the
> combo of big-eyed, human-sized, mascots/plushies with decidedly unfurry pink
> human dicks sticking out of their crotches that佑hrist Almighty, I've had
> some trouble sleeping at night. Fair warning: If you're going to Disney World
> in the near future, don't go to fursuitsex.com until well after your
> vacation.

--
Swipecat

CAndersen (Kimba)

unread,
Aug 21, 2002, 3:25:15 PM8/21/02
to
My favorite bit of misinformation came from a "Fed-Up Rabbit",
describing the history of 'furry fandom':
"Some of the early sketches were sexy, erotic, or pornographic."

"Early"? Like, "before noon on any day you care to name"?

Ostrich

unread,
Aug 21, 2002, 3:34:37 PM8/21/02
to
Swipecat <swip...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:7c5aa033.02082...@posting.google.com...

>
> Ostrich seems determined to torpedo furrydom's reputation.

Not at all. I was merely being helpful. The site exists, and they're
selling exactly what the person who wrote to him was wanting. I'm not a
guardian of the fandom's reputation, nor am I out to attack it. To be
either of those things, I'd first have to be convinced that the public
actually cared one way or the other about furrydom. I've seen no evidence
for that to date.

-Ostrich! <")


Madain

unread,
Aug 21, 2002, 3:39:12 PM8/21/02
to

If the furries are doing nothing wrong, then why does this kind of stuff

Rann Aridorn

unread,
Aug 21, 2002, 4:14:30 PM8/21/02
to
"Ostrich" <x...@xxx.com> was so distracted by the Puma Twins doing a
poledance that they wrote:

>> Ostrich seems determined to torpedo furrydom's reputation.
>
> Not at all. I was merely being helpful. The site exists, and
> they're selling exactly what the person who wrote to him was wanting.
> I'm not a guardian of the fandom's reputation, nor am I out to attack
> it. To be either of those things, I'd first have to be convinced that
> the public actually cared one way or the other about furrydom. I've
> seen no evidence for that to date.

Indeed. I've several times mocked the view that "This will destroy all
of furrydom!" I've pointed out that a few negative articles aren't going
to cause any laws to be made that said "Anyone who participates in furry
must be hunt down and shot", to which the answer is inevitably "OH YES
THEY WILL!"
The whole basis of this seems to be blaming "the humans" or the
government not for stuff they have done, but for stuff these furries in
particular THINK THEY MIGHT DO.
Look at BDSM. Every single time it shows up on a television show, it's
either vilified or mocked. Court shows have lawyers regularly taking an
interest in BDSM as proof of a criminal state of mind, as if bondage &
domination were synonymous with rape.
And yet, no one's out there hunting down dominatrixes with sniper
rifles. BDSM magazines and art are as freely available as anything else.
BDSM is exactly the sort of thing that the paranoid peoples' imagined
Government of Tyranny would like to stamp out, and yet it's going
stronger than ever, with a number of exhibits of "classic" BDSM art and
photographs taken over fifty years ago showing up in museums.
So, shut up, keep doing your thing, and watch for the Winger Exhibition,
coming to the Louvre in 2033.

--
-Rann Aridorn

========

You WILL worship the cuteness!
http://www.hamtaro.com
Little hamsters, big adventures.
Hamtaro... anime hamsters, providing some giggles, some smiles, and a
good deal of aural prozac with their theme music.
Hamtaro: The cure for flamewars.
Put this in your hampsterdance and click it!

Brian Henderson

unread,
Aug 21, 2002, 6:40:13 PM8/21/02
to

You're not being helpful, you're an idiot and a freak. Go find
somewhere else to play.

Brian Henderson

unread,
Aug 21, 2002, 6:43:12 PM8/21/02
to

No, early like in the late 70's/early 80's, and there were really very
few 'pornographic' images period. I mean, if you go through 'Q',
which was the first furry "adult" fanzine, there is NOTHING that
compares to what is normally seen today. The general consensus, as
was official policy for "Furversion" was "You can draw the parts, you
can draw the action, but you can't draw the parts in action".

Oh, I'm sure someone, somewhere was drawing it, but it sure wasn't
open. People at least had TACT.

Rann Aridorn

unread,
Aug 21, 2002, 6:52:50 PM8/21/02
to
Brian Henderson <cep...@directvinternet.com> was so distracted by the Puma
Twins doing a poledance that they wrote:

> Oh, I'm sure someone, somewhere was drawing it, but it sure wasn't
> open. People at least had TACT.

Well, you know what they say. You get tit for tact.

no one in particular

unread,
Aug 21, 2002, 8:06:51 PM8/21/02
to
P.S.
If it is true as had already been said in ninety different ways by so
damn many people that an abacus would come in handy that the outside world
could care less about furry and laughs the same way they do about other
things they could care less about(who's President, their children, their
relationships, their local town government, etc.) then why is Ostrich still
pursued?

"Brian Henderson" <cep...@directvinternet.com> wrote in message
news:jl58mu08se6rup8pi...@4ax.com...

(snip)

> You're not being helpful, you're an idiot and a freak. Go find
> somewhere else to play.

(tossed down glass of brandy and this note)
My two cents: I like BOTH Ostrich AND Mike Hirtes. I'd let you use my
scouter, but Rann says it wouldn't fit since I have a swollen head. Just
take my word. Both have UPA Power Levels of over fifty thousand and could
bench press many tons of irony.
-Wayd Wolf, scaling sarchasms with ease, yodelling all the way...

P.S.
This is a Post Script. The first was a Pre Script. Top and Bottom
Posting brought to you by the Council for Bookending.

Ostrich

unread,
Aug 21, 2002, 8:08:47 PM8/21/02
to
Brian Henderson <cep...@directvinternet.com> wrote in message
news:jl58mu08se6rup8pi...@4ax.com...

> You're not being helpful

Well, obviously not from your perspective, but then you're not looking for
an SPH'ed fursuit for your boyfriend either.

-Ostrich! <")


no one in particular

unread,
Aug 21, 2002, 8:23:39 PM8/21/02
to

"Rann Aridorn" <rann...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9271B5E173ECA...@63.240.76.16...

> Brian Henderson <cep...@directvinternet.com> was so distracted by the Puma
> Twins doing a poledance that they wrote:
>
> > Oh, I'm sure someone, somewhere was drawing it, but it sure wasn't
> > open. People at least had TACT.
>
> Well, you know what they say. You get tit for tact.
>
> --
> -Rann Aridorn

Jumping Jiminy Crickets! It has a sense of humor!

(bows)

I was beginning to think you were humorless and in reference to your
"captain of the garbage scow" line, I was going to bring out your panties,
found in the cargo hold just today...

(holds arms apart as far as he can yet the small tent sized panties hang
with enough material to upholster a love seat)

Glad I didn't have to pull those babies out to provoke a sense of humor.
We now know that you need openings for really bad puns. Around here, one
comes by every so many hours.
-Wayd Wolf, grinning, ducking, running for cubicle...

Kathmandu

unread,
Aug 21, 2002, 8:27:30 PM8/21/02
to
"Ostrich" <x...@xxx.com> wrote in message
news:ak0q20$kan$1...@velox.critter.net...

> Swipecat <swip...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:7c5aa033.02082...@posting.google.com...
> >
> > Ostrich seems determined to torpedo furrydom's reputation.
>
> Not at all. I was merely being helpful. The site exists, and they're
> selling exactly what the person who wrote to him was wanting.

That's funny, what I read was a girl wanting to please her boyfriend by
purchasing a sexy catgirl costume. How that is satified by sending Dan
Savage a link to a gay sex paysite with the added kink of fursuits is beyond
me. Helpful? My ass.


I'm not a
> guardian of the fandom's reputation, nor am I out to attack it.

Oh really, your denial falls flat in light of your previous actions. You
don't seem to miss many opportunities to expose the "freak" contingent
whenever possible. Being one of them skews your perspectives a touch though
I suppose. Acceptance through exposure is a nice tactic but it is infurating
to the others in the fandom who don't share your (and your ilk's)
philosophy.


To be
> either of those things, I'd first have to be convinced that the public
> actually cared one way or the other about furrydom.

How painfully ignorant you are concerning the real world. Because of the
publicity the nutballs of this fandom have perpetuated, mothers pull their
children away from furry mascots. You get this sickening smirk when you tell
someone you are a furry because they have seen the MTV special and "know"
all about you. You are correct, the public doesn't care, until they meet a
furry in the flesh that is.

I've seen no evidence
> for that to date.

Hmmmm, Dan Savage using MTV and Vanity Fair's distorted information as the
basis of knowledge of the furry fandom seems to me to be a sharp poke in the
eye with a sharp stick. Having to explain to people that, no I don't get off
on mascot fursuits nor do I think my totem spirit animal wants me to pork a
Meeko plushie. You need to look harder for evidence, like beyond your nose
perhaps.


--
Kathmandu


Sculptor, artist and writer.

http://www.cableone.net/kathmandu

Be sure to read Salt and Foam

http://www.cableone.net/kathmandu/salt.htm

Also the author of the Sabrina Online Fanfic, The Studio: Photogenisis

http://www.cableone.net/kathmandu/studio.htm

Be sure to check out the Uncle Kat's Story Hour at

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Uncle_Kats_Story_Hour/


CAndersen (Kimba)

unread,
Aug 21, 2002, 11:47:34 PM8/21/02
to
Brian Henderson <cep...@directvinternet.com> wrote:

Wow. You so completely missed the points involved that I couldn't snip
anything out for fear of being accused of destroying the context.

Point one: Writer-to-Savage "Fed Up Rabbit" was trying to create a false
aura of distance from anything like furry porn by stating that such things
existed only in the early days of furry fandom.

Point two: Since, as you pointed out elsewhere, every furry con has an
"adult" section in their art show, I pondered that the writer could only be
truthful if the meaning of "early" was that it's the first thing an artist
draws in a day.

But far be it from me to take away an opportunity for you to reiterate your
tiresome chant about people dragging furry fandom to hell in a handbasket.
AGAIN.

If it's so bothersome, why DO furry cons make sure that it is a fixture at
every gathering?

Karl Xydexx Jorgensen

unread,
Aug 22, 2002, 12:41:57 AM8/22/02
to
Madain wrote:
>I would take a good long look within before saying that the enemies are
>prejudicial. They may just be trying to help.

Doubtful. The ones who are helping are the ones speaking out and providing an
alternate viewpoint or what the fandom is really like, not the ones who are
parroting the stereotypes and inaccuracies.

--
_________________________________________________
Karl Xydexx Jorgensen / Xydexx Squeakypony, KSC
Anthrofurry Infocenter:
http://www.xydexx.com/anthrofurry

Karl Xydexx Jorgensen

unread,
Aug 22, 2002, 12:44:59 AM8/22/02
to
Joe Strike wrote:
>Kinda, sorta... here's the germane quote from this week's
>entirely-dedicated-to-the-topic-of-furries column:
>
>...While I did make one wee mistake in my column about furries (for the
>record: not all furries are into fursuited sex or "modified" stuffed
>animals), in no way did I imply that there was something wrong with
>being a furry."

It's a Good Thing to see Dan Savage retract his previous generalizations and
let folks know not everyone takes their interest in the fandom to a sexual
level. Looks like the cynics and naysayers who keep telling us the fandom is
doomed have been proven wrong yet again.

While the only previous attempts to deal with bad publicity resulted in
the formation of a hate group, their departure may be a sign that the field is
finally clear for the reasonable fans to start working together and speaking up
when the media gets their facts wrong.

Furry fandom has gotten good press in the past, and the only way it wouldn't
get it in the future is if we didn't try to.

Brian Henderson

unread,
Aug 22, 2002, 1:16:56 AM8/22/02
to
On Thu, 22 Aug 2002 03:47:34 GMT, "CAndersen (Kimba)"
<Kimba...@aol.com> wrote:

>Point one: Writer-to-Savage "Fed Up Rabbit" was trying to create a false
>aura of distance from anything like furry porn by stating that such things
>existed only in the early days of furry fandom.

I understand that, and "Fed Up Rabbit" probably didn't know about the
fandom before 3 years ago, so what he has to say about the past hardly
matters. Unfortunately, the majority of furs weren't around back when
the fandom originated, and as I seem to remember someone on Savage's
site saying, it was the 1970s, not the early 1990s.

>Point two: Since, as you pointed out elsewhere, every furry con has an
>"adult" section in their art show, I pondered that the writer could only be
>truthful if the meaning of "early" was that it's the first thing an artist
>draws in a day.

I don't know that *EVERY* furry con has one. Do they? Haven't been
to some of them so I don't know.

>If it's so bothersome, why DO furry cons make sure that it is a fixture at
>every gathering?

Because it sells? Because that seems to be what a lot of furry fans
want? I think it's funny that very few non-furry conventions feel the
need to have an adult section. Why is that?

Rann Aridorn

unread,
Aug 22, 2002, 1:27:47 AM8/22/02
to
Brian Henderson <cep...@directvinternet.com> was so distracted by the
Puma Twins doing a poledance that they wrote:

>>If it's so bothersome, why DO furry cons make sure that it is a
>>fixture at every gathering?
>
> Because it sells? Because that seems to be what a lot of furry fans
> want? I think it's funny that very few non-furry conventions feel the
> need to have an adult section. Why is that?

Because from what I've seen, the adult stuff is right out there mingled
with the clean stuff, so long as it's clearly-marked and the displays
are sticker-censored.

Matt Harpold

unread,
Aug 22, 2002, 2:59:44 AM8/22/02
to

> How painfully ignorant you are concerning the real world. Because of the
> publicity the nutballs of this fandom have perpetuated, mothers pull their
> children away from furry mascots.

Dude, this is utter hogwash. You honestly expect me to believe that A) your
average working mom knows what furry fandom is, and B) gives enough of a
shit about it to be afraid of it, and C) is paranoid enough to believe that
the mascot at a Mariners game is going to bend her kid over?

Ignorant about the real world, indeed! I'd hate to see what your funhouse
mirror vision of the 'real world' is. Likely pretty panicky and paranoid,
I'd imagine.

You get this sickening smirk when you tell
> someone you are a furry because they have seen the MTV special and "know"
> all about you. You are correct, the public doesn't care, until they meet a
> furry in the flesh that is.
>
> I've seen no evidence
> > for that to date.

> Hmmmm, Dan Savage using MTV and Vanity Fair's distorted information as the
> basis of knowledge of the furry fandom seems to me to be a sharp poke in
the
> eye with a sharp stick. Having to explain to people that, no I don't get
off
> on mascot fursuits nor do I think my totem spirit animal wants me to pork
a
> Meeko plushie. You need to look harder for evidence, like beyond your nose
> perhaps.

Guess what, pal. Most people don't care about furry. 99.999% do not give
shit numero uno. They think about it as they're reading the magazine article
or watching the MTV special or whatever, then they forget about it. Nobody
cares. You're not important. Neither am I. So stop this whinging geek
martyrdom bullcrap and get over yourself. You'll have a lot more fun when
you calm down, take a deep breath, and repeat after me: 'NOBODY CARES.'

-Matt/Turbine Divinity

Baloo Ursidae

unread,
Aug 22, 2002, 4:49:55 AM8/22/02
to
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Ostrich <x...@xxx.com> wrote:
>> You're not being helpful
>
> Well, obviously not from your perspective, but then you're not looking for
> an SPH'ed fursuit for your boyfriend either.

Says he who booted a concientious objector from your show's cast after
he complained about having to listen to other castmembers child fetishes.

- --
Baloo


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE9ZKWyNtWkM9Ny9xURAi9FAJ97qtDP3ZQ9jiBzxXMOnPO3gb2L/ACffwXg
093x0Tb6v0GvxluvbSUplrw=
=ApbW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Dr. Cat

unread,
Aug 22, 2002, 7:54:29 AM8/22/02
to
no one in particular <wayd...@nothotmail.com> wrote:
: P.S.

: If it is true as had already been said in ninety different ways by so
: damn many people that an abacus would come in handy that the outside world
: could care less about furry and laughs the same way they do about other
: things they could care less about(who's President, their children, their
: relationships, their local town government, etc.) then why is Ostrich still
: pursued?

Because Furry Fandom has some obsessive nutcases?

(Ironically, most of them are in the furry porn business, or used to be.)

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

(Disclaimer: We put the "fan" in "fanatic"!)

Dr. Cat

unread,
Aug 22, 2002, 8:04:06 AM8/22/02
to
Kathmandu <kath...@cableone.com> wrote:
: "Ostrich" <x...@xxx.com> wrote:
:> Not at all. I was merely being helpful. The site exists, and they're

:> selling exactly what the person who wrote to him was wanting.

: That's funny, what I read was a girl wanting to please her boyfriend by
: purchasing a sexy catgirl costume. How that is satified by sending Dan
: Savage a link to a gay sex paysite with the added kink of fursuits is beyond
: me. Helpful? My ass.

Actually if you read the original column in question, the girl's boyfriend
wanted to be in a sexy catguy costume, and she wanted to get him one.

Sorry for interrupting with actual facts, please carry on arguing about all
the other things you're mad at Ostrich about. :X)

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

(Disclaimer: I don't think most guys would want a used fursuit from a gay sex
video, especially if the guy happens to be hetero (which the majority of guys
are). Dan Savage didn't think so either. But hey, failing to actually help
doesn't mean you didn't try. You might just suck at helping people!)

Ostrich

unread,
Aug 22, 2002, 10:33:29 AM8/22/02
to
Brian Henderson <cep...@directvinternet.com> wrote in message
news:hos8mu46hqv6c28fp...@4ax.com...

> I think it's funny that very few non-furry conventions feel the
> need to have an adult section.

The SF cons that I've been to don't bother separating art into 'adult' and
'non-adult'. It's all displayed together.

-Ostrich! <")


DishRoom1

unread,
Aug 22, 2002, 2:35:08 PM8/22/02
to
Kimba wrote --

Besides, didn't the furry fandom as it is today started with "Aldebo' (sp) and
non-porn stuff?

John Shughart
bluecollie55 at Yahoo

Brian Henderson

unread,
Aug 22, 2002, 5:44:59 PM8/22/02
to
On Thu, 22 Aug 2002 05:27:47 GMT, Rann Aridorn <rann...@attbi.com>
wrote:

>Because from what I've seen, the adult stuff is right out there mingled
>with the clean stuff, so long as it's clearly-marked and the displays
>are sticker-censored.

Just got back from SDCC not long ago, and while their art show is
pretty pathetic, there simply isn't any porn. Period. In fact, all
the way through SDCC, you won't see porn displayed openly as it has
been at furry cons.

I don't recall porn at Westercon last I was there either. Or any
other cons.

Brian Henderson

unread,
Aug 22, 2002, 5:50:07 PM8/22/02
to
On 22 Aug 2002 18:35:08 GMT, dish...@aol.com (DishRoom1) wrote:

>Besides, didn't the furry fandom as it is today started with "Aldebo' (sp) and
>non-porn stuff?

It started long before Albedo was a twinkle in Steve Gallacci's eye.

Rann Aridorn

unread,
Aug 22, 2002, 5:54:50 PM8/22/02
to
Brian Henderson <cep...@directvinternet.com> was so distracted by the
Puma Twins doing a poledance that they wrote:

> Just got back from SDCC not long ago, and while their art show is
> pretty pathetic, there simply isn't any porn. Period. In fact, all
> the way through SDCC, you won't see porn displayed openly as it has
> been at furry cons.

SDCC, as has been mentioned here a number of times before, mostly a
"trade show". Despite the fact that American comics have increasingly
shown women wearing nothing more than some artfully-placed shadows, most
of them want nothing to do with actual nudity or porn for fear of
parents' groups coming down on them more than ever.
At anime conventions, where it's mostly artists and non-commercial
dealers, everything mingles. And the commercial dealers that are there
sell everything they put out... ADV was hawking its new hentai series
Sakura Diaries right along with the reissuing of Robotech.

Cerulean

unread,
Aug 22, 2002, 6:16:16 PM8/22/02
to
Quoth Rann Aridorn:

>Brian Henderson:


>> I think it's funny that very few non-furry conventions feel the
>> need to have an adult section. Why is that?
>
>Because from what I've seen, the adult stuff is right out there mingled
>with the clean stuff, so long as it's clearly-marked and the displays
>are sticker-censored.

The SF/F convention art shows I've been to don't even censor anything.
The skanky vampire porn is right there where anyone can see it. Most
of them are actual paintings on canvas, which wouldn't easily
accomodate stickers. I'm pretty sure our marker-on-bristol fandom
invented the practice.

--
___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 ( hJJaLd-,,hemhue 6u!ua+s!7 s! auo-ou 'a)edS uI,,

Ben Raccoon

unread,
Aug 22, 2002, 6:39:46 PM8/22/02
to
Brian Henderson wrote in news:cnmamug6gbkk93hbu...@4ax.com:

> Just got back from SDCC not long ago, and while their art show is
> pretty pathetic, there simply isn't any porn. Period. In fact, all
> the way through SDCC, you won't see porn displayed openly as it has
> been at furry cons.

Really?

Well, you must not have been looking in the right spots. There were several
booths selling those paintings and prints of the naked and provocatively
dressed fantasy ladies. I believe at least one booth had some pretty
explicit ones, too, out on open display.


--
-- Ben Raccoon
http://www.furnation.com/ben_raccoon

Brian Henderson

unread,
Aug 22, 2002, 7:06:26 PM8/22/02
to
On Thu, 22 Aug 2002 05:27:47 GMT, Rann Aridorn <rann...@attbi.com>
wrote:

>Because from what I've seen, the adult stuff is right out there mingled

>with the clean stuff, so long as it's clearly-marked and the displays
>are sticker-censored.

Just got back from SDCC not long ago, and while their art show is


pretty pathetic, there simply isn't any porn. Period. In fact, all
the way through SDCC, you won't see porn displayed openly as it has
been at furry cons.

I don't recall porn at Westercon last I was there either. Or any
other cons.

Brian Henderson

unread,
Aug 22, 2002, 7:06:29 PM8/22/02
to
On 22 Aug 2002 18:35:08 GMT, dish...@aol.com (DishRoom1) wrote:

>Besides, didn't the furry fandom as it is today started with "Aldebo' (sp) and
>non-porn stuff?

It started long before Albedo was a twinkle in Steve Gallacci's eye.

Kathmandu

unread,
Aug 22, 2002, 7:21:59 PM8/22/02
to
"Dr. Cat" <c...@sullivan.realtime.net> wrote in message
news:3d64...@giga.realtime.net...

> Kathmandu <kath...@cableone.com> wrote:
> : "Ostrich" <x...@xxx.com> wrote:
> :> Not at all. I was merely being helpful. The site exists, and they're
> :> selling exactly what the person who wrote to him was wanting.
>
> : That's funny, what I read was a girl wanting to please her boyfriend by
> : purchasing a sexy catgirl costume. How that is satified by sending Dan
> : Savage a link to a gay sex paysite with the added kink of fursuits is
beyond
> : me. Helpful? My ass.
>
> Actually if you read the original column in question, the girl's boyfriend
> wanted to be in a sexy catguy costume, and she wanted to get him one.

I reread the article and frankly, I think it could be interpreted either
way. She really wasn't clear but then I am often wrong. Me projecting my
view into it, I figured the guy would want to dress her into the costume
since he can't see himself very well while wearing the thing. Be that as it
may, I thank you for pointing out the errors of my ways.

>
> Sorry for interrupting with actual facts, please carry on arguing about
all
> the other things you're mad at Ostrich about. :X)
>


No problem.

> (Disclaimer: I don't think most guys would want a used fursuit from a gay
sex
> video, especially if the guy happens to be hetero (which the majority of
guys
> are). Dan Savage didn't think so either. But hey, failing to actually
help
> doesn't mean you didn't try. You might just suck at helping people!)


Being that Ostritch's name never fails to be involved in some way with each
new insult, I (and many others I'm sure) would wish he would stop helping. I
reread the fursuitsex page just to be sure of my facts and I cannot see
anywhere it says the fursuits are availabe for sale.

Could you verify this for me? Thanx


Ostrich

unread,
Aug 22, 2002, 8:16:42 PM8/22/02
to
Kathmandu <kath...@cableone.com> wrote in message

> I
> reread the fursuitsex page just to be sure of my facts and I cannot see
> anywhere it says the fursuits are availabe for sale.
>
> Could you verify this for me? Thanx
>

http://www.fursuitsex.com/faq.html

-Ostrich! <")


David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus)

unread,
Aug 22, 2002, 8:48:41 PM8/22/02
to
On Wed, 21 Aug 2002 03:05:36 GMT, Joe Strike <joes...@nyc.rr.com>
wrote:

[...]

> "Someone who gets rock hard or dripping wet when dressed up like a fox
> or raccoon or a chipmunk makes a rough sort of sense. But someone who
> fantasizes about being an animal or hangs out with people who do without
> the excuse/cover of sexual fetish or compulsion? That's just sick."
>
> I guess in Savage's book it's better to be a fursuit sex fiend than a
> lifestyler

You have to understand that people normalize what there used to. A
person that is in an envioment where kinked peaple are commen. When
his work involves talking about fetishies then thouse things seem
(are) normal to him.

He has a conceptual frame work to understand them threw.

A new ager type, or a neo-pagen would be able to make "a rough sort of
sense" out of fur if it was presented as a spirtral thing. An Artist
would understand it if it was presented in artistic terms, as would an
athour if it was presented as a story telling vechal. Others would
understand it if it was presented as a sub-culture thing.


--
Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia. See
http://dformosa.zeta.org.au/~dformosa/Spelling.html to find out more.
Free the Memes.

Kathmandu

unread,
Aug 22, 2002, 9:04:25 PM8/22/02
to

"Matt Harpold" <mhar...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:AZ%89.243399$uj.3...@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net...


>
> > How painfully ignorant you are concerning the real world. Because of the
> > publicity the nutballs of this fandom have perpetuated, mothers pull
their
> > children away from furry mascots.
>
> Dude, this is utter hogwash. You honestly expect me to believe that A)
your
> average working mom knows what furry fandom is, and B) gives enough of a
> shit about it to be afraid of it, and C) is paranoid enough to believe
that
> the mascot at a Mariners game is going to bend her kid over?


Umm OK, you have stated your opinion. Thank you.

A) your average working mom knows what furry fandom is, and

She does now if she reads Vanity Fair or caught the MTV show. Admittedly,
the prospect is rather low unless she has net access and perhaps did a
search on information for just about any damned animal on the planet and
found someone's furry porn page. (This recenty happened to my sainted, white
haired Mom who is now online)

B) gives enough of a shit about it to be afraid of it, and

You obviously aren't a parent. They are paranoid about everything. After
watching that MTV special they may not pick up their kid and run screaming
but they will be under close scutiny for any wrong move.


>
> Ignorant about the real world, indeed! I'd hate to see what your funhouse
> mirror vision of the 'real world' is. Likely pretty panicky and paranoid,
> I'd imagine.

You are wrong, my life is none of those things. I am not stupid though and I
lock my doors and I have a gun in my nightstand. I have seen the evil that
lurks in the hearts of men. There is a vast potential of unbelievable
stupidity and the possibility for harm is boundless.


> Guess what, pal. Most people don't care about furry. 99.999% do not give
> shit numero uno. They think about it as they're reading the magazine
article
> or watching the MTV special or whatever, then they forget about it. Nobody
> cares. You're not important. Neither am I. So stop this whinging geek
> martyrdom bullcrap and get over yourself. You'll have a lot more fun when
> you calm down, take a deep breath, and repeat after me: 'NOBODY CARES.'

So you say, and I tend to agree with you on the low percentage of folks who
care. It's very much like homosexuality for the vast majoriy of average
shmoes, "don't really care as long as they keep their faggot shit to
themselves." Matthew Shepard ran into the small minority that did give a
shit though. It's that small minority that you have to worry about. It's the
small minority that beats the shit out of you and ties you to a fence in the
snow simply because you are different, a target.

You go back to your nice safe cubicle or whatever, I'm obviously paranoid
and delusional. Of course, Jasper Texas is only 40 miles from where I grew
up. Have a nice day.


Ka'haku Pôpoki`o`mauna

unread,
Aug 22, 2002, 11:16:56 PM8/22/02
to
On the dark and dreary 22 Aug 2002 Brian Henderson
<cep...@directvinternet.com> posted
news:hos8mu46hqv6c28fp...@4ax.com:

>>Point two: Since, as you pointed out elsewhere, every furry con has an
>>"adult" section in their art show, I pondered that the writer could
>>only be truthful if the meaning of "early" was that it's the first
>>thing an artist draws in a day.
>
> I don't know that *EVERY* furry con has one. Do they? Haven't been
> to some of them so I don't know.
>

C-ACE didn't.

--
Ka`haku Pôpoki`o`mauna
ICQ 162910303

Brian Henderson

unread,
Aug 23, 2002, 1:00:19 AM8/23/02
to
On 22 Aug 2002 22:39:46 GMT, Ben Raccoon
<ben_racco...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Well, you must not have been looking in the right spots. There were several
>booths selling those paintings and prints of the naked and provocatively
>dressed fantasy ladies. I believe at least one booth had some pretty
>explicit ones, too, out on open display.

Furry fandom isn't known for pinups, they're known for hermaphrodites
with massive breasts graphically boinking bovines with gigantic
members. So, where were THOSE kind of XXX-rated pictures on open
display at San Diego?

Obvious Fake. Do Not Harvest.

unread,
Aug 23, 2002, 1:56:47 AM8/23/02
to
>From: "Ostrich" x...@xxx.com

Eywwww. US$500 to US$1000 for a fursuit that someone ELSE has had intercourse
in? For that kind of cash you should be able to buy a fresh, never-used suit
(regardless of whatever you would be doing in it, yourself). If someone else
doesn't have a better use for that much money they are welcome to it, but
somehow this seems especially tacky.

*****************************************************
If you want me to see your response, please post.
http://ursine.dyndns.org/cgi-bin/listing.pl
http://members.hostedscripts.com/antispam.html
*****************************************************

DishRoom1

unread,
Aug 23, 2002, 1:59:54 AM8/23/02
to
Kathmandu wrote --

>So you say, and I tend to agree with you on the low percentage of folks who
>care. It's very much like homosexuality for the vast majoriy of average
>shmoes, "don't really care as long as they keep their faggot shit to
>themselves." Matthew Shepard ran into the small minority that did give a
>shit though. It's that small minority that you have to worry about. It's the
>small minority that beats the shit out of you and ties you to a fence in the
>snow simply because you are different, a target.
>
>You go back to your nice safe cubicle or whatever, I'm obviously paranoid
>and delusional. Of course, Jasper Texas is only 40 miles from where I grew
>up. Have a nice day.

I've heard of Mathew Shepard's murder, but then I heard these unusal stories
that one of the "homophobes" had a gay mother, and that the murder was a
robbery, not a hate crime.

Rann Aridorn

unread,
Aug 23, 2002, 2:32:16 AM8/23/02
to
Brian Henderson <cep...@directvinternet.com> was so distracted by the
Puma Twins doing a poledance that they wrote:

>>Well, you must not have been looking in the right spots. There were
>>several booths selling those paintings and prints of the naked and
>>provocatively dressed fantasy ladies. I believe at least one booth had
>>some pretty explicit ones, too, out on open display.
>
> Furry fandom isn't known for pinups, they're known for hermaphrodites
> with massive breasts graphically boinking bovines with gigantic
> members. So, where were THOSE kind of XXX-rated pictures on open
> display at San Diego?

Good lord, you bitch like a Democrat on election day. Why must it always
come back to the herms with massive breasts? You seem to be making far
bigger a deal of them than anyone else. In fact, the only time I've seen
Winger-esque furries mentioned on this group is when one of you bitches
brings 'em up.
Hell, probably half the people in the fandom wouldn't know about the
herms' existence if not for the people bitching about them!

Doug Winger

unread,
Aug 23, 2002, 2:59:25 AM8/23/02
to
In article <e8gbmu09ftqfhvtan...@4ax.com>, Brian Henderson
<cep...@directvinternet.com> wrote:

> Furry fandom isn't known for pinups, they're known for hermaphrodites
> with massive breasts graphically boinking bovines with gigantic
> members. So, where were THOSE kind of XXX-rated pictures on open
> display at San Diego?

At the Eros Publications booth, with some at the "Lives of the XXX-Rated
Starlets" comics display, though as secondary offerings. It seems that MU gave
that sort of thing a pass this year, with another publisher taking it up in
their place.

No hermaphrodites with massive breasts graphically boinking bovines with
gigantic members were showcased this year that I know of, though there were
some publications (non-Furry) that had featured those there in the past. They
tend more towards humanish types being boinked, though they do toss in the
occasional demon or elf for boinkery.

Seek and ye shall find. Heck, I found all that sort of stuff without any
effort on my part in the past, just walking around and looking. While I wasn't
at SDCC itself this year, I have seen some of the handouts and giveways- and
even a publication or two bought there- featuring that sort of topic from this
year's show.

Of course, that's giving the anime and video games/multimedia offerings a
miss entirely. I'm certain you could find scads of sort of thing there.

Too bad they didn't bother having seperate areas for such materials, but I
understand booth and table rates, as well as space, don't allow for such at
that Con. They do label it appropriately, though, so I guess you can't think
too harshly about their oversight in that matter.

Happy to help, and I hope this assists in rounding out your collection.


- Doug, Just Passing Through

Rann Aridorn

unread,
Aug 23, 2002, 3:07:23 AM8/23/02
to
Doug Winger <just...@speakeasy.net> was so distracted by the Puma Twins

doing a poledance that they wrote:

> - Doug, Just Passing Through

Woo! ^o^ Brian, you bitched so much that DOUG WINGER posted! Damn, man, I
take it back, keep bitching, make Doug into a regular!

RHJunior

unread,
Aug 23, 2002, 6:18:56 AM8/23/02
to
I'm yet to meet anyone on the planet outside of Hollywood who isn't socially
awkward or less than physically perfect.
Puhleez.

Akal Ashata Alis <AAA...@wolfenet.com> wrote in message
news:ak0l40$m33$1...@raccoon.fur.com...
>
>
> Wow... not all furry people are overweight. Jeeze. But I do see what he
> means. Lots of people take to the net for a lack of social skills.
Anonymous
> as it can be, people get a nice kick out of doing stuff with other people
in
> their own little fantasy.
> In my case, well.. I'm way too light to fall into that overweight
> catagory (maybe 130?). Still......
>
>
> A'A'Alis
> One fox, No time.
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.371 / Virus Database: 206 - Release Date: 6/13/02
>
>

RHJunior

unread,
Aug 23, 2002, 6:20:37 AM8/23/02
to

> Indeed. I've several times mocked the view that "This will destroy all
> of furrydom!" I've pointed out that a few negative articles aren't going
> to cause any laws to be made ....<snip>


Of course not.

One termite doesn't bring down the roof.....

But when you see more and more of them pop up....

You know you have a problem, and you'd better deal with it-- or start
looking for a new home.

RHJunior

unread,
Aug 23, 2002, 6:25:09 AM8/23/02
to
Denial, phase one: "There's nothing wrong !"
Denial, Phase Two:"Nobody knows anything is wrong !"
Denial, Phase Three: "Okay, a FEW people know something's wrong, but nobody
important cares !"
Denial, Phase Four: "These important people who know something's wrong
aren't THAT important !"
Denial, Phase Five: "Even if everybody knows something's wrong, they won't
do anything !"

Denial, Terminal Phase: "See, I told you that things were going wrong..."

RHJunior

unread,
Aug 23, 2002, 6:37:08 AM8/23/02
to
> If it's so bothersome, why DO furry cons make sure that it is a fixture at
> every gathering?

Several possible reasons, probably a combination of all the below:

Lack of standards(who cares that it offends vast portions of society?)

Lack of spine (all the porn freaks will quit coming <do NOT go there> and
we'll lose money !)

Inertia (oh gawd, who wants to go to all the trouble of CHANGING things ?)

Delusions of invisibility (Oh, the convention's growing tenfold every year
and attracting more and more attention, but SURELY all those news reporters
and frothing social activists will continue to ignore us !)

Failure to grasp cause and effect (Geez, why do these things always attract
so many skanky freaks? We only have a third of the dealer's floor covered
with porn sales....)

They're skanks themselves (Nooooooo, you can't take away the x-rated porno
section of the dealer's room! I wouldn't get any more free peek-- I mean it
would be a transgression of freedom of EXPRESSION, right....)

Rann Aridorn

unread,
Aug 23, 2002, 3:51:29 AM8/23/02
to
"RHJunior" <blu...@ntelos.net> was so distracted by the Puma Twins

doing a poledance that they wrote:

> Lack of spine (all the porn freaks will quit coming <do NOT go there>
> and we'll lose money !)

But if they're porn freaks, why stop cumming?
(Uh-oh! I WENT THERE!)
Besides, if there's enough of the "porn freaks" out there to endanger a
con if they decided not to attend, how do you know it's them who are the
"freaks"? As the saying goes, if you were just as you are, and you lived
in a world where everyone had one eye, they wouldn't be weird for having
one eye, you'd be weird for having two.
To put it another way, awhile back one of the periodic "ELIMINATE THE
PORN!" threads started up on the VCL boards. One self-righteous fur
cried "Adult content should not be allowed! I don't like the thought of
all my clean, wonderful art being posted next to THAT horrid stuff!" An
artist who drew yiff replied with "Oh? Hey, if you ask me, VCL should
take down all that CLEAN crap! I don't like having my spooge next to
that glittery angel stuff!"
And before you snort and call the yiff-artist a freak, ask yourself how
his argument's any different from the anti-yiff-artist's.

Rann Aridorn

unread,
Aug 23, 2002, 3:53:33 AM8/23/02
to
"RHJunior" <blu...@ntelos.net> was so distracted by the Puma Twins
doing a poledance that they wrote:

If you want to live your days in fear of the government coming to shoot
you in the head because you like furries, you're perfectly free to do
so. Just as I'm perfectly free to laugh at you as I continue to enjoy it
without such doomsaying, and am perfectly free to tsk and shake my head
sadly when you turn up dead of a stress heartattack in your steel "anti-
hyooman-gov'ment bunker".

Baloo Ursidae

unread,
Aug 23, 2002, 7:42:13 AM8/23/02
to
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

RHJunior <blu...@ntelos.net> wrote:
> I'm yet to meet anyone on the planet outside of Hollywood who isn't socially
> awkward or less than physically perfect.

Have you ever been to Hollywood? My father used to work at the EDS
office on Wilshire Blvd. It's rather nice looking. For a sunscorched
light-industrial hellhole in the desert. I hear Hollywood Blvd has a
nice sidewalk. Never actually got to see it through all the ugly ass
prostitutes, drunken sunburned beggars, and equally ugly-ass ditzy
botox victims piled hapazardly on it. Hollywood Blvd's the main drag.
It gets nastier the farther out you go. I'd say that Hollywood's got
the lowest count per capita of socially capable, physically perfect
people. If you look at the surrounding cities, the odds improve
slightly, like in Studio City or City of Industry. But even then,
we're talking looks and social skills, not brain cells.

And now that I actually sit and think about it, there's what, 26
million people in LA and Orange Counties combined, and maybe 2600
braincells between them? I very rarely agree with Howard Stern, but
he's right on this one: It's one area that would benefit from the
death penalty to clean up some of the white trash wandering around.

- --
Baloo
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE9Zh+UNtWkM9Ny9xURAg4sAKCeYUGBTJE4nwXrsyqeCztswr3IfQCeLkmB
uK9XFOqBy4s95p7Uz6SWwJc=
=aOZy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Atara

unread,
Aug 23, 2002, 8:17:00 AM8/23/02
to
cep...@directvinternet.com (Brian Henderson) wrote in
<e8gbmu09ftqfhvtan...@4ax.com>:

>Furry fandom isn't known for pinups, they're known for hermaphrodites
>with massive breasts graphically boinking bovines with gigantic
>members. So, where were THOSE kind of XXX-rated pictures on open
>display at San Diego?

Apparently right next to the Goats' booth:

http://www.goats.com/forums/news/317.html


--
Atara
"Draco Dormiens Nunquam Titillandus."
http://www.FurNation.com/Atara/
***What doesn't fit in my email addy? NADA.***

Blackberry

unread,
Aug 23, 2002, 11:14:42 AM8/23/02
to
On Fri, 23 Aug 2002 03:37:08 -0700, "RHJunior" wrote:
>
>> If it's so bothersome, why DO furry cons make sure that it is a fixture at
>> every gathering?
>
>Several possible reasons, probably a combination of all the below:
>[...]

If you're so against it, I have a few suggestions:

1) Don't go into those sections with erotic material.
2) Don't go to conventions at which any erotic material is sanctioned.

There you go. Problem solved.

--
"...only the government would call a half cup a reasonable serving of ice
cream."
- Consumer Reports

Don Sanders

unread,
Aug 23, 2002, 11:46:11 AM8/23/02
to
In article <ak5jh...@drn.newsguy.com>, le...@NOanthrobunnySPAM.com
says...

> On Fri, 23 Aug 2002 03:37:08 -0700, "RHJunior" wrote:
> >
> >> If it's so bothersome, why DO furry cons make sure that it is a fixture at
> >> every gathering?
> >
> >Several possible reasons, probably a combination of all the below:
> >[...]
>
> If you're so against it, I have a few suggestions:
>
> 1) Don't go into those sections with erotic material.
> 2) Don't go to conventions at which any erotic material is sanctioned.
>
> There you go. Problem solved.
>
To further add to it, if the complain arise that there are not clean cons
around, I should point out C-ACE that was recently held. And of course
one can start their own con as well, that point has been batted around
plenty of times.

The solutions keep stacking up, all they require is someone to act upon
them.

Just my .02 cents.

--
Don Sanders.

Matt Harpold

unread,
Aug 23, 2002, 2:38:14 PM8/23/02
to

> > Furry fandom isn't known for pinups, they're known for hermaphrodites
> > with massive breasts graphically boinking bovines with gigantic
> > members. So, where were THOSE kind of XXX-rated pictures on open
> > display at San Diego?
>
> Good lord, you bitch like a Democrat on election day. Why must it always
> come back to the herms with massive breasts? You seem to be making far
> bigger a deal of them than anyone else. In fact, the only time I've seen
> Winger-esque furries mentioned on this group is when one of you bitches
> brings 'em up.
> Hell, probably half the people in the fandom wouldn't know about the
> herms' existence if not for the people bitching about them!
>
> --
> -Rann Aridorn


You know, if it wasn't for the drugs thing, I think we're more or less in
agreement about most stuff. ;-)

-Matt/Turbine

Matt Harpold

unread,
Aug 23, 2002, 2:42:10 PM8/23/02
to

> That's mostly been my expierience as well. As for the bristol board thing,
> don't get me started there. I try to support artists who have a little
> more range in media they use. I admire most work on canvas though I can't
> afford any of it these days.

You do my grumpy fine artist heart proud. :)

Linen or cotton duck? Old Holland or Holbein? What are these 'markers' they
speak of? I know not of markers. I think I was one of two people exhibiting
at Anthrocon who actually works in oils. Rog Minotaur might.

-Matt/Turbine

Matt Harpold

unread,
Aug 23, 2002, 2:58:11 PM8/23/02
to

"Kathmandu" <kath...@cableone.com> wrote in message
news:ak41mp$1f9a$1...@velox.critter.net...

>
>
> "Matt Harpold" <mhar...@attbi.com> wrote in message
> news:AZ%89.243399$uj.3...@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net...
> >
> > > How painfully ignorant you are concerning the real world. Because of
the
> > > publicity the nutballs of this fandom have perpetuated, mothers pull
> their
> > > children away from furry mascots.
> >
> > Dude, this is utter hogwash. You honestly expect me to believe that A)
> your
> > average working mom knows what furry fandom is, and B) gives enough of a
> > shit about it to be afraid of it, and C) is paranoid enough to believe
> that
> > the mascot at a Mariners game is going to bend her kid over?
>
>
> Umm OK, you have stated your opinion. Thank you.
>
> A) your average working mom knows what furry fandom is, and

Mine doesn't. My sig. others' parents don't. Nobody I have showed my art to
(which can be anthro) has surprised me by knowing what furries are. They ARE
aware of the SF fandom, however, and they are aware I paint animal critters.
They have no idea of a 'fandom'. People at a CON I went to (SF con in
Kentucky) BARELY knew. They knew there was such a thing, and absolutely
nothing else.


> She does now if she reads Vanity Fair or caught the MTV show. Admittedly,
> the prospect is rather low unless she has net access and perhaps did a
> search on information for just about any damned animal on the planet and
> found someone's furry porn page. (This recenty happened to my sainted,
white
> haired Mom who is now online)

I'll try this experiment. I'll search for a bunch of animals on google and
yahoo or whatever, and see how easy it is to 'stumble' across furry porn.

> B) gives enough of a shit about it to be afraid of it, and
>
> You obviously aren't a parent. They are paranoid about everything.

I know a few artists who have active parents, who are in their teens.
They're FAR more concerned about where their kids actually are, where they
hang out with, and the people they associate with, than this periphery
culture thing like furry fandom.


I'm not saying that if a parent was exposed to it in spades, that they'd be
happy with it. I'm saying there is probably one parent for every 5 or 10
thousand that has ever heard of it. There simply aren't enough furries. Just
like parents don't know what balloon fetishists are, or what Quake 3 is, or
whatever. Parents can't keep the video games their kids want for christmas
straight! You think they're looking for minutae on wierdoes on the internet?


After
> watching that MTV special they may not pick up their kid and run screaming
> but they will be under close scutiny for any wrong move.

You're totally exaggerating, man. I can't say that enough. At a SPORTS
EVENT? You're serious? Or a theme park?

>
> >
> > Ignorant about the real world, indeed! I'd hate to see what your
funhouse
> > mirror vision of the 'real world' is. Likely pretty panicky and
paranoid,
> > I'd imagine.
>
> You are wrong, my life is none of those things. I am not stupid though and
I
> lock my doors and I have a gun in my nightstand. I have seen the evil that
> lurks in the hearts of men. There is a vast potential of unbelievable
> stupidity and the possibility for harm is boundless.

Don't me melodramatic or anything. Arming yourself is fine, and yes, most
people ARE stupid. Stupid people are NOT attentive or aware, or informed,
and it helps to be these things to be aware of something like furry fandom.


> > Guess what, pal. Most people don't care about furry. 99.999% do not give
> > shit numero uno. They think about it as they're reading the magazine
> article
> > or watching the MTV special or whatever, then they forget about it.
Nobody
> > cares. You're not important. Neither am I. So stop this whinging geek
> > martyrdom bullcrap and get over yourself. You'll have a lot more fun
when
> > you calm down, take a deep breath, and repeat after me: 'NOBODY CARES.'
>
>
>
> So you say, and I tend to agree with you on the low percentage of folks
who
> care. It's very much like homosexuality for the vast majoriy of average
> shmoes, "don't really care as long as they keep their faggot shit to
> themselves."

Exactly.

>Matthew Shepard ran into the small minority that did give a
> shit though.

Well, we all know a gay person or three. We all DON'T know furries.
Comparing gays to furries is a bit specious, since it's estimated that what,
5% of the population of America is gay? It keeps going up and down, but it's
a whole number. How many furries are in America? 20,000 tops? 10,000? Out of
hundreds of millions.

It's that small minority that you have to worry about. It's the
> small minority that beats the shit out of you and ties you to a fence in
the
> snow simply because you are different, a target.

Sure. Because you're DIFFERENT, not because you're furry. It doesn't MATTER
if you're furry if you'd get the crap kicked out of you for being into
Sci-Fi stuff. ;-) You said people are aware of the differences. I seriously
doubt they are.

> You go back to your nice safe cubicle or whatever, I'm obviously paranoid
> and delusional. Of course, Jasper Texas is only 40 miles from where I grew
> up. Have a nice day.

I agree Texas is a far more inhospitable place for furries and assorted
wierdoes that Portland is.

And for the record, I clean up Hepatitis B infected shit and keep
developmentally disabled people from hurting themselves and others for a
living. Not exactly firefighting, but certainly not as safe as a nice job in
a cubicle. ;-)

-Matt/Turbine

Matt Harpold

unread,
Aug 23, 2002, 2:59:53 PM8/23/02
to

"Rann Aridorn" <rann...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:Xns92731D69D8BF3...@216.148.227.77...

> "RHJunior" <blu...@ntelos.net> was so distracted by the Puma Twins
> doing a poledance that they wrote:
>
> > Denial, phase one: "There's nothing wrong !"
> > Denial, Phase Two:"Nobody knows anything is wrong !"
> > Denial, Phase Three: "Okay, a FEW people know something's wrong, but
> > nobody important cares !"
> > Denial, Phase Four: "These important people who know something's wrong
> > aren't THAT important !"
> > Denial, Phase Five: "Even if everybody knows something's wrong, they
> > won't do anything !"
> >
> > Denial, Terminal Phase: "See, I told you that things were going
> > wrong..."
>
> If you want to live your days in fear of the government coming to shoot
> you in the head because you like furries, you're perfectly free to do
> so. Just as I'm perfectly free to laugh at you as I continue to enjoy it
> without such doomsaying, and am perfectly free to tsk and shake my head
> sadly when you turn up dead of a stress heartattack in your steel "anti-
> hyooman-gov'ment bunker".

No kidding. I DO reserve the right to live in fear of the government because
I have a non traditional living arrangement and I don't want to gov'ment to
sic CPS on me and take my kids away. Which HAS happened to other poly
parents, though not in Portland I bet. ;-)

-Matt


Matt Harpold

unread,
Aug 23, 2002, 3:09:27 PM8/23/02
to

"RHJunior" <blu...@ntelos.net> wrote in message
news:gul99.11966$pW1....@atlpnn01.usenetserver.com...

Which is all a very clever way of saying that furries like it, and they'll
continue to. You cannot ever get rid of them, no matter how hard you try. No
matter what you say, Ralph, they LIKE IT. People like me like it, and I'm at
least as upstanding as you are. ;-) I'm not a freak, I pay my taxes, have a
nice car, work in health care, I'm reasonably intelligent, and I have NO
PROBLEM WITH FURRY PORN. Shock. You can wish it away all you like, just
like you can wish away gay people, and the fetish community, and poly
marriages, and offensive art, and heart disease, and farting in church, but
all these things exist, and will continue to in a free society.

Personally, I think the nature of it has actually IMPROVED since CF 9. I
think furry fandom is attracticing far better art than it ever has, better
costumes, nicer people, and fewer wierdoes per capita. The porn will always
be there, but it's more discreet. Anthrocon didn't look any more screwball
than Norwescon, a basic SF con in Seattle.

But you would never think this, because it dismantles your entire argument
to say that things are getting better., not worse.

-Matt/Turbine


Matt Harpold

unread,
Aug 23, 2002, 3:10:16 PM8/23/02
to

> >Several possible reasons, probably a combination of all the below:
> >[...]
>
> If you're so against it, I have a few suggestions:
>
> 1) Don't go into those sections with erotic material.
> 2) Don't go to conventions at which any erotic material is sanctioned.
>
> There you go. Problem solved.

They don't call them the thought police because they merely avoid what
troubles them. ;-)

-Matt/Turbine


Ken Pick

unread,
Aug 23, 2002, 5:10:20 PM8/23/02
to
"RHJunior" <blu...@ntelos.net> wrote in message news:<2jl99.11515$pW1....@atlpnn01.usenetserver.com>...

And a variant on it, first heard as a caution to activists:

Before: "What could possibly go wrong?"

After: "But how was I to know?"

Ken Pick

unread,
Aug 23, 2002, 5:17:26 PM8/23/02
to
dish...@aol.com (DishRoom1) wrote in message news:<20020823015954...@mb-fq.aol.com>...
> Kathmandu wrote --

>
> >You go back to your nice safe cubicle or whatever, I'm obviously paranoid
> >and delusional. Of course, Jasper Texas is only 40 miles from where I grew
> >up. Have a nice day.
>
> I've heard of Mathew Shepard's murder, but then I heard these unusal stories
> that one of the "homophobes" had a gay mother, and that the murder was a
> robbery, not a hate crime.

I have also heard that after he was dead, Matthew Shepard became a
poster boy for gay activism. The gay activist groups glomed onto him
as a Martyr For The Cause, when they probably wouldn't have noticed
his existence otherwise.

I don't know anything about Matt Shepard except his lynching, I don't
know what type of guy or personality he was, but turning him into a
Poster Boy for The Cause does almost a great a disservice to him as
his killers did. Like 9 out of 10 people in general, I kind of doubt
he would have wanted or liked being made into a Cause. (Especially
after what he ended up having to go through as a prerequisite.)

There's an old anti-Catholic joke that the reason you can't be
canonized a saint until after you're dead is so you won't be there to
dispute the Official Story of yourself....

Karl Xydexx Jorgensen

unread,
Aug 24, 2002, 12:45:59 AM8/24/02
to
Doug Winger wrote:
>They tend more towards humanish types being
>boinked, though they do toss in the occasional
>demon or elf for boinkery.

Woohoo! Boinkery!

(As in, "Get thee to a boinkery!" Whee!) -:)

--
_________________________________________________
Karl Xydexx Jorgensen / Xydexx Squeakypony, KSC
Anthrofurry Infocenter:
http://www.xydexx.com/anthrofurry

Karl Xydexx Jorgensen

unread,
Aug 24, 2002, 12:54:53 AM8/24/02
to
Matt Harpold wrote:

>Kathmandu wrote:
>> A) your average working mom knows what furry fandom is, and
>
>Mine doesn't. My sig. others' parents don't.

My mom does.

Of course, she attended Anthrocon 2000 and had a great time, so I don't think
that really helps Kathmandu's claim too much. -:)

Obvious Fake. Do Not Harvest.

unread,
Aug 24, 2002, 2:42:07 AM8/24/02