plushies unwelcome?
Brian Henderson
lon...@netcom.com (Lontra) wrote:
>Lately, I've been very concerned about all the bad things being said
>about plushies here. I'm genuinely puzzled by this. Judging by the
>dozens of furs I've seen at ConFurences carrying plush pals, I always
>assumed that loving stuffed animals was an accepted part of Furrydom.
Depends on what you mean by loving stuffed animals, Lontra. Since I
really don't do stuffed animals, let me change the example slightly to
animals. I have 6 dogs. I love my dogs. This doesn't mean I have
sex with my dogs. Carrying stuffed animals has always been and always
will be acceptable in furry fandom. IMO, people who equate cutting
holes in the back ends of their Winnie the Pooh toy for sexual
purposes with being furry (something that certainly has been
happening of late) are wrong and certainly unacceptable.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++==========================================
+ Brian Henderson == Internet: BHen...@microsys.net ==
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++== Cephus on Furrymuck ==
+ Furry Fan, Babylon 5, == and Furtoonia ==
+ MST3K, Atheist, Skeptic, ==========================================
+ Sliders, RPG Gamer, INWO, == I'm not saying what I'm thinking, so ==
+ Herpetophile, Gargoyles == I don't think anyone agrees with me! ==
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++==========================================
+ Alternate Gargoyles Universe Mailing List Archive: ==
+========http://www.microsys.net/personal/bhend/agu.htm/===============
Dan Lorey
In article <4tane3$7...@harpo.uccs.edu>,
j...@brain.UCCS.edu (Justin M. Carpenter) wrote:
>I think discretion on both sides of this debate is necessary. Furries who
>have sex with plushies, _please_ keep this side of your lifestyle discreetly
>out of view at furry cons; you're offending people. It is your business what
>you do with your plushies, and any furry fan who condemns you on behalf of
>any higher authority than his/her opinion, or social rules at a particular
>place, is overstepping his/her rights -- but it is also not your right to
>offend others by displaying alternative practices and lifestyles that they
>do not wish to see.
Just from my observations at the various furry cons I've been to, I think
those into sexual plushophilia _have_ been very quiet and discrete in public
about the relationships they have with their plush. I've seen and met a lot
of plush-toting furry-folk (both sexual and non-sexual), and I've never seen
_anyone_ do anything with their plush in public other than giving them an
occasional hug, nor have I met one who's intiated any sort of discussion I've
considered inappropriate or personally offensive. And of all the stories,
myths and rumours I've heard about inappropriate sexual behavior in public
at cons, I've never heard _any_ stories at all about misbehavior of _any_ sort
involving fur fans and their plush (and I'd be more than a little suspicious
if someone were to suddenly come up with a story right now).
I think it's quite amusing (in a sad sort of way), that those who are
anti-plush sex repeatedly demand that those who do enjoy plush sex keep
their public con behavior discrete - something that they've been voluntarily
doing all along!
[Snipped, to save bandwidth, some good advice that will probably be completely
ignored by those who need it most.]
Dan
*********
Dan Lorey - dl...@cornell.edu
Dr. Cat
Dan Lorey (dl...@cornell.edu) wrote:
: j...@brain.UCCS.edu (Justin M. Carpenter) wrote:
: >I think discretion on both sides of this debate is necessary. Furries who
: >have sex with plushies, _please_ keep this side of your lifestyle discreetly
: >out of view at furry cons; you're offending people.
: about the relationships they have with their plush.
I'd certainly have to agree, it seems to be one of the quietest groups
around in terms of what people say and do in public. Unlike some other
behaviors/lifestyles/interests that people complain about, I'd think most
of the people attending any given furry con don't run across even any
hint of plush sex activities or discussions at all. Like most "image"
issues, it's probably gotten much more attention through recent complaints
about it than it was getting before on its own. There are probably a few
alt.fan.furry readers who didn't know that was something people even did
until they read someone's complaints about it. Well, I guess it's
educational, huh?
***********************************************************************
Dr. Cat / Dragon's Eye Productions ** Now available for Windows!
******************************************** ftp.eden.com pub/dspire
Dragonspires is a graphic mud for PCs. ** http://www.eden.com/~cat
***********************************************************************
guitar
ega...@airmail.net (Desmond Gaban) writes:
>j
>>If you're a furry who's against sex with plushies -- please, show some good
>>taste. God Herself did not come down from On High and appoint you Eradicator
>God herself???????
Yes? What do you want?
>Desmond, Diedrupo on FurryMuck
>http://web2.airmail.net/egaban/shanda/ (Shanda the Panda)
>FurryCode1.2:FCF2w A++ C- D-- H M+ P R+++ T++ W>++ Z>++++$
>Sm RLCT* Cn+++ d++ a# e# f- h#> iwf+++ sm--
Sorry, couldn't help myself on this one. :)
guitar
Watts Martin
In article <quozlDv...@netcom.com>, D.M. "Quozl" Falk wrote:
>Karl W. Meyer (fer...@wwa.com) wrote:
>: Justin M. Carpenter (j...@brain.UCCS.edu) wrote:
>: : I think discretion on both sides of this debate is necessary. Furries who
>: : have sex with plushies, _please_ keep this side of your lifestyle discreetly
>: : you do with your plushies, and any furry fan who condemns you on behalf of
>: : any higher authority than his/her opinion, or social rules at a particular
>: : place, is overstepping his/her rights -- but it is also not your right to
>: : offend others by displaying alternative practices and lifestyles that they
>: : do not wish to see.
>
>: offended others as far as plush go? Haven't heard any actual instances
>: mentioned here. ...
>: ... What might have happened in rooms later is not
>: anybody's business and shouldn't be of any concern of yours. Your
>: admonitions for us to behave are uncalled for as we have been. I consider
>: doing so a subtle attempt to define yet another group that one can look
>: down on as "hurting the fandom" Strange how those doing this either
>: subtley or otherwise never are in the group that is causing the alleged
>: harm.
>Scapegoating. Don't you just _love_ it? :( There's been _rampant_
>scapegoating going on this newsgroup, _especially_ of late, and _it_ is
>what's doing more harm to the fandom that _any_ perceived "image
>problems"...
Justin was calling for courtesy on both sides and you and Karl are
responding as if he's used some kind of "code word" signifying that he
really wants all plushophiles thrown out of furry fandom. His message made
sense and didn't do any "scapegoating" at all.
Any time someone says "People should be careful not to let <pick-a-topic>
offend others," someone invariably responds like they've been personally
attacked. You say you aren't given specific examples? Don't eat with your
mouth full, Quozl, because some people think it's disgusting. Do I need to
cite specific examples of that before you agree it's a sensible statement?
You say "I'm not aware of any plushophile having done anything offensive in
public at a con." Great! I'm not either. But how in the world, pray tell,
does reacting to Justin's message by darkly hinting at scapegoating
accomplish anything positive? Isn't the worst that could be said to him
"Yes, that's a good idea, but from what I've seen it's a basically
unnecessary admonition?" It's probably an unnecessary admonition to most
people not to let their kids play with loaded guns, but somehow I don't
think the NRA is trying to scapegoat gun owners when they repeat common
sense rules of gun safety. If the perceived "anti-plushie" forces need to
calm down, perhaps they're not the only ones.
Dr. Cat
Watts Martin (mi...@agii.solluna.org) wrote:
: Justin M. Carpenter (j...@brain.UCCS.edu) wrote:
: : I think discretion on both sides of this debate is necessary. Furries who
: : have sex with plushies, _please_ keep this side of your lifestyle discreetly
: : out of view at furry cons; you're offending people.
[intervening replies snipped]
: You say "I'm not aware of any plushophile having done anything offensive in
: public at a con." Great! I'm not either.
[snip]
: Isn't the worst that could be said to him
: "Yes, that's a good idea, but from what I've seen it's a basically
: unnecessary admonition?"
No. One could justifiably say "It's a basically unnecessary admonition,
and please don't insult our group by claiming we're doing something that
we're not." He said something that is untrue ("keep it out of view
because you're offending people"), and that is likely to hurt feelings of
members of the group that is being described inaccurately. Expecting a
cheerful "Good idea but not needed!" instead of "Hey, stop spreading
falsehoods about our group!" just isn't realistic.
If he had avoided any inaccuracy or exaggeration, then a "thanks but
that's an unnecessary admonition" would be quite appropriate.
Brian Henderson
dl...@cornell.edu (Dan Lorey) wrote:
<snip>
> Just from my observations at the various furry cons I've been to, I think
>those into sexual plushophilia _have_ been very quiet and discrete in public
>about the relationships they have with their plush. I've seen and met a lot
>of plush-toting furry-folk (both sexual and non-sexual), and I've never seen
>_anyone_ do anything with their plush in public other than giving them an
>occasional hug, nor have I met one who's intiated any sort of discussion I've
>considered inappropriate or personally offensive. And of all the stories,
>myths and rumours I've heard about inappropriate sexual behavior in public
>at cons, I've never heard _any_ stories at all about misbehavior of _any_ sort
>involving fur fans and their plush (and I'd be more than a little suspicious
>if someone were to suddenly come up with a story right now).
Oh, I don't think I've ever seen someone having sex with a plushy in
public at a con and to be perfectly honest, I don't care what people
do with them in the privacy of their hotel room. That is not, nor has
ever been the issue AFAIC. What is the problem are the people, both
online and in print publications, who insist that sexual plushophilia
is what furry fandom is all about (or a part of the fandom itself).
It isn't never has been and never will be.
Carry your plushies all you want. Have sex with them in your bedroom
if you want. Just don't tar me with the sexual plushophile brush.
> I think it's quite amusing (in a sad sort of way), that those who are
>anti-plush sex repeatedly demand that those who do enjoy plush sex keep
>their public con behavior discrete - something that they've been voluntarily
>doing all along!
>[Snipped, to save bandwidth, some good advice that will probably be completely
>ignored by those who need it most.]
> Dan
>*********
> Dan Lorey - dl...@cornell.edu
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++==========================================
Karl W. Meyer
Brian Henderson (BHen...@kirk.microsys.net) wrote:
: Oh, I don't think I've ever seen someone having sex with a plushy in
: public at a con and to be perfectly honest, I don't care what people
: do with them in the privacy of their hotel room. That is not, nor has
: ever been the issue AFAIC. What is the problem are the people, both
: online and in print publications, who insist that sexual plushophilia
: is what furry fandom is all about (or a part of the fandom itself).
: It isn't never has been and never will be.
Furry fandom is about anthropomorphic animals. If some see their plush as
anthropomorphic or even have obviously antropomorphic plushies then I'd
say they are indeed part of the fandom for them. What goes on in the
bedroom with them isn't your or my concern.
: Carry your plushies all you want. Have sex with them in your bedroom
: if you want. Just don't tar me with the sexual plushophile brush.
As to the first, I plan to. To the second, it's none of your business. To
the third, I don't recall anybody saying you had sex with plush but you
have made it clear you don't and that's fine.
--Crim Ferret (Karl Meyer)
fer...@wwa.com