Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

How utterly charming . . .

1 view
Skip to first unread message

FromTheDes...@stukafox.com

unread,
Feb 3, 2001, 11:52:20 PM2/3/01
to

Such a NICE hobby . . .


http://furrybid.transform.to/cgi-bin/auction.pl?plushfur&981632524


StukaFox
Not even remotely suprised.
--
The most important question of 2001 will be 'Why aren't you fucking FURIOUS?'

Gabriel Gentile

unread,
Feb 4, 2001, 12:26:06 AM2/4/01
to
I could've gone my whole life without knowing this existed.

ilr

unread,
Feb 4, 2001, 12:31:44 AM2/4/01
to

<FromTheDes...@StukaFox.Com> wrote in message news:95in64$26bl$1...@velox.critter.net...

>
>
> Such a NICE hobby . . .
>

Shutup Stukafox. I've had my run-in with Majikfox and he's a real
Lamer-Kook. And Amazingly, he's one of the only people like that
I've met that somehow got attached to this "hobby". You might
as well be pointing to Nekobe. It's a shame we can't put a big
warning sticker on people like this to correctly inform others when
they encounter them but; regardless, this should be shocking to
no one who knows anything about this extreme fringe.

...As for everyone, they'll just have to gag a little, and come to
grips with reality. Really WEIRD people exist EVERYWHERE.
-Ilr
-Ilr


ilr

unread,
Feb 4, 2001, 12:33:58 AM2/4/01
to

<FromTheDes...@StukaFox.Com> wrote in message news:95in64$26bl$1...@velox.critter.net...
>
>
> Such a NICE hobby . . .
>

Shutup Stukafox. I've had my run-in with Majikfox and he's a real


Lamer-Kook. And Amazingly, he's one of the only people like that
I've met that somehow got attached to this "hobby". You might
as well be pointing to Nekobe. It's a shame we can't put a big
warning sticker on people like this to correctly inform others when
they encounter them but; regardless, this should be shocking to
no one who knows anything about this extreme fringe.

...As for everyone else, they'll just have to gag a little, and come to

Alexsandyr Troutnoodler

unread,
Feb 4, 2001, 12:57:51 AM2/4/01
to
Gabriel Gentile wrote:
>
> I could've gone my whole life without knowing this existed.

*grins and chuckles*

I wouldn't worry about the person posting the item, as it's most
likely a joke.

*I* would be more worried about the person who *bid* on it. =O.x=

JtBear...please tell us that you were joking when you posted that
bid? Please?
--
Aloha Nui Loa, Le'hule'hupa'lupa'lu No Ka Oi! Aiko Aiko Ho'o'one Ke
Ho'aloha!

================O <==[IonOtter, LogOut]

FromTheDes...@stukafox.com

unread,
Feb 4, 2001, 1:45:28 AM2/4/01
to
ilr <i...@rof.net> wrote:

> ...As for everyone else, they'll just have to gag a little, and come to
> grips with reality. Really WEIRD people exist EVERYWHERE.

The furry spin-doctor has spoken. Report to Jorgensen to
pick up your paycheck.

Actually, I wish the infinitely-amusing FoxMajik would cough up
his 'rules' page again -- Christus Apollo, but what a King Hell
loon! I love the part where he gets into hurting people for not
buying into his delusions. Whatta utter-nutter!

Velar and Furbid, your one-stop ammo shopping for laughing at
furry.


StukaFox

Farlo

unread,
Feb 4, 2001, 2:17:40 AM2/4/01
to
Stukafoxie wrote:
> Such a NICE hobby . . .

Pardon, but why are YOU searching e-bay for items like this?
I did not think that it was your bag (so to speak).

--

Farlo
Urban fey dragon

m>^_^<m

Farlo

unread,
Feb 4, 2001, 2:20:25 AM2/4/01
to
Stukafoxie wrote:

>The most important question of 2001 will be 'Why aren't you fucking
>FURIOUS?'

Who is Furious and why are you pimping him?
I am not interested. Please take this elsewhere.

Martin Skunk

unread,
Feb 4, 2001, 2:34:23 AM2/4/01
to
Farlo wrote:
>
> Stukafoxie wrote:
> > Such a NICE hobby . . .
>
> Pardon, but why are YOU searching e-bay for items like this?
> I did not think that it was your bag (so to speak).
>

You've got a point, Farlo. Stuka came, searched for something on
furBid, found it, and showed it to anyone interested on A.F.F. Worst of
all, there was no warnings about the nature of the link or the stuff. I
think I'm going to blame Stuka for ruining my dinner's digestion, and
making me feel a sudden repugnance for "MJC Skunk Plushies". :b


--- Martin Skunk

FromTheDes...@stukafox.com

unread,
Feb 4, 2001, 2:33:28 AM2/4/01
to
Farlo <hall...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:


> Pardon, but why are YOU searching e-bay for items like this?

My, but what a dipshit you are . . .

Say Hi to Gruber for me.

*plonk*


StukaFox

Van Matiney

unread,
Feb 4, 2001, 2:34:51 AM2/4/01
to
I told him about it.
I in turn, was told about it by someone else.
Who was told about it by someone else.

Somewhere down the line, someone did either run across it, or went looking
for it deliberately. Please try to avoid jumping to conclusions in the
future. It's a long jump, and you could fall in the ravine.

V.

"Martin Skunk" <marti...@notcoldmail.com> wrote in message
news:3A7D05FF...@notcoldmail.com...

Elynne

unread,
Feb 4, 2001, 3:09:40 AM2/4/01
to
On Sun, 4 Feb 2001, Martin Skunk wrote:
> Farlo wrote:
> > Stukafoxie wrote:
> > > Such a NICE hobby . . .
> > Pardon, but why are YOU searching e-bay for items like this?
> > I did not think that it was your bag (so to speak).
> You've got a point, Farlo. Stuka came, searched for something on
> furBid, found it, and showed it to anyone interested on A.F.F. Worst of
> all, there was no warnings about the nature of the link or the stuff.

Actually, it was right there in the non-yiffy miscellaneous items section,
which IIRC from the brief glance at it only had four or five other items
listed. It is definitely in the *wrong* subject category. I somehow
doubt that if it had properly been listed in the R or X sections, that
Stuka would have a) seen it or b) complained about it. There certainly
isn't any shortage of items in either section.

Elynne, who recently referred her fur-friendly roommate to Velan, and then
had an interesting discussion about the wide range of non-standard sexual
practices that we both first heard about directly because of furry

Martin Skunk

unread,
Feb 4, 2001, 3:17:32 AM2/4/01
to

Van Matiney wrote:
>
> I told him about it.
> I in turn, was told about it by someone else.
> Who was told about it by someone else.
>
> Somewhere down the line, someone did either run across it, or went looking
> for it deliberately. Please try to avoid jumping to conclusions in the
> future. It's a long jump, and you could fall in the ravine.
>
> V.
>

Okay, but Stukafox published it -here- on AFF. The responsibility of
doing this page public was his, not yours, unless you told Stuka, "go
and post this URL to AFF", something I doubt.
Therefore, I'm still blaming him for ruining my digestion.

--- Martin Skunk

Farlo

unread,
Feb 4, 2001, 11:33:37 AM2/4/01
to
Mathue wrote:

>In article <B6A24410.4A41%spook...@earthlink.net>, Gabriel Gentile


><spook...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> I could've gone my whole life without knowing this existed.
>

> What, you've never heard of blow-up dolls either?

The finest "love dolls" anywhere, but not one with a tail:
Http://www.realdoll.com

I have read that they have had requests for animatronic versions ... I
suppose an animatronic vixen love doll might be a posssibility. Let us
dwell on the social implications.

Van Matiney

unread,
Feb 4, 2001, 2:23:19 PM2/4/01
to
My reply should have been to Farlo, not you Martin. sorry about that.

V

"Van Matiney" <asgd...@sdgadaoiefh.com> wrote in message
news:vC7f6.164513$y9.29...@typhoon.we.rr.com...

Skytech

unread,
Feb 4, 2001, 7:35:38 PM2/4/01
to
>
> Such a NICE hobby . . .
>

Hmmph.. As strange as the person offering it, I wonder more about someone
who would buy it.

This is not the top of the fur fan bell curve.
--
The vigilant fox
Skytech

Richard Chandler - WA Resident

unread,
Feb 4, 2001, 5:02:26 PM2/4/01
to
In article <95in64$26bl$1...@velox.critter.net>,
FromTheDes...@StukaFox.Com writes:
> Not even remotely suprised.

Wanna be more disgusted? Someone has Bid on it too.

(Didn't eBay have to ban prostitutes from selling their "used" panties on the
service?)


--
"if Marylin Manson has more of an influence on a kid than the kid's parents
do, then maybe the parents need to look at how they're raising their kids."
-- Charlie Clouser, Keyboardist, Nine Inch Nails.
Spammer Warning: Washington State Law now provides civil penalties for UCE.

Richard Chandler - WA Resident

unread,
Feb 4, 2001, 5:06:10 PM2/4/01
to
In article <3A7D05FF...@notcoldmail.com>, Martin Skunk <

marti...@notcoldmail.com> writes:
> You've got a point, Farlo. Stuka came, searched for something
> on furBid, found it, and showed it to anyone interested on A.F.F. Worst
> of all, there was no warnings about the nature of the link or the stuff.
> I think I'm going to blame Stuka for ruining my dinner's digestion,
> and making me feel a sudden repugnance for "MJC Skunk Plushies". :b

But the OTHER point is, if Stuka could do it, then so could anyone else. Say,
someone who wanted to make a case to the Toronto Worldcon committee that the
Furry History showcase shouldn't be supported, or maybe some other Tabloid
reporter out to point and laugh at us. Or maybe someone who hates furries and
is trying to convince a friend not to be involved in the fandom.

Richard Chandler - WA Resident

unread,
Feb 4, 2001, 5:09:04 PM2/4/01
to
In article <3A7D101C...@notcoldmail.com>, Martin Skunk <

marti...@notcoldmail.com> writes:
> Okay, but Stukafox published it -here- on AFF. The
> responsibility of doing this page public was his, not yours, unless
> you told Stuka, "go and post this URL to AFF", something I doubt.
> Therefore, I'm still blaming him for ruining my digestion.

Well, as we read, it was "Made Public" by being posted on the furbid Misc
items (e.g. Clean items) section.

Rather than blaming the messenger why not blame the originator, the sick fuck
who wants to sell a "used" plushie with his stains and stink on it?

Skytech

unread,
Feb 4, 2001, 8:09:01 PM2/4/01
to
>
> The finest "love dolls" anywhere, but not one with a tail:
>

Never heard of the infamous 'Love ewe'? Not exactly the same class but...

> I have read that they have had requests for animatronic versions ... I
> suppose an animatronic vixen love doll might be a posssibility. Let us
> dwell on the social implications.
>

A couple decades ago, the Playboy Channel featured a story on semi-robotic
dolls for rich, choosy clientele. Hmm, there's that artist that
photo-touches up human femmes to resemble various animals. Could get a job
designing for either outfit.
--
Skytech

Leslie_R

unread,
Feb 4, 2001, 5:15:19 PM2/4/01
to
Mathue wrote:
>
> In article <B6A24410.4A41%spook...@earthlink.net>, Gabriel Gentile
> <spook...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> > I could've gone my whole life without knowing this existed.
>
> What, you've never heard of blow-up dolls either?
>
i think the point of contention here isn't that *ahem* 'intimate-use'
plushies exist, but that someone would consider the fact that this one
is previously used to be a selling point -:P

> --
> MT - Diagonally parked in a parallel universe.
>
> 101010

Leslie
--
"He's a God, it'll take more than one shot."
-Lady Eboshi, 'Princess Mononoke'

FromTheDes...@stukafox.com

unread,
Feb 4, 2001, 8:31:38 PM2/4/01
to
Richard Chandler - WA Resident <mau...@kendra.com> wrote:

> Rather than blaming the messenger why not blame the originator, the sick fuck
> who wants to sell a "used" plushie with his stains and stink on it?

Rich,

Marten's post is meant to be humor along the lines of 'you owe
me a new keyboard for making me spit Coke on it from laughing.'

FromTheDes...@stukafox.com

unread,
Feb 4, 2001, 8:33:18 PM2/4/01
to
Richard Chandler - WA Resident <mau...@kendra.com> wrote:

> Wanna be more disgusted? Someone has Bid on it too.


Can you say 'health hazard'. Doubtless, someone wanted to make
tea outta it . . .


StukaFox

Farlo

unread,
Feb 4, 2001, 9:02:18 PM2/4/01
to
Stukafoxie wrote:

> Can you say 'health hazard'. Doubtless, someone wanted to make
> tea outta it . . .

Gee. I did not think that this thread could go lower.
Silly me.

Xydexx Squeakypony, KSC

unread,
Feb 4, 2001, 9:05:29 PM2/4/01
to
Farlo wrote:
>Silly me.

In other news, X-Files is on...

I'm getting myself a bowl of ice cream and watching. -:)

--
_________________________________________________
Karl Xydexx Jorgensen / Xydexx Squeakypony, KSC
Flamewars: The only winning move is not to play.
http://www.xydexx.com/anthrofurry

ilr

unread,
Feb 4, 2001, 9:18:34 PM2/4/01
to

<FromTheDes...@StukaFox.Com> wrote in message news:95itq8$2cec$1...@velox.critter.net...

> ilr <i...@rof.net> wrote:
>
>
> The furry spin-doctor has spoken. Report to Jorgensen to
> pick up your paycheck.
>
I got yer Spin right here Doc, it's beef log log and you
can squeeze deezfattyboombattynutz for all I care too.
Get fuckkin real, I don't play-up nuthin but ya fat mamma!
-Ilr


ilr

unread,
Feb 4, 2001, 9:43:37 PM2/4/01
to

Farlo <hall...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:903EB7AB8...@news.fysh.org...

> Stukafoxie wrote:
>
> > Can you say 'health hazard'. Doubtless, someone wanted to make
> > tea outta it . . .
>
> Gee. I did not think that this thread could go lower.
> Silly me.
>
Yeah, nasty, that didn't even occur to me, and I still wish it hadn't.
First they come on here like "what kinda sicko came up with this"
Now after the tea-comment, I'm wondering the same thing of THEM
-Ilr


ilr

unread,
Feb 4, 2001, 10:05:39 PM2/4/01
to

Leslie_R <tro...@atoka.net> wrote in message news:3A7DD477...@atoka.net...

> >
> i think the point of contention here isn't that *ahem* 'intimate-use'
> plushies exist, but that someone would consider the fact that this one
> is previously used to be a selling point -:P
>
>:0=====X

FromTheDes...@stukafox.com

unread,
Feb 4, 2001, 11:37:52 PM2/4/01
to
ilr <i...@rof.net> wrote:

> I got yer Spin right here Doc, it's beef log log and you
> can squeeze deezfattyboombattynutz for all I care too.
> Get fuckkin real, I don't play-up nuthin but ya fat mamma!
> -Ilr

</obBlazingSaddles> "Now how can you argue with that?
I'm especially glad these children were here to hear
that display of authentic frontier gibberish!

ilr

unread,
Feb 5, 2001, 2:44:25 AM2/5/01
to
>
> A couple decades ago, the Playboy Channel featured a story on semi-robotic
> dolls for rich, choosy clientele. Hmm, there's that artist that
> photo-touches up human femmes to resemble various animals. Could get a job
> designing for either outfit.
> --
> Skytech
>
That Japanese guy with the Hornet, Snail, and a whole mess of
other species that would classify more as abstract art than
tasteful furrotica? (Well, he did do a nice rabbit)

And not to sound antagonistic, but I think the real thing would be
alien enough(Not that I wouldn't try it just to figure out if I liked
it or not), a close but inanimate representation of such, rings just
plain creepy in my opinion. -Ilr


0 new messages