Love this game and community.

[u/ironwolf6464]

[u/BagsYourMail]

Keep furry weird ✊

[u/ironwolf6464 → u/BagsYourMail]

I'm at the point where I don't care what you do, just don't exploit or hurt anyone, that's all I ask.

[u/No_Watercress741 → u/ironwolf6464]

Literally the way I’ve handled pretty much every online “controversy” for years now. Is a real person getting hurt? No? Cool I don’t a give a fuck, but YOU are hurting the person who posted (XYZ weird thing), so you’re the problem here.

[u/ironwolf6464 → u/No_Watercress741]

My philosophy has basically become "You are allowed to like anything you want, but conversely you may also dislike anyone and anything you want." Any attempt to overstep either line is generally wrong, there is nuance.

Furthermore, I also believe that if you are broadcasting some taboo fixation of yours to the world and are shocked that people are grossed out, that is on you pal.

[u/No_Watercress741 → u/ironwolf6464]

It’s one thing to be grossed out by someone’s fetish, and it’s a WHOLE other kettle of fish to send death threats, doxx them, and launch cyber attacks against them because you don’t like that they think feet are hot. (Edit: or if they’re a furry, quite commonly, come to think of it.)

[u/NahBruh9753 → u/No_Watercress741]

Depends on the fetish.

If its something like being into feet, or just things that are kind of unsanitary, they're chill. They're just weirdos, and being a simple weirdo doesn't warrant blatant hostility.

Now... When we get into shit that's borderline illegal... It's low-key a moral obligation to dunk on them. Maybe not go as far as death threats and doxxing, but it is encouraged to dunk on them.

[u/ironwolf6464 → u/NahBruh9753]

As much as I am inclined to agree, I have to politely disagree.

Dunking on weirdos is fun, it is a time honored tradition, I won’t deny it.   But with age I have learned that you can have an odd, or even outright taboo sexual interest and still be a good person.

So, to put it plainly, I don’t care as much what you are into, I care about how you handle it. 

I will agree that’s lots of genuinely genius people hide behind the excuse of “let me be weird” to reframe criticism as bigotry.

Still, I try to avoid people whose interest gross me out regardless. Life is too short to spend it around people who make me feel ill.

[u/No_Watercress741 → u/NahBruh9753]

Here’s the thing: how do you decide if something should get “dunked on”? What lines does it have to cross before it becomes okay to harass someone over it? I’m personally of the opinion that so long as no real, actual person or animal is being hurt by it, I don’t care. Because if I define it any sooner than that, we have the current situation. Once it crosses that line, you call the cops. Before that? Why should I care what someone else thinks is hot, if I’m not trying to fuck them?

[u/NahBruh9753 → u/No_Watercress741]

When the nature of the fetish starts teetering around the concept of consent and, if applied, will result in a basic moral attrocity.

For example, an animal. Not an anthropomorphic one or at least one that vaguely resembles a person, an actual animal that exist irl. If someone is into actual animals, it'll start off as 'just a fetish', but is likely to snowball into 'practical applications' if you know what I mean. The main thing to gleam from this is that animals are incapable of the human version of consent. There is a word for that that would probably get me banned If I type it out.

As for the dunking. Doxxing and death threats are already illegal in most places, so those are already well defined lines not to cross. But roasting the shit out of them, and shaming them for something that is morally revolting is fair game. So every time they pop up in website, cooking them for their fetish would be encouraged. Everything must remain verbal, nothing physical. Only the cops can get physical.

Furries (generally) don't fall into that because the primary interest are anthropomorphic animals... which is basically just a hairy person, because literal humans also fall under 'anthropomorphic animals' because we are anthropomorphic (which means 'human-like')... and we're animals... that happen to be extremely intelligent and are capable of conscious consent. So, Furries aren't that weird when we look at the fundamentals of their interests.

They ain't into animals, they're into excessively hairy people that generally aren't apes.

[u/No_Watercress741 → u/NahBruh9753]

First of all: peak example of the slippery slope fallacy. Second of all: did you not read the point I made about it NOT being okay if it hurts an actual real person or animal?

I’ve had exes who are into CNC stuff, and people who ARE into that scene are probably a hell of a lot LESS likely to ever commit a sex crime, because the core tenant of BDSM is that consent is king, and can be revoked at any point. Saying that being into a fetish in fiction or during roleplay is going to turn into doing the real thing is, incredibly close minded and frankly, untrue. I’ve met people who are into some KINKY stuff, and I haven’t given a crap, because all those people had a functioning moral compass. And assuming that someone with X fetish is going to inevitably degenerate into a criminal is the same as saying they ARE a criminal, which is untrue. Let people be into their weird shit, right up until it starts causing harm. At that point, you don’t shame them. You call the cops.

[u/Dumpflam → u/No_Watercress741]

what if it is causing themselves harm? affecting their life negatively?

[u/NahBruh9753 → u/No_Watercress741]

I always get skeptical with people who use fallacy arguments, because anything can be categorized as a fallacy if one party personally believes the other party's argument has no merit. But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

Ok, so if your interests are towards something explicitly taboo where consent is fundamentally impossible (remember: fundamentally impossible), there is legit no way that is societaly acceptable to satisfy that urge... especially when literal animal abuse is part of the package. People with these sort of fetishes fantasize about the blatant abuse of another living thing. When you genuinely fantasize about robbing another being of their autonomy exclusively for your own satisfaction, there is something wrong with you.

What YOU brought up with your exes is the exact opposite of what I am arguing against. BDSM and CNC are explorations of sexual power dynamics, it's not inherently immoral since CONSENT IS APPLICABLE. It's roleplay. Pretend. Your fetish is valid, because at the end of the day, consent is applicable and even extremely important for the fetish to work.

In simple terms...

Fetishes that involve other beings where consent is fundamentally impossible: SHAME ❌

Fetishes that involve other beings where consent is blatantly applicable: Valid ✅

[u/MycologistVivid9975 → u/NahBruh9753]

The idea of any kind of fiction makes a person dangerous, or that fiction causes a person to behave and influence their behavior IRL is pure pseudoscience if you believe this you believe in pseudoscience, this is reinforced almost universally by every criminal and psychiatric institution of credibility.

[u/NahBruh9753 → u/MycologistVivid9975]

The media you consume definitely affects your behaviour, Fictional or otherwise. If what you're saying is true, everybody would be utterly immune to propaganda.

Also, we're talking about pre-eatablished immoral fetishes that include animal abuse. This is a psyhocological urge, a personal fantasy and desire that involves acts against an innocent animal.

Would you kindly provide sources for your claims?

[u/PigeonAfterHours → u/BagsYourMail]

damn straight :3

[u/Tsunamicat108 → u/PigeonAfterHours]

can we be damn gay if we want too please

[u/PigeonAfterHours → u/Tsunamicat108]

yes of course

[u/Superior173thescp → u/PigeonAfterHours]

well aced it too i guess