"Furry" discussion.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gaerteuth
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

Gaerteuth

Guest
I’d like to see a discussion on the moral compass regarding the “Furry” fandom.

In the broadest of senses, it is a dissociation from your human form, and a fondness of applying human-like attributes to characters that are animals.

View attachment 17064
a basic representation of furry characters.

Is this dissociation immoral?

Do immoral things that appear to stem from it fundamentally intertwine with it?

Where can a Catholic draw the line on this moral compass?

How might other religions and non-religions view this?
 
Gaerteuth said:
I’d like to see a discussion on the moral compass regarding the “Furry” fandom.

In the broadest of senses, it is a dissociation from your human form, and a fondness of applying human-like attributes to characters that are animals.

View attachment 17064
a basic representation of furry characters.

Is this dissociation immoral?

Do immoral things that appear to stem from it fundamentally intertwine with it?

Where can a Catholic draw the line on this moral compass?

How might other religions and non-religions view this?
Click to expand...
I don’t get it, why would it be immoral? I’m aware that “furry” stuff often has sexual connotations, but surely that falls under the same heading as other sexual immorality. What’s wrong with drawing cartoon animals that look like people, as long as it’s clean? :confused:
 
People who engage in such activities have some deep psychological issues.
 
Obviously, it depends on what you plan to do with it. There is nothing intrinsicly wrong with drawing human-like critters, if you are trying to be the next Dr. Seuss, or practicing to become a children’s illustrator or comic strip artist. If your purpose in doing this is sexual or it provides a temptation for you toward inappropriate sexual activity, then you shouldn’t do it.
 
Allegra said:
Obviously, it depends on what you plan to do with it. There is nothing intrinsicly wrong with drawing human-like critters, if you are trying to be the next Dr. Seuss, or practicing to become a children’s illustrator or comic strip artist. If your purpose in doing this is sexual or it provides a temptation for you toward inappropriate sexual activity, then you shouldn’t do it.
Click to expand...
This answer pretty well sums up my response to the OP’s questions. The overall issue is not something that I’ve put any thought into, mainly because the only thing I can draw is water, and then only if I’ve got a well, a bucket, and a rope.
 
Kamaduck said:
I don’t get it, why would it be immoral? I’m aware that “furry” stuff often has sexual connotations, but surely that falls under the same heading as other sexual immorality. What’s wrong with drawing cartoon animals that look like people, as long as it’s clean? :confused:
Click to expand...
It’s not the drawing of characters. People who are into “furry” dress up in costumes and become the character they dress up as, and many of these “furries” will have sex with each other as their characters.

It’s a mental health problem.
 
TheRealJuliane said:
It’s not the drawing of characters. People who are into “furry” dress up in costumes and become the character they dress up as, and many of these “furries” will have sex with each other as their characters.

It’s a mental health problem.
Click to expand...
I dunno, I’m pretty sure the furry fandom includes other who like anthropomorphized animals. I could be wrong about that, and I do know it’s often associated with sexual stuff, but I’m pretty sure not everybody who identifies as a “furry” even dresses up.

Also: are we saying that dressing up as characters in general is wrong? Or only dressing up as anthropomorphic animals? :confused:
 
TheRealJuliane said:
It’s not the drawing of characters. People who are into “furry” dress up in costumes and become the character they dress up as, and many of these “furries” will have sex with each other as their characters.

It’s a mental health problem.
Click to expand...
I think that’s a gross over-generalisation. I have no association with this fad, but given that people who do engage in that type of behaviour have their own label (‘yiffers’, if you were curious) that probably suggests it isn’t a mainstream part of the fandom. Dressing up as characters alone isn’t that obscure, though, considering the existence of other nerds ‘cosplaying’ as characters from fictional works.

Though I’ve been wrong before.
 
What do these people do, exactly? If we’re talking about creating (writing, illustrating), it may be a productive outlet (eg Beatrix Potter or Walt Disney). If we’re talking about adults who spend an inordinate amount of time thinking about these things… as with watching sports or reading fluff magazines… everything in moderation.
 
TheRealJuliane said:
It’s not the drawing of characters. People who are into “furry” dress up in costumes and become the character they dress up as, and many of these “furries” will have sex with each other as their characters.

It’s a mental health problem.
Click to expand...
Not to be the “devil’s advocate”, but how is this any different from the people who get done up in pagents or who spend the year designing award winning costumes for the Carnival parades and balls? Many people who do this over-sexualize themselves, but many others do not and consider this a tradition and an artform. Is this really a sin for those who do it in a festive and artistic way, simply because some choose to be perverted about it?
 
Havard said:
What do these people do, exactly? If we’re talking about creating (writing, illustrating), it may be a productive outlet (eg Beatrix Potter or Walt Disney). If we’re talking about adults who spend an inordinate amount of time thinking about these things… as with watching sports or reading fluff magazines… everything in moderation.
Click to expand...
If I remember correctly, on Second Life (an online social world of avatars) those that take avatars that are animal typed characters are called “furries.”

Some woman on Second Life once told me that you’ll find that most the people who have furry avatars as their primary avatars are homosexuals.

I don’t know whether or not that is true. I do know a lot of prejudice on Second Life is aimed at furries. I always found it funny that online social communities like Second Life would have discrimination going reminiscent of racial segregation in the Jim Crow South.

But if it is true that most those into furries tend be homosexual, I would hazard a guess it is a disassociation from their human bodies and identities in some way. Due primarily I would think to feeling like outsiders and lepers in a world of majority heterosexuals. Feelings that go to the core of their being probably.

I think you might find similar identification process in young kids that pick the monster and ugly monster when ever doing group play with other kids instead of the hero or attractive characters. Or what most would regard as attractive compared to monsters.
 
Havard said:
What do these people do, exactly? If we’re talking about creating (writing, illustrating), it may be a productive outlet (eg Beatrix Potter or Walt Disney). If we’re talking about adults who spend an inordinate amount of time thinking about these things… as with watching sports or reading fluff magazines… everything in moderation.
Click to expand...
They buy or make costumes and dress up like their favorite character, like the mascot suits from major league sports. Just google it.

Actually Wiki has a pretty good article.

Furry Fandom

However I think the “Sexual Aspects” section minimizes the perversion. But what do I know, I’m not a furry…😛

Maybe we can merge 2 lame populations and have Furry Steampunkers. 😃
 
Allegra said:
Not to be the “devil’s advocate”, but how is this any different from the people who get done up in pagents or who spend the year designing award winning costumes for the Carnival parades and balls? Many people who do this over-sexualize themselves, but many others do not and consider this a tradition and an artform. Is this really a sin for those who do it in a festive and artistic way, simply because some choose to be perverted about it?
Click to expand...
I don’t know - trying to become a stuffed animal is kinda weird. Carnival/Mardi Gras is perverted in a different way, just a more conventional way.
 
TheRealJuliane said:
They buy or make costumes and dress up like their favorite character, like the mascot suits from major league sports. Just google it.

Actually Wiki has a pretty good article.

Furry Fandom

However I think the “Sexual Aspects” section minimizes the perversion. But what do I know, I’m not a furry…😛

Maybe we can merge 2 lame populations and have Furry Steampunkers. 😃
Click to expand...
What’s wrong with steampunk? :confused:
 
TheRealJuliane said:
I don’t know - trying to become a stuffed animal is kinda weird. Carnival/Mardi Gras is perverted in a different way, just a more conventional way.
Click to expand...
But of course, weird isn’t sinful. People have the right to be weird without being accused of wrong doing.
 
Allegra said:
But of course, weird isn’t sinful. People have the right to be weird without being accused of wrong doing.
Click to expand...
As long as they are not fornicating with their furry costumes on, or off, it’s just weird.
 
TheRealJuliane said:
They buy or make costumes and dress up like their favorite character, like the mascot suits from major league sports. Just google it.

Actually Wiki has a pretty good article.

Furry Fandom

However I think the “Sexual Aspects” section minimizes the perversion. But what do I know, I’m not a furry…😛

Maybe we can merge 2 lame populations and have Furry Steampunkers. 😃
Click to expand...
in the words of Wolfgang,

verrrrrry interesting … but schtupid.

its a free country, people can dress up as circus animals if that floats their boat. any of my circle of friends proposing such would get a righteous beatdown.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top