Are Furries Doomed?
by Pixeleen Mistral on 21/07/07 at 1:28 pm
Fallout from enforcing bans on “Broadly Offensive” behavior may threaten furry avatars
by Cinnamon Twist, spicy reporter
Can furries yiff without being offensive?
Great Britain had many rules on the books for many years that it didn’t enforce in the American colonies. They were there, sure, but they were largely ignored. When Britain started to enforce rules in order to make the colonies more profitable, the colonists rebelled. Is this the fate of Second Life’s residents with regard to the notorious “broadly offensive” clause in the TOS?
In a recent article by the Herald’s award winning syndicated advice columnist Heartun Breaker, a reader asked Where do I find animals in Second Life who want to play animals… and play with me as I am?
The answer brings us to a string of even more interesting questions – some not which could be not safe for work.
Where do I find animals in Second Life who want to play animals… and play with me as I am?
The answer to that is, of course, everywhere one looks in Second Life. As the Lindens look to clean up the “broadly offensive” behavior that has been allowed to grow and develop unchecked since 2003, one of the many questions that will surely be raised involves the line between Furries and bestiality.
mounting evidence of virtual bestiality?
Most Furries in Second Life have adopted the classic “anthropomorphic” animal, like a cartoon animal. The Lindens even offer such an avatar as one of the basic shapes you can choose when you are born in Second Life. If one uses such an avatar, and one has sexual congress with another avatar, either human or furry, is that bestiality?
straw poll indicates some SL players will cross species boundaries
More to the point of the original question posed, what if someone looks for an avatar that looks less like a cartoon and more like a real animal? With some shopping, one can find avatars that will turn one into an anatomically correct dog or horse. Having sex with one of these creatures for real in many US states and foreign countries is a crime. Certainly many people find the idea of coupling with a dog or horse to be offensive. Will these avatars soon be banned? Can we logically assume that if the realistic animal costumes are banned then a case can be made to ban all furries in order to avoid the “gray area” that would ensue should the Lindens choose to ban “realistic” animal avatars?
In many shops, people are able to buy animal props, with poses and animations, that allow them to simulate sex with dogs and horses. These “animals,” though they look realistic enough, are merely sexual props; no more real than a ‘dildo’ or a sexual pose ball. Having sex with animals, or appearing to have sex with animals, however, is far more offensive than using traditional sex toys, so do they need to be banned? If so, how do we differentiate them from the other sex toys?
Where will the community draw the line with regard to “broadly offensive”? Will dildos, sexgen beds and Furries soon be a thing of the past?
Nacon
Jul 21st, 2007
Don’t forget Gor as well, retard.
(We all know that’s you getting humped on, Pixeleen.)
moses
Jul 21st, 2007
i am sorry but the term ‘broadly offensive’ is offensively broad.
WitnessX
Jul 21st, 2007
Now stepping into a drama minefield. It is advised you use furfags as guides, as if one explodes, nothing of value will be lost.
Walker Spaight
Jul 21st, 2007
Actually, Nacon, Pixeleen prefers video-enabled multi-operator media starlet avatars.
Lisae Boucher
Jul 21st, 2007
It’s weird but in the Netherlands and Belgium bestiality is not illegal. In Germany, having sex with animals isn’t illegal either, but publishing bestiality porn is. In the USA, about half of all the states explicitly consider bestiality a crime. The other states will just call it mistreatment of animals, which accidently also happens to be a crime. However, in the UK people could get the death penalty for bestiality and after the death penalty was abolished, punishments in the UK for bestiality still tends to be very high. (At this moment, 2 years imprisonment.)
In the Netherlands in 2004 there was a case of sexual abuse of a pony. The guy who did this was just released again since legally, he had done no harm to the animal. Much to the dislike of the public, as I might add. After this, it was announced that steps will be taken to put a stop to these kinds of activities but it takes years before one such proposal actually becomes law here.
Bestiality is still a difficult topic, though. It is just another fetish and many people -including me- just think it’s real sick. Yet many lawmakers seem to have forgotten to write appropriate laws relating to this sick behavior. Instead, laws are extremely vague, as usual.
The Prophet
Jul 21st, 2007
lawdy lawdy!! Thats nasty. More pools to close now that SLH has antagonized us.
Furfag sympathizers are no better than furfags.
Anonymous
Jul 21st, 2007
this is just stupid its second life. its called virtual its not real so i dont see anything wrong with it just someones playing animal. so i donno what is going on but i just find it stupid stop taking virtual things real its a game . so shut up if you dont like it and leave
Anonymous1
Jul 21st, 2007
stop taking this as something real its a virtual game and second life is a game i see notthing wrong with it being in a game its not real , yes it maybe sick but why should i care if someone like doing it in second life we should not give a care in the world. if they where doing it in real life maybe i would say something else but its not its only virtual so stop having a go at something thats not real and only in a game.
expression
Jul 22nd, 2007
I’d much rather see SL digital dogs doing this than real dogs. I don’t give a shit what people do in games, as long as it stays in the game. Simulating sex with animals hurts no people and no animals.
How is this any worse that fragging a player running around in quake 3. In that case you are shooting and KILLING a person. NOT!
Eric Rice
Jul 22nd, 2007
Congrats, guys, you made TechCrunch. Level UP!
HazimGazovX
Jul 22nd, 2007
Pictures of Profoky Neva are broadly offensive, even she gets pissed when she sees them. It’s all about priorities. Get rit of Profoky, then worry about the dogmonglers.
Natu
Jul 22nd, 2007
i kill animals all the time in world of warcraft, is that murder?
Flack Quartermass
Jul 22nd, 2007
Let’s hope LL doesn’t continue down that slippery slope. When SL becomes too much like RL, I won’t be there.
I have no personal desire for any of the activities mentioned in the article.
I do, however, support a resident’s *option* to do so because I find it more appealing to allow what I may dislike than to be thought-policed for things that 1) hurt no one, 2) occur between consenting adults and 3) take place in a virtual world.
Alazarin
Jul 22nd, 2007
Where do you think all those babyfurs come from? You think a stork delivers them? Nope, it’s Mom and Pop furry having their fun
Or possibly Momma furry and Poppa alien or Momma human and Poppa furry or whatever. Who knows? Who cares? We might all be test-tube babies out of a gene-splicing lab for all I know. Or replicants.. or simulants.. or virtual entities with no real existence outside of an artificial simulation. And without the examples photographed for the story, where would all the werewolves come from? Take pity on those poor transylvanian peasants…. where would they be without their werewolves? Or their vampires for that matter.
Next predicted scandal in SL: Dryad s3cks… is it immoral? And those trees… they’re all a bunch of dangerous subversive hermaphrodites!!!!!!!!!!!! Three anal-rententive neo-conservative christian-fundamentalist throwbacks think so and are will be doing the chat-show circuit on TV next week to call for public burning of all Dryads.
Lisae Boucher
Jul 22nd, 2007
Quote: stop taking this as something real its a virtual game and second life is a game i see notthing wrong with it being in a game its not real
I do realize why people have some fear about this. People are afraid that people who behave like this in a virtual world or who collect images (virtual or real) of bestial porn will sooner or later cross some lines and do things for real. But why would people think such things?
In general, when an offender is arrested for animal abuse then a search of his place tends to uncover some animal porn too. But then you have to start wondering what he did first. Did he first collect the porn and then start to abuse animals? Or did he start abusing animals first and then decided it would also be cool to collect related images?
It is actually a chicken-and-egg problem that people don’t have an answer for. Yet the two seem to be strongly related to one another. So does virtual bestiality encourage people to start abusing animals? Or do people who abuse animals also happen to be interested in bestiality porn?
Draconis
Jul 22nd, 2007
Isn’t the whole point of second life to escape from reality and the rules it implies? If people want to have cartoon/realistic anthro sex then there’s nothing wrong with that as long as it’s done in a place away from communal areas where there are minors. What goes on behind closed doors and in private online or off is up to consenting adults.
Now if avatars are behaving badly in public…well…that’s a whole other matter.
Anon
Jul 22nd, 2007
It may be “just a game” but furfags are going to scare away other players (customers). Now yiff in hell!
Lewis Nerd
Jul 22nd, 2007
“Isn’t the whole point of second life to escape from reality and the rules it implies?”
If so, please explain why racism, nazi imagery and such are banned in SL.
The point is that everyone will find something distasteful/illegal/immoral/sick – so where do you draw the line? What can you allow, and what can’t you allow? Don’t fall into the trap of basing it on US laws because 70% of the playerbase are not in the US – and Linden Lab is not a “US only” company either now.
Lewis
Nik
Jul 22nd, 2007
Anything two consenting adults want to do is fine — particularly in a world where physical harm is an impossibility. As long as it does not get seen by underage types, who cares?
That’s the position the Lindens should take regarding EVERYTHING that happens in the mature areas of SL — including people who want to roleplay being children. Because once you start saying, “This particular behavior is NOT okay,” the option of expanding that definition is on the table.
Slight caveat to the above: I’m guessing that, for legal purposes, they’ll have to make sure no RL child porn or bestiality porn is being passed around. Good luck policing that.
Lisae Boucher
Jul 22nd, 2007
Quote: The point is that everyone will find something distasteful/illegal/immoral/sick – so where do you draw the line?
Actually, that is such a good question! And unfortunately there is no good indication of where to actually draw those lines. Second Life does bring out some of the extremes into plain view, but that’s mostly because you can so easily travel around and thus miss the signs indicating what kind of offensive material is on the land that you’re about to enter.
Another issue is how to determine what is really offensive and what’s not? Who is going to decide this? And what motives will be used to decide about this? Right now we’re discussing bestiality. And I’m against that and so are many others. But next time there might be a similar discussion about homosexuality and how it should be outlawed. And then the demand that women return to the kitchen again. And whatever other restrictions they could come up with. So we don’t want certain freedoms to be taken away.
Yet we also want to make sure people won’t use their freedoms to abuse others. So some restrictions are required. If you take that into consideration then you should be allowed to do anything that doesn’t cause harm or discomfort to others. (And with others, I also include unneeded cruelty towards animals.)
But then there is the discussion that people always tend to have that certain kind of behavior would sooner or later lead to abusive actions. This is why people are against bestiality images since it might cause people to actually abuse animals. Same about racist remarks, since such remarks could encourage to actually start to act upon those and hurt people from the racial group that they dislike. It also means that people who discuss how to make bombs are considered dangerous since they could use that knowledge to actually make some bombs.
Concerned Citizen
Jul 22nd, 2007
This is quite a pickle the lindens have created. The Lindens let sex spin out of control for four years. It’s going to be impossible to get that genie back in the bottle.
Will prudish America come play if we have slavegirls paraded around on leashes? Furry couples with multiple breasts and partners that look like puppies? Human ageplayers? The Transgendered and flaunting set? Women walking their dogs then taking them home to…uh…see picture above.
(Well they will come play of course, but it will be on the downlow and then they’ll deny it).
More importantly, will the corporations come keep this ship afloat if it’s a digital downlow?
Anonymous
Jul 22nd, 2007
Virtual?! Real?! What’s the difference!!! OMFG! It gets worse!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NidUG88wY4o
moses
Jul 22nd, 2007
hmmm…’broadly offensive’ to WHO ? i do not remember completeing a survey about what i like and do not like. any one here get one ?
Lewis Nerd
Jul 22nd, 2007
On a related note…
http://www.wgrz.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=49447
Lewis
Second Lulz Vigilante
Jul 22nd, 2007
Geez the PN guys and their sympathizers crack me up. Sim crashing is gay. Sort of like using a nuclear weapon to kill a housefly. Going to a furfag sim for any reason is double gay. All these guys prpobably take a few minutes to jack off to yiffy before their guilt and shame causes them to fire off a sim crasher. lol!
A more effective way of pissing off furfags is to debate them on neutral territory where they can’t eject you and you don’t have to look at yiffy sex. Using logic to explain to them why yiffy is disgusting has a far more lasting psychological effect than griefing(most of them hate logic and having their precious rationale torn to shreds ya know). Griefing them just gives a martyr complex and makes them even worse than before.
I’ve even got a couple of the more reasonable ones to give up yiffing. Something no griefer has ever accomplished. lol!
Lisae Boucher
Jul 22nd, 2007
Quote: The Lindens let sex spin out of control for four years.
As my father told me, if it wasn’t for all the sex the Internet would never have been as popular as it is nowadays. Apparently sex and anything sex-related seems to make the biggest revenue on the Internet. What will people continue to use it for if sex disappears completely from the Internet? And I do even mean every hint about sexuality, thus even something suggestive as the relationship between Harry and Ginny in the 7th book…
Quote: Will prudish America come play if we have slavegirls paraded around on leashes?
I think there are also plenty of non-prudish Americans who at one point will have enough of all those restrictions. Especially when more and more of them see how relaxed things are in other countries. Simple example: gay marriages. These are accepted in many European nations already but in the USA still not completely possible.
The biggest problem in the USA is the unconditional patriotism. Freedom of opinions is okay until someone says something that is completely out of order. The best example of this is how the USA thought about Communism a few decades ago. One simple trick to take down someone with a different opinion was to accuse the person of being a communist. Nowadays, communism dis disappear but now there’s a different target, which all relates to the 9/11 attack and the threat of terrorism after that. Suddenly, extremist Muslims became the enemy and many of them are still awaiting their trial after being captured outside the US borders.
Unfortunately, those patriots aren’t wrong in what they say. But it’s the way they operate to try to take down anything that even seems to be the opposition. Michael Moore, for example, has almost become an enemy of the state (well, just G. Bush) simply because his documentaries about weapon control, about 9/11 and more recently because of his reports on the US Health Care system.
Quote: More importantly, will the corporations come keep this ship afloat if it’s a digital downlow?
Companies don’t have morals. Companies tend to just go for profits. However, the market does force companies to maintain the most popular morals at that moment and companies don’t like changing things whenever morals change so they tend to enforce the most important morals. They will do anything to stay popular amongst the public. So if the public allows naked slave-dance-girls in public then the next advertisement they make will incorporate them. Then again, if an artist displays her bare nipple during a huge event then companies will publicly announce all kinds of steps they’ve taken to prevent such things in the future while also pointing out such things could still happen to their competition. And of course companies will use their influence to make sure they don’t have to change their moral values too often, since changing morals is more expensive than preventing such changes.
CrushYiffDestroy
Jul 22nd, 2007
Intro to the Second Life Herald
A subject not explored often here is the Second Life blogging community and its reactions to the game staff’s behavior. The experience as a whole is nothing unlike a World of Darkness MUSH where everyone plays a vampire journalist for the Times.
Hu…
Lisae Boucher
Jul 22nd, 2007
Quite: Sim crashing is gay.
And what’s wrong with being gay?
Yeah, I get your point but couldn’t resist the remark.
Quote: Using logic to explain to them why yiffy is disgusting has a far more lasting psychological effect than griefing
Yeah, but that can backfire after which griefing becomes easier. If the furry-lovers have some logical counter-replies then you’d just end up in an endless arguments which will have a psychological effect on both sides.
Reminds me on one thing… When you see Donald Duck walk in the comics, he’s always bottomless. But when he gets out of the shower he wears a towel around his bottoms. What’s up with that?
Oh, don’t worry. I agree with you on this. Furrylovers have a very weird sexual fetish. They’ve probably been reading too many comics with ducks and mice in them. Those magazines should be banned!
Csven Concord
Jul 22nd, 2007
*wonders whether or not a person having relations with someone who has an organ transplanted from an animal is guilty of pseudo-bestiality*
Hali Heron
Jul 22nd, 2007
Furries by their nature are not offensive content. If Furries are banned, so will my music.
Second Lulz Vigilante
Jul 22nd, 2007
“Furrylovers have a very weird sexual fetish. They’ve probably been reading too many comics with ducks and mice in them. Those magazines should be banned!
”
@Lisae
That’s the part I don’t get though. I was raised on Warner Bros. cartoons. I loved em. But I never sexualized anything about talking animals. If I ever put on a furry av I wouldn’t get the urge to yiff. I’d be more far more likely to try and re-enact all the slapstick things I’d seen in the cartoons like dropping anvils and pianos on people’s heads.
As for the classic cartoons it wasn’t Donald Duck I couldn’t figure out. It was all those black and white Popeye the Sailor shorts from the Depression era that freaked me out the most. 2 ugly guys fighting over an ugly anorexic woman repeating the same dysfunctional love triangle formula:
1) Olive and Popeye are doing fine until Bluto comes along and Olive stats to favor Bluto.
2) Popeye gets his ass kicked by Bluto and becomes depressed.
3) Bluto gets too “fresh” with Olive, i.e. tries to rape her(that’s what’s implied).
4) Popeye eats a can of Spinach which somehow magically grants him superhuman strength, kicks Bluto’s ass, and wins back Olive…until the next cartoon where the whole damn thing gets recycled.
Popeye the Sailor was hella disturbing thing to watch.
Second Lulz Vigilante
Jul 22nd, 2007
“*wonders whether or not a person having relations with someone who has an organ transplanted from an animal is guilty of pseudo-bestiality*”
@Csven
If the organ transplanted was a dog cock, I’d have to say “yes”. :p
Anonymous
Jul 22nd, 2007
If anything, SL is keeping them away from the real shit. like a holding pen. Though let’s be honest, SL will never ban furries, they’re their bread and butter. The people who spend the most on the game are furries. Good luck at ever seeing any of them banned for broadly offensive content, the day they do that, all the furries will up and leave SL. I’ve seen it happen before. Sheezyart.com used to allow adult art, however, furries took advantage of this and the site was jokingly known as the #1 furry porn site online, until the admins got sick of it and banned adult works. which led to massive drama. It was pretty damn hilarious. However, LL isn’t that stupid, and there would be lindens who’d quit, etc.
Technically furryism as an erotic fixation is indeed bestiality, because it’s an infatuation with another species, some have more humanlike figures than others, but that’s more or less a security thing. Which you start buying and using realistic animal genitalia, it’s pretty much evidence. There’s no innocent factor about it. It’s like saying hentai is not as bad as real porn in context of potential offensive material.
However, it’s probably best to leave it alone, because it keeps a lot of people off the rest of the internet.
Lisae Boucher
Jul 22nd, 2007
Quote: If anything, SL is keeping them away from the real shit. like a holding pen.
I don’t know. Some people seem to think it will only encourage people to try this for real. Reality is that we just don’t know the effect. It’s similar with violent video-games. Do they prevent violence or do they actually cause more violence? That too has still not been proven.
Quote: Though let’s be honest, SL will never ban furries, they’re their bread and butter.
Problem is, when that happens then there would be so much more that needs to be banned. Not just from Second Life but also in real life. People could even wonder if Mickey Mouse should be banned since he’s a humanoid animal-like thing with a girlfriend…
Quote: Technically furryism as an erotic fixation is indeed bestiality, because it’s an infatuation with another species
Which brings another question. How about all those books with the main characters in some fantasy settings? Where do half-elfs come from?
What if someone writes an erotic story about sex with elves? What if there’s an adult version of Star Wars where Anakin decides to have sex with a wookie? (Wookee? Wookiee? Woekie? WhoCares?) As before, where to draw the lines and more importantly who is going to decide about this and based on which motives?
Anonymous
Jul 22nd, 2007
“Technically furryism as an erotic fixation is indeed bestiality, because it’s an infatuation with another species”
False on multiple levels.
1. Bestiality, in common usage, deals with non-human animals (“multicellular organism of the kingdom Animalia”), which in turn are defined biologically by kingdom, not species.
2. If you want to be “technical”, humans are biologically animals (“multicellular organism of the kingdom Animalia”), but for the purpose of defining “bestiality” to be meaningful in this context, guess we won’t be too “technical”
3. Whereas the fantastical anthropomorphic organisms often found in furry fandom do not exist in nature, their representations are not technically a species of anything, in any event. You can’t take a furry depiction and call it the depiction a species of anything in real life any more than trying to do the same for random squiggly lines, some of which might resemble eyeballs and a mouth. The most that can be said is that the representation has identifiable characteristic of particular organisms/species/animals, but do not represent animals, themselves. Because bestiality concerns animals (which are real), it is not meaningful to apply the term to fantastical organisms (which are not real) simply for their non-human animal characteristics, unless you’re prepared to apply “human” terms to the same organisms for their human characteristics (which would defeat the purpose of making the distinction for applying this specific term in the first place).
And Linden Labs WILL censor ANYTHING if it deems such is in its business interest to do so. They’ve already proved that.
Eric Bauman
Jul 22nd, 2007
Long live evil forces of Ganon!!!
Anonymous
Jul 22nd, 2007
AWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW YEAH.
SherpaDerpaX
Jul 22nd, 2007
lolfurfags
Cheezo
Jul 22nd, 2007
These comments look to be made of tl;dr and BAWWWWWWWWWWW
Psychotic Writer
Jul 23rd, 2007
>Can furries yiff without being offensive?
Hell no.
I have no problem with people wanting to wear different avatars, and run around in a “role” but the whole sexual aspect of furryism is freaking sick to me. It’s gross, nasty, weak, and fails hard.
Red rocket = You are so going to hell.
Anonymous
Jul 23rd, 2007
When EVER was a RL dog hurt in any way by humping a RL girl?
Really, even RL animal sex doesn’t hurt animals.
Think the dog would mind humping anyone?
Come on people.
Simple answer to the question in this article:
No, of course they won’t ban furry sex. They’re not crazy.
Lisae Boucher
Jul 23rd, 2007
Quote: When EVER was a RL dog hurt in any way by humping a RL girl?
There has been a recent case of a 2 year old child who was sodomized by a Pitbull. Question remains if this was just natural behavior for this dog or if it has been trained to have sex with humans. I think the dog was just naturally horny, though. And there’s a common cure for that too which would solve this problem with this dog together. My girlfriend just suggested that we should also do that with real men with the exception of a few studs which all of us women can share for reproduction…
But I’m sure she’s kidding…
But the reality? Except for the possibility of bite marks and scratches, there doesn’t seem to be much of a danger here. However, for the dog this tends to become confusing. He is allowed to mate with one of the alpha females so he must be the alpha dog, right? Worse, the dog might start to think it’s okay to have sex with anyone who is part of the family including any outsiders. He’s the alpha male in a species where the females tend to be more bossier than males. And it’s already confusing for him to interact with those humans since their behavior is so different from real dogs that having sex with their bosses just confuses them even more.
No, dogs won’t mind humping people. But it’s other people who will mind being humped by a dog. I still see images of a teddy bear being violated by a small poodle. The child who owned the toy wasn’t too happy about it either nor were the parents. And it happened to be their own dog to begin with. But they managed to get it under control through simple surgery. The teddy bear has lost it’s virginity and the dog lost a couple of balls to lick…
The same applies to other animals, btw. Teach them to have sex with humans and next time they might decide to take advantage of some human. So to prevent rape by animals, you better not train them on how to have sex with humans to begin with.
A Zebra
Jul 23rd, 2007
Interesting that the person above mentions neutering the animal. Apparently it’s perfectly acceptable to mutilate an animal by cutting off its testicles, but you can’t have sex with it because that’s icky, or the animal might not like it. Here’s a news flash: animals like to have sex. That’s where all the little baby animals come from.
As anyone that’s ever had a dog hump their leg can attest, animals don’t have much of an objection to inter-species sex. I don’t think that “it’s disgusting” is a good enough reason because as mentioned before, everyone finds everyone else’s sexual kinks pretty awful.
Furries make up a significant minority of SL residents. Although Daniel Linden showed in his hour-long seminar (sorry, I don’t have a link, I think it was in a Herald article), he’s not particularly furry-friendly and wouldn’t see much of a problem with doing away with them. There are a few furry Lindens however.
Furries aren’t doing any harm – if you don’t like it then don’t go to furry places. As for bestiality, furries tend to be animal lovers and have a deep respect for their chosen species. That may (although certainly doesn’t necessarily) include a sexual interest in the RL animal, but as said before, sex is perfectly natural and anyone that thinks otherwise should go and live on a farm for a while.
Bestiality in SL? – that’s just ridiculous. They’re pixels, folks.
from Zebra – long time reader, first time commenter
~ Furry love! ~
Alazarin
Jul 23rd, 2007
I can only assume that Cinnamon Twist’s article was a deliberate wind-up / troll. And a very humorous one at that. Well done, Cinnamon Twist! It certainly brought out the haters with their pitchforks ‘n’ torches and the pretentious pontificators. Sure, many of us furries fantasise about sex. Who doesn’t? What people come across in SL is role-play between consenting adults and is no more ‘dangerous’ than people dressing up as roman centurions, klingons, martians, mermaids or whatever and having a bit of fun. The number of furs who advocate any form of bestiality can be counted on the talons of one paw. When seen in context of the sheer size of the furry population they barely even register on the radar.
I suspect that our freshly-minted and rabidly vocal morality police are sexually frustrated losers who have never made it past the missionary position if they even made it that far in life. I hasten to guess that they’re rather well acquainted with Rosie Palm and her five sisters.
Anon
Jul 23rd, 2007
>Interesting that the person above mentions neutering the animal. Apparently it’s perfectly acceptable to mutilate an animal by cutting off its testicles, but you can’t have sex with it because that’s icky, or the animal might not like it. Here’s a news flash: animals like to have sex. That’s where all the little baby animals come from.
Go to hell. That shit is sick. Sex with an animal? Come on. Yes, animals like to have sex, wow! So do we, but WITH each other? No, animals do it because honestly, when a dog “mounts” something it has a habit to attempt to dominate, and humps. It’s not doing it because it likes to have sex with creatures not of it’s species, it’s doing it because it’s trying to dominate. People who fuck animals are fucked in the head.
~ Furry Death ~
Lisae Boucher
Jul 23rd, 2007
Quote: Apparently it’s perfectly acceptable to mutilate an animal by cutting off its testicles, but you can’t have sex with it because that’s icky, or the animal might not like it.
Actually, the same happens to pigs. It’s even worse for pigs since their testicles are removed or else their meat will have some weird smell. It also happens to bulls, horses, sheep and other animals that are kept for food. Normally the males of every species would be competing over mating rights. Cut off their nuts at an early stage in life and they will be a lot calmer and more tolerant towards other males once they grow up.
Am not saying I consider it icky. It’s just not my kind of thing. And when you hear stories about children being sexually abused by dogs the you could wonder if the testicles of a dog are more valuable than the anus of a two year old human child. As I’ve said, you could train a dog to have sex with humans. But dogs will repeat that trick even at more inappropriate moments.
And virtual furry sex? Those are pixels indeed and I just don’t know what effect such images have on humans. It could be that they’ll start abusing animals. It could also be that they rent a Wookie and Leia suite and prepare to create some loud noises together. So I’m just neutral about this.
Don’t see any fun in furry-sex anyways. I hate hairballs in my mouth which also explains why my girlfriend and I keep certain areas hairless… Oops, sorry. Too much information.
Still, I am convinced that if you train animals to have sex with humans then the animal might become confused some day which would require testiclectomy to prevent in the future. Or otherwise the animal might become a bit violent the next time it wants sex. And keep in mind that for many species, sex means dominance.
Bobby Troughton
Jul 23rd, 2007
That’d be silly, they’d have to ban all other costumed forms of sex too. Being that the broadly used avatars in SL tends to be furries, I’d doubt it’d be considered to be broadly offensive. I think mainly Lindens moral crusade would just go after kiddie porn, age-players, and racist nazi folk. Seems most furries think furry sex is more of a joke then anything.
O.O
Jul 23rd, 2007
It’s amazing to see this even being brought up. And the various comments in part make me roll over the floor in laughing, and shake my head in disbelief over their stupidity. And one or two actually make good points…
Furry *in itself* has absolutely NOTHING, ZILCH, NADA to do with bestiality. Even two furries having sex with eachother, is not bestiality. It may be weird, it may be ridiculous, and it certainly is deserving of mockery, but it’s not bestiality.
Yes it LOOKS like it, but anyone with two braincells and google can find out what it is. Clearly, most of the nay-sayers and pitchfork carrying crowd have either no google, or no briancells.
If you think furry is icky because it’s a fetish about animals, I am calling you a stupid dipshit, you read it correctly. Do your research before opening your mouth.
If you think furry is just wierd and wanna make fun of it because it’s different, hey, knock yourself out. I do it too, furry IS weird. But not a fetish.
Bestiality is sexual intercourse between an ANIMAL and a human (Animal in caps to indicate the difference with a furry: Furries are not animals, they’re non existant, anthropomorphic animals. See your local dictionary). The SL images in the article above indeed is bestiality. And indeed, this might lead to people trying it IRL as well.
Bestiality is by definition not animal cruelty: If you think a human male can hurt a mare for instance, you’re giving him way too much credit… Even the worlds largest human penis is not large enough to cause even the slightest tickle to a mare, who are obviously built for the size of a horsewang.
In most cases, people who have sex with animals, deeply care for the animals, and would never hurt them in any way. The cases where you hear of animals being seriously hurt, it’s not simple zoophilia but it’s done with the intent to harm the animals. Such is animal cruelty and illegal in most countries on the planet.
Most animal porn you will find on the net however, it’s not about hurting the animals, nor about a deep care, but simply profit. It also consists mostly of human females and male animals. Obviously, the only ones who it might be cruel to, is the human female.
The danger of a dog learning that sex with the female human of the house is indeed that in it’s mind, it makes it dominant. But there’s easy ways to prevent that: make sure the man of the house asserts his dominance. Or just make sure that you train the dog so it knows it’s only okay to do that sort of thing in given sutuations. Cause ya know, you can train dogs very easily. (seeing the amount of dogpoop on the sidewalks everywhere, however, shows that most people don’t know this yet.)
The example of the dog raping the teddybear is in this context unneeded, as of course, each animal has a sexual drive and they will do this sort of thing even without being taught so. But, fortunately, dogs can be trained so they could have also taught it not to do that, and the castration wouldn’t be needed.
(incidently: castration, if done properly by a vet, is a painless operation under narcosis (sp?), and is not maming an animal. A lot of dogs are castrated anyways, as well as cats, to prevent other unwanted aspects of the workings of the organs… Like the smell from unneutered cats.)
Where was I going with this?
Oh right. last two points:
- It’s PIXELS and NOT RL. If you have problems seperating RL from a game, go have your head examined.
- Who’s damn buisness is it anyway what two concenting adults do in their little virtual privacy, but their own? Putting your nose where it does not belong, THAT is broadly offensive.
(PS: I can see the flood of “Furry lover, GTFO and yiff in hell” and what not coming already. You couldn’t be more wrong, I’m totally on your side. But, at least I do my homework on the subjects of my ridicule, as opposed to most of you.)
shockwave yareach
Jul 23rd, 2007
1, no, furry is not a sexual anything. Furry simply defined is an appreciation and enjoyment of anthropomorphism. This covers a large area of media and furry has been a staple of advertisers for generations. (Put a Tiger in your tank, for example) Not every furry is into yiffing at all and most oldtimers have more interesting things to do. And furry doesn’t even have to have living beings – the walking talking furniture in “Beauty and the Beast” are anthropomorphic.
2, While furry itself isn’t sexual, just like any other fandom there are corners where (surprise) people have sex. Name me any other activity or group that does not. You cannot even point to the Catholic Priests and say they don’t (Run, little alterboy – run!), so don’t act like it’s automatically bad and evil. But unless you go looking for it (or arrange with friends to make some photos, as certain reporters do) you aren’t going to just stumble onto it. Just like the Kirk/Spock fanfiction, if you want to find something, you’ll find it. Doesn’t make the whole thing about sex though, anymore than the Star Trek wank material made Trek all about boffing across the universe.
3, It is no different having people play as Animals or Digitgrade animals than it is all these other people pretending to be angels, devils, demons, vampires or samauri… then screwing each other a thousand different ways with 15,000L beds in a rented skybox. Furries are people enjoying a fantasy unreal life through the computer, the same as the rest of you. If it’s okay for you to have your demon/angel sexcapades, then don’t bitch about what others are doing.
4, if you want to take the approach that “it’ll lead people to try it in real life!”, then you’ll have to ban all the video games where you shoot people, because “it’ll lead people to try it in real life!” as well. And lets not forget to ban every book and movie out there with a murder/cheating spouse/crime as well. If we follow your logic, Netflix will be pretty empty.
If furry isn’t your interest, then whatever man. You can go back to dressing up like Paris Hilton with a dildo hanging out of your purse – I don’t care. What you do is your biz and what I do is mine. But if you aren’t a furry, don’t even pretend that you have the faintest idea what it’s all about because from the outside, you don’t see or know squat.
WitnessX
Jul 23rd, 2007
OMG YOU GUYS FURRY ISNT SEXUAL GAWD
YIFFING IS A SPIRITUAL JOURNEY ITS GOT NOTHING TO DO WITH SEX