I've been thinking about certain questions that I've been asked so I guess I'm going to ask these question to see what this community says

One of my questions would be whether or not you feel as if the NSFW community deserves the amount of blame and demonization it gets from those in and out of the fandom (saying "oh those guys? They give the fandom a bad name") and similar types of arguments. Another would be whether or not you feel like the NSFW furry content is (technically) beastiality ((I know it's a poor question that's used by most of the furry-hating community but I feel as if I need a second opinion and *maybe* some refutation)) the third and last would be whether or not you feel as if the fandom is a fetish or not and if you feel the general discrimination that the fandom faces is warranted.

If you got this far without Tl;Dr-ing I'd appreciate any sort of reply

NSFW communities attract creeps. It's unfortunate, and since some communities tolerate creeps, there's going to be some level of justification to the SFW-only crowd looking down on NSFW communities. I'm glad e621 discourages creepiness these days. But to claims that the NSFW side gives the fandom a bad name, I'm guessing popular shows like CSI do more harm, by portraying the NSFW community as both "squicky" and as representative of the fandom as a whole. For much of the 20th century, it was acceptable to make jokes out of homosexuality and portray LGBTQ folks as perverts. In the 21st century, so far, furries are the new disfavored minority.

Furry art can and does blend into bestiality. I don't think there's a real refutation to be made, except to say that it's a spectrum, and while humans can't breed with other species, it hasn't stopped a number of them from trying throughout history. Further, humanity has a long and storied history with anthropomorphic animals or with shape-shifting into animals, and nearly every culture has myths and legends involving human/anthromorph or straight-up human/animal partnerships. Even western societies have tales such as when Zeus seduced a mortal woman by morphing himself into a swan.

Is the fandom a fetish? I mean, it can be. Fetishes are... fetishes. Is it a fetish for the community in general? Ask a sociologist, man, I only have anecdotes, and I think the healthier attitude is to not care either way.

And finally, screw the haters. Furry fans shouldn't face discrimination anymore than anyone else, particularly in light of humanity's long association with therianthropy.

• #1. Every community has a "bad" side to it and many people will tend to just use them as scapegoats whenever there is any negative publicity brought to the fandom. As to whether they deserve it, it depends. If they had purposely tried to deface or slander the community, then they deserved to be shunned. If it was accidental or unintentional and the media chose to exaggerate it as the norm of the community, then you should blame them. One person/group's actions should not reflect the behavior of the entire community.

• #2. If you mean "content" as "artworks", then no. Bestiality is the action of sexual intercourse between a person and an animal. If a bunch of drawn pixels on a screen or lines & colours on a piece of paper is considered to be bestiality, I would burn everything I have and move into the wild. However, legal-wise, it all comes down to how your country defines its obscenity laws and freedom of expression.

• #3. Anything can be a fetish. A fandom is a community; a fetish is someone's sexual desire towards a particular thing. You can either have a fetish for it, or not. As for discrimination, you will have to ask yourself the question again. Should the fandom be discriminated because of one person/group's interest?

UppishSharkbait said:
I've been thinking about certain questions that I've been asked so I guess I'm going to ask these question to see what this community says

One of my questions would be whether or not you feel as if the NSFW community deserves the amount of blame and demonization it gets from those in and out of the fandom (saying "oh those guys? They give the fandom a bad name") and similar types of arguments. Another would be whether or not you feel like the NSFW furry content is (technically) beastiality ((I know it's a poor question that's used by most of the furry-hating community but I feel as if I need a second opinion and *maybe* some refutation)) the third and last would be whether or not you feel as if the fandom is a fetish or not and if you feel the general discrimination that the fandom faces is warranted.

If you got this far without Tl;Dr-ing I'd appreciate any sort of reply

1. discrimination is always pointless
2. no. one thing is watching 2 wolves having sex on this page for example, and another is having sex with your dog. you're not harming anybody with digital porn but you're harming your dog having sex with it. if you harm your dog, that means you don't love it.
3. well, i've seen furry groups on facebook and they seem to be like...uh...INCREDIBLY HORNY people. they are always talking about yiff and making weird comments like "i would love to burry my face on [insert something]" or something like that, it's so disgusting!
i'm not like them, i just like anthropomorphics.

UppishSharkbait said:
I've been thinking about certain questions that I've been asked so I guess I'm going to ask these question to see what this community says

One of my questions would be whether or not you feel as if the NSFW community deserves the amount of blame and demonization it gets from those in and out of the fandom (saying "oh those guys? They give the fandom a bad name") and similar types of arguments.

I would say no to the general demonization of the NSFW community - some black sheeps can be found in every community tho. We see it in religions, politics, etc. and those are mostly the ones drawing the most attention towards their community.

Don't want get too political here, but an actual and the best example for this would be islamists and muslims - ISIS, Al-Quaida, etc. are names we all heard several times in our life by now. Some very black sheeps in a religion consisting of 1,8 billion people. Yet many take the believes and actions of those groups as reflection for the whole religion.

Another would be whether or not you feel like the NSFW furry content is (technically) beastiality ((I know it's a poor question that's used by most of the furry-hating community but I feel as if I need a second opinion and *maybe* some refutation))

the third and last would be whether or not you feel as if the fandom is a fetish or not and if you feel the general discrimination that the fandom faces is warranted.

Bestiality would involve a non anthropomorhic, feral animal in art and descripes the act of sex with animals (see link). I would say the NSFW content is an aspect of Zoophilia , as I couldn't find a term specific for liking anthropomorphic animals.

For the fandom in general, there are many factors that could cause a liking of Furry characters. Some people are fascinated by the idea of human like animals, like to roleplaying within the concept (Fur suits, as example) or find the art interesting. Without sexual motives to like it, it isn't a fetish per definition.
(But hey, I'm a retail salesman not a psychologist ^^ ; no guarantee I'm correct here )

General discrimination of a community is never good nor warranted. There are parts of it that can be good and ones that are bad, where to draw the line between depends on the person judgeing

I don't mind it as long it isn't anything from my childhood, that didn't made me feel awkward while watching, I'm looking at you Total Drama Island.

ikdind said:
NSFW communities attract creeps. It's unfortunate, and since some communities tolerate creeps, there's going to be some level of justification to the SFW-only crowd looking down on NSFW communities. I'm glad e621 discourages creepiness these days. But to claims that the NSFW side gives the fandom a bad name, I'm guessing popular shows like CSI do more harm, by portraying the NSFW community as both "squicky" and as representative of the fandom as a whole. For much of the 20th century, it was acceptable to make jokes out of homosexuality and portray LGBTQ folks as perverts. In the 21st century, so far, furries are the new disfavored minority.

Furry art can and does blend into bestiality. I don't think there's a real refutation to be made, except to say that it's a spectrum, and while humans can't breed with other species, it hasn't stopped a number of them from trying throughout history. Further, humanity has a long and storied history with anthropomorphic animals or with shape-shifting into animals, and nearly every culture has myths and legends involving human/anthromorph or straight-up human/animal partnerships. Even western societies have tales such as when Zeus seduced a mortal woman by morphing himself into a swan.

Is the fandom a fetish? I mean, it can be. Fetishes are... fetishes. Is it a fetish for the community in general? Ask a sociologist, man, I only have anecdotes, and I think the healthier attitude is to not care either way.

And finally, screw the haters. Furry fans shouldn't face discrimination anymore than anyone else, particularly in light of humanity's long association with therianthropy.

to be honest, this site still tolerates a fair number of creeps, just look at marsminer.

1. The reason NSFW communities even exist is because sexual desire is, always has been, and always will be part of who we are as human beings. The real problem with these communities isn't the communities themselves but rather, how certain individuals in them act. There's nothing inherently wrong with enjoying NSFW content or having a sexual fetish but it can be problematic when people do things like constantly bring up their fetishes or violate other people's boundaries.
I myself find anthros sexually desirable but I'm not going to shout that from a mountaintop, that's something I prefer to keep to myself, only talking about it in appropriate places but even then, I do so in a civilized manner.
Point is, as long as people aren't obnoxious about what they like, it shouldn't matter.

2. No, because there's a difference between attraction to real animals and attraction to anthros, with the difference being that the latter is fictional, as well as sentient and capable of giving consent by means of a spoken language whereas real animals are not sentient and unable to give consent. Also, I feel that being sexually attracted to anthros counts as toonophillia, which is the sexual attraction to cartoon characters.

3. For some, it certainly is a fetish and for others, it's simply a hobby and nothing more, but for myself and many others, it's a little of both. I do enjoy NSFW furry content but I also enjoy SFW content as well.
Does the fandom deserve the flak it catches? As I said earlier, the real problem is how certain individuals act and as long as people aren't being obnoxious about what they like, it shouldn't matter.

Dusk_To_Dawn said:
1. The reason NSFW communities even exist is because sexual desire is, always has been, and always will be part of who we are as human beings.

So, should we masturbate ourselves privately? Everyday? Weekdays? Months?

I personally see no problem with it, because that's how this art community started. A bunch of social rejects sharing their interest in humanized animals with a myriad of fetishes drizzled on. Generally, the only ones who seem to take issue with it are people who came in after the fact under the guise of this being a hip, trendy SFW "fandom" that all their friends on Twitter and Tumblr would love and stop making fun of them for liking if it weren't for _____, in this case porn. While completely ignoring the fact that the majority of hatred comes from fursuiters, the general aesthetic of anthros, and this inherent need furries have to shove their interests in everyones face, and act like the victim when people voice their disinterest (It was a lot bigger in the mid-to-late 2000s, but it still happens enough to be relevant).

As for the whole "are you/you ARE into X since you like Y art" debate, I feel comfortable enough to give that a largely blanketed no. An interest in a theme in art vs reality are very different. For one fiction is a fantasy, theres no rules, restrictions, or morals, you can do as you please. Things presented in arts are idealized fantasies. Someone getting off to an Eevee (or most ferals really) with mostly human features (eyes, personality, genitals, etc) applied to it says nothing about that person's interest in fondling the neighbors dog, it says something about their interest in the character Eevee, for the most part it doesn't get much more complex than that. You don't need to justify your interest in a drawing by comparing it to the morality of reality and how things function here. A drawing can't "consent" because it doesn't need to, it's not real, who cares. Anything you draw can "consent" based on the will of the artist, so that sentiment is meaningless, as is applying the moral values meant for living, breathing humans to an illustration.

Tl;dr, nothing's wrong with NSFW, it's always been this way, and if the "revisionist history" types want their trendy, family-friendly art "fandom" they can make something else and stop piggybacking off of established communities.

1) My experience is that the majority of self-identified furries are into NSFW sorta stuff, at least to some degree. This seems backed up by the furry survey, where the numbers I'd tend to associate with "no interest" are higher than the numbers for "high interest" but still make up the overall minority compared to those with some interest.

In other words, it's the definite minority who really don't involve themselves with furry pornography at all. So I don't think that complaint holds much weight. It would be like joining the NRA and complaining that people are too into guns. That's what you signed up for here.

2) NSFW content being bestiality? Well, it's hard to say. On the one hand, anthros don't exist, so I feel like its in an overall different category. However, if they did exist, they would be of a different species from humans, thus making it bestiality by definition.

This is a problem with language. Words don't have precise definitions, and are more about how communities see things and treat things. And generally, socially, there is definitely a distinction made between someone who's into anthros and someone who's into regular animals, and if you said "I'm into bestiality" people would not understand that to mean "I'm attracted to anthros" but rather "I'm attracted to real animals".

So whether or not it should be, it is considered differently.

However, I would also like to say something in response to some of the comments here. And that is that I think that you're wrong about consent being impossible between humans and animals. I am of the opinion that it is not, and that such behavior is not inherently immoral.

Unfortunately, these forums are not the best location to have a discussion about this, due to the ToS. You want to argue with me, send me a PM.

3) I don't really have anything of particular interest to add to this one, comparatively, so leaving it be.