Judged and Accused

[Fang Wolf]

How many of your artist/animator have be Judged because of your works and who you are?
Be in my shoes and suffer for accused for that you draw - that will you do in real life.
For some people is art = reality - There is no difference between them....
Yes, I have..So have you be in this kind of thing?

Warning for nsfw rant - about me as Furry:

Spoiler:

I'm a Furry and be accused of being in beastaliy because I'm Furry and that is not true!
I would never do that kind of thing...why think people we furries do that kind of things?

- Never understand People in this world....

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by Fang Wolf

Warning for nsfw rant - about me as Furry:

Spoiler:

I'm a Furry and be accused of being in beastaliy because I'm Furry and that is not true!
I would never do that kind of thing...why think people we furries do that kind of things?

I don't think that's a very big leap to make, mentally, for a lot of people looking from the outside in. Personally, I think it's not "I have a fantasy about having sex with animals" but rather, "I have a fantasy about having sex as an animal."

Working in the hotel industry you sure hear a lot of stories about what goes on in those "Furry" cons...

[IndigoErth]

Originally Posted by Fang Wolf

I would never do that kind of thing...why think people we furries do that kind of things?

My two cents... Because despite the intelligence of the species, human beings can be rather simple minded beasts who think all the answers should be simple. A black and white world is easy, all the gray area requires thought and most are too lazy for the more complex thought required.

The furry thing is not something I'll personally ever understand, but I at least can appreciate the amazing amount of talent that goes into a lot of those costumes.

[Fang Wolf]

Originally Posted by IndigoErth

Because despite the intelligence of the species, human beings can be rather simple minded beasts who think all the answers should be simple.
A black and white world is easy, all the gray area requires thought and most are too lazy for the more complex thought required.

Yes, world is black and white. (all as no normals is a big sins)
Some people I have meet don't know what is the difference between human intelligence creatures
(Mutants, werewolfs, ect, ect..) and no intelligence beasts.

Here is The Guide tell what I mean.....

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

I don't think that's a very big leap to make, mentally, for a lot of people looking from the outside in.
Personally, I think it's not "I have a fantasy about having sex with animals" but rather, "I have a fantasy about having sex as an animal."

Yes, you can have fantasy or dream about it. (No wrong with that...)
But if you do thing as animation, artworks or says someting about you be accused of it.
People think you in it and drag you down in dirt (called weirdo, ect, ect, ect).

[Fang Wolf]

People judged everything as Different what they think is normal..

[Leo656]

I think there's "degrees" of everything. Like there's people who have one or two beers with dinner, and there's people who get fall-down piss-their-pants drunk every chance they get. But it's unfair to accuse people on One Side of that equation of being The Other Side by default. Like when I have a few beers at a holiday party, there's always at least ONE person giving me the side-eye, and my wife is always like "No, he's not like that at all, he's never a problem drinker." But people ASSUME you are, and man, that can be annoying as hell.

So yeah, I think there's degrees. Some people just like the artwork, and that seems pretty much fine and "harmless"; I don't get why some people get all bent about it. Lola Bunny or Jessica Rabbit, it's a cartoon either way so we've already crossed one "line" into Nonsense. But nobody ever really gets side-eyed for saying they'd bang Jessica Rabbit; it's more or less a given, from what I've seen. But... it's still just a cartoon... so while I see there's still a few degrees of separation between one and the other... either one is "silly" if we're being honest about it. So if a person is already one who finds cartoon characters arousing, well... I don't see the big deal either way. FW April or Krystal from Star Fox, it's really not THAT different. You're never gonna bang either one of 'em in Real Life, so who cares what you're thinking in your head? I mean, if Lola Bunny is Wrong then I dont wanna be Right.

Other people do the fursuit and convention thing, and I gotta admit, that's a bit more outlandish to me, but... MOSTLY because I can't fathom anyone spending so much time, money and effort on ANY thing. It's also none of my business. But I'd never participate. At the same time I don't go to "regular" cons or dress up in elaborate super-hero attire either; again Too Much Work! But I have no problem with people who do, and a lot of time their craftsmanship is admirable. As for what people are doing behind closed doors at such affairs... eh, once again, not my business. If people wanna dress up like Care Bears and screw around, that's their business, just like the people down the hall at the same hotel dressing up like Batman and Batgirl and doing their own weird sex stuff is their own business. I don't see much separation between the two, frankly. Either one is kinda "weird" if you wanna be judgmental about it.

Either way, I think it's all pretty harmless and I think it's kinda weird that a lot of people talk about furries the same way they talk about pedophiles or actual zoophiles. I highly doubt that the same people who jack it to Thundercats are also molesting their pets. Y'know who I've seen in the news a lot over the years get in trouble for molesting animals? Chicks who work at vet clinics and animal shelters and horse farms. Lotta "after-hours" stuff going on in those places if you go strictly by what the headlines report. But do we automatically assume that every woman who becomes a vet secretly wants to molest animals? No, we don't assume that. Or likewise, how many times is it in the news every single year that some female teacher got caught having sex with her underage students? Literally dozens, and I'm sure there are tons who never get reported. But do we automatically assume that every female teacher wants to have sex with her students? No, we don't. No matter how many times it actually HAPPENS, we don't cast those aspersions on those types of people.

I don't know. I think there's way worse stuff in the world than people getting horny for cartoon characters, and I do think it's kinda funny that Those People get judged a lot more harshly than a lot of people who actually do Bad Stuff in real life. It's odd.

[Sumac]

Furries are single handedly responsible for their...ahem..."reputation".
So, they should deal with it.

Usually, I am "live an let live" type, so I don't have strong feelings about weirdos doing some crazy ****, but furries creep me out. The whole idea of pretending to be a "cartoon animal" is just...bizzare, to say the least.

[Coola Yagami]

I can't say I understand furries either, but to each their own.

It's just funny how people are quick to vilify anything related to sex but not when it's related to animated violence.

Like if someone draws Jessica Rabbit in all her glory, people think the person is sicko.

But yet actual DC artists can draw the Joker standing in a room, covered in blood, dead bodies all around him, and no one is accusing the artist of having sick homicidal tendencies and being a potential danger in real life.

Like when I read Dollhouse's plans in the New 52 Catwoman comics, it made my skin crawl, but over how sick the character was, not because I was thinking the comic book writer was some deranged mass murderer that somehow snuck into DC offices to script this.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by Coola Yagami

Like if someone draws Jessica Rabbit in all her glory, people think the person is sicko.

Do they? I think it's fine to do that. It's just more the people that get off on stuff like that and obsess on it that is iffy, not the artists.

[Leo656]

To my point earlier, though... I've personally never heard anyone belittle anyone else for lusting after Jessica Rabbit. To the contrary, I've seen grown men in a public setting make jokes about wanting to f*ck Jessica Rabbit, and it's taken no differently than if they'd said they wanted to f*ck Britney Spears.

I mean it's just kinda "interesting". I'm on the record that I have zero problem with anyone being attracted to a cartoon character. I just think that once you're already into that territory it's kinda silly to say "Well, This One with huge breasts, long legs, a round ass and 'F*ck Me' eyes is Perfectly Okay... but This Other One with all the same features BUT she's also got a tail, that's gross and you're a horrible person now." Like it's 99% the same thing, c'mon. Either way, it's a drawing. If it's purposely drawn to be arousing then people shouldn't act disgusted and horrified by the fact that some people ARE in fact aroused by it. It's okay not to be into it, like it's okay not to like rap music or the color orange or whatever. But when people overreact so hyperbolically to it as some do - "Oh my god those people should be gassed to death or thrown in jail", etc. etc. - that's what I find weird. Like really? People should be killed or locked up because they got aroused by a drawing. We've all heard it said. "Too far", says I. Way, way too far. Sounds way too much like "Kill all the f*gs", to me.

To your Sex vs. Violence point, however... yeah, I've never understood that. As a kid, I was allowed to watch horror movies if I REALLY wanted to; my Mom was scared they'd give me nightmares, and very rarely they did, but I liked being scared, so whatever. So I could watch all the Freddy and Jason movies I wanted to, no problem. But if my Dad fell asleep with the TV on, and I came downstairs to take a piss and saw naked tits on the living room TV on my way to the bathroom, good LORD did my Mom throw a fit. She'd be screaming at my Dad for like two hours, while he'd be saying "So what? Big deal, he saw tits, gimme a f*cking break." It was ridiculous!

Meanwhile, one time when I was like 4 she brought me over to her friend's house, and they rented The Toxic Avenger and had me watch it with them. Why? Good f*cking question! The brief nudity, she covered my eyes, but the guy getting his guts ripped out was PERFECTLY fine for a 4-year old. Yeah, and what do you think I saw in my sleep for the next week? Christ, I really think I would've been better off seeing two seconds of tits at that age than the rest of what's in that f*cking movie. But oh NO... you can show your kid people drowning in toxic waste, ripping people's heads off, people's guts getting torn out, but GOD FORBID they see TITS, that's gonna f*ck 'em up.

I mean... I AM a huge pervert, so maybe she wasn't 100% wrong. But I kinda think it had less to do with the fact I saw so many tits at a young age, and more to do with the fact that I wasn't "supposed" to see them and that made them more glamorous and exciting. Like maybe if it wasn't such a big earth-shaking deal I wouldn't have given a sh*t. I don't know.

But I definitely think it's stupid and ridiculous how as a society we glorify violence but censor sex and nudity. Like, one is a Natural Act and the other is an Unnatural Act, by definition. And yet we've got the entire thing backwards, we celebrate the Unnatural and we vilify the Natural, and it makes no goddamn sense.

But I think it has a lot to do with why so many people are so screwed up.

[Sumac]

Originally Posted by Coola Yagami

I can't say I understand furries either, but to each their own.

It's just funny how people are quick to vilify anything related to sex but not when it's related to animated violence.

Like if someone draws Jessica Rabbit in all her glory, people think the person is sicko.

But yet actual DC artists can draw the Joker standing in a room, covered in blood, dead bodies all around him, and no one is accusing the artist of having sick homicidal tendencies and being a potential danger in real life.

Like when I read Dollhouse's plans in the New 52 Catwoman comics, it made my skin crawl, but over how sick the character was, not because I was thinking the comic book writer was some deranged mass murderer that somehow snuck into DC offices to script this.

I think it is something uniquely American and related to Puritan values. But wherever it comes from the hypocrisy is obvious: violence and blood are good and won't effect anyone, tits and nudity is horrible and turn little kids to pervert rapists.

One of the best demonstration of the issue is the recent Mortal Kombat game: American SJWtards were angry at developers for "too sexy costumes", so most women in the new game have ended up being covered from head to toe, while violence reaches an unprecedented level. This binary is absolutely idiotic and baffling, even though advertisements and jokes featuring sex are everywhere in American culture.

This whole issue baffles me, not only on ideological, but purely on logical level. Somehow, in the minds of some people, such natural things as nudity and sex are more traumatizing than hardcore violence!? How!?

Or as George R.R. Martin said: “I can describe an axe entering a human skull in great explicit detail and no one will blink twice at it. I provide a similar description, just as detailed, of a penis entering a vagina, and I get letters about it and people swearing off. To my mind this is kind of frustrating, it’s madness. Ultimately, in the history of [the] world, penises entering vaginas have given a lot of people a lot of pleasure; axes entering skulls, well, not so much.”

We have similar issue in Russia, where majority of people are hellbent to stop any kind of sex education in schools, thinking it will make kids into perverts and sex deviants. And I mean, not SJW ****-propaganda about "boys can be girls", but just general stuff, like diseases and medical information is considered "taboo".

In Western Europe people are much more open-minded when it comes to sex and nudity, which seemingly baffles a lot of Americans when they see their comic books.

Reaction of SJWs on this stuff is whole another matter, but I doubt that majority of SJW angry about sex and nudity for political reasons, more like, because, they themselves ugly freaks and thus need to eliminate any reminder of what real beauty looks like, not that it will help them, since they main ugliness on the inside not on outside.

Originally Posted by Leo656

To my point earlier, though... I've personally never heard anyone belittle anyone else for lusting after Jessica Rabbit. To the contrary, I've seen grown men in a public setting make jokes about wanting to f*ck Jessica Rabbit, and it's taken no differently than if they'd said they wanted to f*ck Britney Spears.

I mean it's just kinda "interesting". I'm on the record that I have zero problem with anyone being attracted to a cartoon character. I just think that once you're already into that territory it's kinda silly to say "Well, This One with huge breasts, long legs, a round ass and 'F*ck Me' eyes is Perfectly Okay... but This Other One with all the same features BUT she's also got a tail, that's gross and you're a horrible person now." Like it's 99% the same thing, c'mon. Either way, it's a drawing. If it's purposely drawn to be arousing then people shouldn't act disgusted and horrified by the fact that some people ARE in fact aroused by it. It's okay not to be into it, like it's okay not to like rap music or the color orange or whatever. But when people overreact so hyperbolically to it as some do - "Oh my god those people should be gassed to death or thrown in jail", etc. etc. - that's what I find weird. Like really? People should be killed or locked up because they got aroused by a drawing. We've all heard it said. "Too far", says I. Way, way too far. Sounds way too much like "Kill all the f*gs", to me.

I think, major difference, between cartoon animals and sexy girls like Jessica Rabbit is that they are "codified" on different level.

I have a theory, well, it is more like a fact, that people are attracted to certain things in other sex, like most women would be attracted to a healthy strong man with big muscles and most men would be attracted to a sexy woman, with big hips and tits.

I think it is "hard-wired" into human psyche, so it doesn't really matter whether those things exist on a real human or a fictional character. We can "feel / understand" that this is supposed to be attractive, even beyond our logical functions.

This is why drawing of fictional humans are considered to be OK to masturbate too. Well, by a lot of people.

However, when it comes to cartoon animals, our human minds can read that this is not OK, because, they can "feel / understand" that those creatures ARE not humans. Thus controversial reaction.

It's like a logic error: one hand character has some things humans hard-wired to find attractive, on the other - it is not a human, thus it should not be attractive. Thus confusion and repulsion.

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by Sumac

One of the best demonstration of the issue is the recent Mortal Kombat game: American SJWtards were angry at developers for "too sexy costumes", so most women in the new game have ended up being covered from head to toe, while violence reaches an unprecedented level. This binary is absolutely idiotic and baffling, even though advertisements and jokes featuring sex are everywhere in American culture.

This whole issue baffles me, not only on ideological, but purely on logical level. Somehow, in the minds of some people, such natural things as nudity and sex are more traumatizing than hardcore violence!? How!?

I haven't played the newest one yet, but I've heard a little bit about all that. And that is so, so, SO stupid. It's like the entire thing in a nutshell, right there.

Madness.

[Fang Wolf]

Originally Posted by Coola Yagami

It's just funny how people are quick to vilify anything related to sex but not when it's related to animated violence.

Like if someone draws Jessica Rabbit in all her glory, people think the person is sicko.

Yes, I have done animation about Celestia x Shredder. (MLP)
BANG, People start to accusing me for have sex with animals....
- judged and black mark - Like I was in beastaliy....

But Pony is human-level intelligence.
So Why would that be mark as beastaliy?

Originally Posted by Coola Yagami

But yet actual DC artists can draw the Joker standing in a room, covered in blood, dead bodies all around him, and no one is accusing the artist of having sick homicidal tendencies and being a potential danger in real life.

Yes, that is true. No one jugded artis for that.
That is really okay...

OBS: But world full of nutbrains as down understand was art and was in real.

[Hamato Yoshi]

Reminds me of this song from sitcom MWC :

https://marriedwithchildren.fandom.com/wiki/Branded

[D-ray]

I mean, as long as you do no harm to anyone else, why bothering to be judged?

I remember when I was younger, I always had the reputation of being "anti-social", and I always HATED that judgement, because I didn't think it was true.
But at the same time, I tried to watch my situation from outside, like: why people say that?

Usually people is considered "social" when they have lots of friends and ALWAYS stay in groups. So,as society's standars, I could be considered an anti-social.
But that's it, I could be considered so, but what would happen if I do?
Nothing really. Nobody would punch me or kill me because of that, so why bothering?

From your point of view, I would just tell you to do the same thing.
Furries ARE seen in a bad way because of their common behaviours, but do not try to
change peoples mind about FURRIES as a whole, just prove them that YOU don't do that kind of stuff, if you really need to.
Strangers will ALWAYS judge youbecause they don't know you yet, and not because YOU are what the judgment says.
I would go deeper on why I consider "bad" for an artist to be affhiliated with a group of similar ones, but that's
another story, and (since I'm not very good at writing) I prefer keeping the discussion on this level for now.

I know it's kind of hard to understand it because everyone takes things differently, but try it.
Just ask yourself what would happen if people judges you.
Let the ones who are worthy to ignore the prejudices to appreciate you, not the other way around.

[IMJ]

Being a "furry" has clear ties to some kind of mental illness. The only reason that it isn't is the identical reason that people use to defend it - generally speaking being a furry doesn't widely lead to personal harm or harm of others.

That is the only reason that we "live and let live" in that particular situation, which is a good enough reason for me to let furries do their thing and not be bothered by it.

And so to be clear, there is some kind of skewed mental algebra that goes along with it - fetishism, body dismorphia, whatever the connection is, I don't know. There is mental illness there of some kind, but I'm okay with the criteria that if no harm is done then who cares. But to deny that their is some poor psychology going on is either a lie of justification or just ignorant. But who cares (I've said it now three times for the low-information reader of the thread, whoever you are).

[Coola Yagami]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

Do they? I think it's fine to do that. It's just more the people that get off on stuff like that and obsess on it that is iffy, not the artists.

How did I miss this one?

But yeah I think the implication is the people think the artist himself/herself is just as 'sick' and obsessed since they're the ones drawing Jessica Rabbit (or whoever else) fully naked to begin with.

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by IMJ

Being a "furry" has clear ties to some kind of mental illness. The only reason that it isn't is the identical reason that people use to defend it - generally speaking being a furry doesn't widely lead to personal harm or harm of others.

And what about people who are into BDSM? Femdom? "Water sports"? Granny porn? Sex with midgets? Rape fantasies? Character roleplay? Where's the line? At what point does something cross the line from "kink" into "mental illness"?

I generally don't like that kind of thinking, because honestly anything sexual that isn't "vanilla" could very well be called "indicative of a mental illness" and a case could be made for it. Which is why I pretty firmly believe that how anyone gets off should be their own personal business unless they choose to share it.

The truth is, any or all of that stuff only "crosses a line" when the person hearing about it chooses to say, "Ew, that's gross, those people should be locked up." But they've in turn got their own thing that they'd never brag about jerking off to, either. So it's really weird when people get all judge-y. "That thing indicates a mental illness!" Yeah, so does That Guy's thing, most likely. Stones, glass houses, yadda yadda. It's dumb.

[IMJ]

Originally Posted by Leo656

And what about people who are into BDSM? Femdom? "Water sports"? Granny porn? Sex with midgets? Rape fantasies? Character roleplay? Where's the line? At what point does something cross the line from "kink" into "mental illness"?

I generally don't like that kind of thinking, because honestly anything sexual that isn't "vanilla" could very well be called "indicative of a mental illness" and a case could be made for it. Which is why I pretty firmly believe that how anyone gets off should be their own personal business unless they choose to share it.

The truth is, any or all of that stuff only "crosses a line" when the person hearing about it chooses to say, "Ew, that's gross, those people should be locked up." But they've in turn got their own thing that they'd never brag about jerking off to, either. So it's really weird when people get all judge-y. "That thing indicates a mental illness!" Yeah, so does That Guy's thing, most likely. Stones, glass houses, yadda yadda. It's dumb.

You are missing the nuance and in it's place supplanting mostly sexual fantasies as a marker of the behavior for justification. They are not all akin to each other.

Bucking societal norms are the stretch limit if someone isn't a full on sociopath. But I'd say the mental health threshold is crossed once disillusionment with self begins and gives rise to "the other", moreso when the other is a completely different species.

For example, wishing you were a superhero can be mental illness, but let's say that it isn't at that threshold and instead in of itself is simply a projection of reaching an ideal state for humanity.

This as opposed to needing a connection to an animal and actually bringing yourself out of compliance with the human state and into the closest compliance possible with a non-human state is a crossed threshold of mental status. Especially when done for any reason of self-comfort derived from "the other" (furrie) rather than striving to be an ideal human (e.g., growth into the best of that which we already are). That's definitely mental illness and not akin to BDSM or most of your other examples. Sorry bro.

[Leo656]

Seems like a lot of over-thinking to me, but c'est la vie.

If I spoke to two people, and one of them said "I occasionally like to jerk off to cartoon characters, and some of them have cat's tails or whatever but otherwise my sex life is pretty normal," and the OTHER person said to me, "My favorite sex thing is to get tied up and beat up, or to do that to other people," I know which of the two I'D think was more weird and possibly more "mentally ill."

BUT, that's me. I generally think the whole "Kill all the furries!" mentality has a lot to do with people deflecting from their own "perverted" kinks. "Don't lookit ME, lookit THEM! THEY'RE the weird ones! I'm perfectly fine!" And I'm old enough and have seen enough to know that no, nobody is "fine". Everybody is a "sick pervert" and the rest is just a matter of degree.