Half-Life 2 mod replaces Alyx with Krystal from Star Fox and it's the original actor.

[Leo656]

I like butts and I like boobs. Lots of cartoon characters have 'em in spades. Some of them have "extra accessories" like a tail or whatever, but I can't get too hung up on that. Butts and Boobs. If they're drawn well, that's swell, I'm into it.

What confuses me isn't the people who look at "furry" art and get worked up about it specifically; I do think that on some level once you're open to the idea of fapping to a cartoon character, the rest is just splitting hairs. Maybe that's an oversimplification but it's how I've always looked at it.

No, what I don't get are people who make it a Lifestyle. I mean, I'm not mad at 'em, but... the whole deal with making the costumes, going to conventions, all that... that's like Actual Work, man, and it just seems like a very extreme way to show enthusiasm for f*ckable cartoons.

BUT, then again, on some level I suppose someone could easily turn my own logic back on me and say, "Well, people go to conventions wearing elaborate Superman or Wolverine costumes, too, so once you're okay with that then the rest is just splitting hairs, same as your earlier analogy about fapping to cartoons; One is as good as The Other." And okay, fair point I guess, but I need to also point out that part of me is just as bewildered by the time, money and effort that people who do "regular" cosplay put into their hobby as well. Again, ain't mad at 'em, but I find ALL of it a bit overwhelming just because whether the person is dressed up like Krystal or Jubilee, in my head I'm thinking of all the investment into it and thinking, "Jeez... that's a lot, right there." Like it's not something I, myself, could ever fathom.

A friend of mine once said to me, "I wish there was a separate term for people who just like 'sexy' cartoon characters even if they're anthros, and people who actually make the whole 'furry' thing a lifestyle." And I totally get what they meant because I'm the same way. I don't think looking at cartoon porn is that weird, it's not like the person is hurting anyone or letting it take over their life. But once you're spending an exorbitant sum on expressing your enthusiasm for this particular kink, I do kinda side-eye that just a little.

But then again, at that point to me it's not that much different from a person who spends thousands of dollars looking at "regular" porn; like, "This is extreme behavior regardless, the specifics are secondary to the fact that this is now a bit compulsive."

But no, on the whole those people don't bother me. I noticed as kids it was a thing most people I knew went through - tons of the boys had crushes on like Cleo from Heathcliff or Gadget from Rescue Rangers, and all the girls had "their" Ninja Turtle for example - and then some kids grew out of it and now they think that stuff is "weird" or "gross", and then others simply never grew out of it at all and so to them it's no different from any other kink.

I don't buy the whole "zoophilia" angle though. Going by how much furry porn the internet contains, and how poor most peoples' impulse control is, there'd be millions of people getting busted constantly for f*cking dogs and horses or whatever, and then in turn while they were being investigated their browser history or hard drive or whatever would be full of anthro art. If that happened a lot, I'd say maybe there was something to that theory. But it happens so rarely, or at least only gets reported in the news so rarely, I have to kinda call that one bunk. There's just no proven link, just assumptions.

Y'know what I DO read about a lot in the news, though (by "a lot" I mean I see it once or twice a year in my feed), is women who work at the vet or animal shelter who get caught f*cking dogs in their care. Every time it happens, the article makes it a point to mention, "This happens more often than people might think", and will cite other cases.

And yet, we don't automatically assume, "Well, if a woman works at the vet's office she must be getting it on with the dogs," because we know that's kind of a leap. BUT, it apparently happens a decent amount of time, so we COULD just make that assumption if we wanted to. Just like we could assume, "Well, SOME priests molest kids so by extension they ALL do."

It's just weird how with stuff like that, even when confronted with factual data that says "Yes, this happens A LOT," we say, "Well, you can't generalize, that's not fair."

But with other stuff, in this case a specific kink or fetish that isn't to everyone's taste, it makes perfect sense to just say, "Ah, yeah, the guy said he faps to that Star Fox chick, so clearly he f*cks animals," even though statistically we've got very little evidence to say that even as an assumption. It's just projection, objectively.

I mean, I'm admittedly kind of a Libertine about stuff like this, anyway. I just can't help but note the double standards at play, is all. I know people WANT the whole "Furries are Zoophiles" theory to be true, I simply don't think it is. I'm sure it has in fact happened but I don't think it's happened enough, at least that we know of, to make it fair game to jump to those kinds of conclusions.

Most of the "hardcore" ones I know just fap to cartoons. To my knowledge I've never even spoken to one who ever did the convention deal. Of course, I don't KNOW what they get up to in their private time. But I can say I know a lot of people who will admit (privately or otherwise) that they have at least one "furry" chick on their list and I've never heard of any of them ever getting into any impropriety with an actual animal in real life. So there's that.

Like, if someone told me their kink was Hardcore Rape Porn, I'd honestly think THAT was a bit weirder than furry porn. I wouldn't say so out loud because I try not to kink-shame people, at least not to their face, but yeah, I'm more comfortable hanging out with the guy who just thinks Krystal's got nice tits versus the guy who jerks off to women getting choked and spit on. But that's me, y'know? ((Shrug))