Furries

Author: TheUnderdog

Posts

Total: 72
#31
K_Michael
K_Michael's avatar
Debates: 38
Posts: 749
4
5
10
K_Michael's avatar
K_Michael
4
5
10
-->
@TheUnderdog
It’s objectively wrong to think your a wolf when you are in fact a human.
It's objectively wrong to think there is a god when there is in fact not, or conversely
It's objectively wrong to think there is no god when in fact, there is.

You can make any argument you want, but only one of these statements is true. There are, AT A MINIMUM, several BILLION people in the world who are wrong about religion, and a lot of theology seems to indicate that some sort of eternal damnation comes with being wrong, so maybe you should worry about that instead of what some people you have literally never met think.
#32
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 4,256
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@TheUnderdog
Yay, another anti-trans thread. Cause we have nothing better to worry about...
#33
YouFound_Lxam
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 2,125
3
4
7
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
YouFound_Lxam
3
4
7
Furrys should burn in hell. 
#34
YouFound_Lxam
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 2,125
3
4
7
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
YouFound_Lxam
3
4
7
In the nicest way possible.
#35
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 269
Posts: 7,659
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
Furrys should burn in hell.
In the nicest way possible.
Oh well, I would rather not burn. I am not a big fan of burning.

Topic's author
#36
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 3,292
3
4
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
4
10
-->
@K_Michael
The people that believe God exists can define God.  The people that believe they are a wolf cannot define a wolf.

What is a wolf?  What is a human?  The current definition is based on DNA.

If you want to be treated as a wolf, then you would have to be killed if you ever come near a child.  If I had a child and they were near a wolf, I would shoot the wolf if able.  Wild Animals can’t be trusted with children.

#37
K_Michael
K_Michael's avatar
Debates: 38
Posts: 749
4
5
10
K_Michael's avatar
K_Michael
4
5
10
-->
@TheUnderdog
NO ONE IS ASKING TO BE TREATED AS A WOLF. You are being dense. They just want to go to conventions and commission p*rn. If you have a problem with things that furries are actually doing, then say so.
Topic's author
#38
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 3,292
3
4
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
4
10
-->
@K_Michael
I don’t have an issue with furries being at furry conventions.  I have an issue when they identify as an animal and expect the rest of society to cater to that.  Trans species isn’t a thing.
#39
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 565
Posts: 19,930
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@K_Michael
NO ONE IS ASKING TO BE TREATED AS A WOLF. You are being dense. They just want to go to conventions and commission p*rn. If you have a problem with things that furries are actually doing, then say so.
Sorry but this is not exactly true.

I know actual hardcore wolf, cat or fox kink people due to other places I interact (forums, chatrooms etc). They genuinely enjoy roleplaying as the animal well beyond just sex, it's not just an orgasm stimulant for them to RP as it, they have packs and everything, they growl, howl, dress up and roleplay fighting for who is alpha and everything. They are made fun of and sidelined in a lot of places, even if they pretend they are for BDSM in all ways, similar to the way the DDlg and MDlb community is (funnily enough less so) but it is a real thing, a real extreme kink.

Also DDlg and MDlb go well beyond just sex or it would be exactly as pedo as people think, from what I understand the 'little' regresses either due to trauma or just never really maturing properly like stagnated puberty or whatever or they are just generally less mature very sensitive people. The style of a 'daddy dom' or 'mommy/mummy/mama domme' is very tender and different to normal BDSM outside of the sex, definitely not about brutal punishment etc.

The style of full-time furries and their interactions is hidden away because people like you mock them for it, they really genuinely want to feel like a wolf (some prefer to be feline, lions or tigers etc) and be primal, wild and barely talking. The submissives like to RP as 'cute' animals instead and will maybe even get off to being teased and humiliated for it in a degrading way by a human dom. They want to even be leashed at least in part and bossed around like the dom/domme/master/mistress *owns* them.

#40
K_Michael
K_Michael's avatar
Debates: 38
Posts: 749
4
5
10
K_Michael's avatar
K_Michael
4
5
10
-->
@RationalMadman
In their personal lives with close friends who they trust, or out where it affects prudes like UnderDog?
#41
K_Michael
K_Michael's avatar
Debates: 38
Posts: 749
4
5
10
K_Michael's avatar
K_Michael
4
5
10
-->
@TheUnderdog
Trans species isn’t a thing.
Not yet it isn't!
#42
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 565
Posts: 19,930
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@K_Michael
In their personal lives with close friends who they trust, or out where it affects prudes like UnderDog?
They used to force trans people to be the same way, don't you get that the bigotry is identical? He is actually onto something, you are all not seeing it.

This is one of the first threads he's legitimately onto an actual hypocrisy that is genuine.

Screw that, they used to be the same way with gays and lesbians. Shut up and keep it to yourselves, that was the mantra.
#43
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 565
Posts: 19,930
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@TheUnderdog
You have a good point on this thread, push harder on the parallels, don't let them distract you, this is a legitimate point.
#44
K_Michael
K_Michael's avatar
Debates: 38
Posts: 749
4
5
10
K_Michael's avatar
K_Michael
4
5
10
-->
@RationalMadman
I can see the parallels, and there is definitely such a thing as going too far in indulging others' beliefs. But I think that the correct stance is closer to the current policy towards trans people than it is of trans people decades ago or furries today.
I think I was seeing it from the wrong way, to me, it feels natural to keep that part of myself to myself, but I was ignoring people who do feel a greater need to express their identities. Thanks for that insight.
Topic's author
#45
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 3,292
3
4
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
4
10
-->
@K_Michael
Hopefully it doesn’t become a thing.  Otherwise we are going to have to define human.  It would also mean if someone identifies as a deer, they could be killed for venison.  It’s all fun and games until someone gets killed.
#46
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 3,205
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@TheUnderdog
I expect the only aliens humanity to meet,
To be connected of their blood or actions,
One option of which, I'd count transhumans,
By accident, intention, or time.

Though there's 'individual trans,
And reproducing trans.

Certainly a human who cuts off his fingers and toes, lacks broad flat nails.
And certainly dogs show the effects of genetic changes through generations.
#47
K_Michael
K_Michael's avatar
Debates: 38
Posts: 749
4
5
10
K_Michael's avatar
K_Michael
4
5
10
-->
@TheUnderdog
Or you could stop defining morality around whether someone is human and instead around whether they're a person.
#48
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 3,205
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
This thought has been occurring to me lately,
Though it is perhaps a 'regression of morality on my part.
. . .

People often talk about 'character,
Rather than appearance,
But I am a Nihilist,
Why 'must this be so.

Glancing about manga,
I saw one about a woman marrying an andromorphic wolf,
I only read the description,

I find myself unable to think of the anthro as other than an animal.
Though of course they are not a simple wolf,
Hm, I'm reminded of a thread on dehumanization,
The idea of reading about a 'relationship, between two species, even if intelligent, bothered me,
Though I suppose I like the webcomic Freefall well enough,
Perhaps it's lack of realistic art, does not offput me,
As well as much of the plot dealing with other questions.
. . .

Hm, I don't ever 'quite recall saying I've no discriminatory views myself,
Only that I think I like myself more than various groups I could be said to belong.

. . .

I think Jake Sully of Avatar,
Is a traitor to the Human Race, myself,
Though one can make an argument for 'people mattering, or honor in the sense of people mattering.

. . .
Hm,
Just a question of values,
Meaningless themselves anyhow,
But I cannot do without them, seems.

. . .

Would a more intelligent human,
Be more a person than I,

Many people consider themselves more people,
Than the mentally handicapped,
Or fetuses,
Though Horton says a person's a person.
Well,
I don't feel 'all there, first waking in the morning. . . 
Topic's author
#49
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 3,292
3
4
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
4
10
-->
@K_Michael
If we classify non human animals as people, it would mean society would be forced to go vegetarian.  I’m assuming your opposed to this even if you are vegetarian personally.
#50
K_Michael
K_Michael's avatar
Debates: 38
Posts: 749
4
5
10
K_Michael's avatar
K_Michael
4
5
10
-->
@TheUnderdog
False dilemma fallacy. Just because the "humans and only humans are people" definition is bad, doesn't mean that the only alternative is "all animals are people"
As I've said before here and elsewhere, the intellectual complexity of dolphins, chimps, elephants, etc., are high enough that they should receive at least the same moral considerations of a human child.
Topic's author
#51
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 3,292
3
4
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
4
10
-->
@K_Michael
Those animals I would agree with; killing dolphins, monkeys, and elephants for parts should be illegal.  But if someone identifies as a deer, it would mean humans could kill them for venison if they want to be treated as a deer.  Unless you support outlawing venison production, but that would be like outlawing meat consumption in general.  Pigs are smart, but we aren’t banning pork production (even if you personally don’t eat pork).
#52
K_Michael
K_Michael's avatar
Debates: 38
Posts: 749
4
5
10
K_Michael's avatar
K_Michael
4
5
10
-->
@TheUnderdog
Instead of defining personhood by species or genetics, administer a personhood test. Anyone who passes the test qualifies as a legal person, whether they be alien, robot, dolphin, or a furry claiming to be a deer. If part of their identity means that they don't want that legal protection, then that is their choice.

Topic's author
#53
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 3,292
3
4
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
4
10
-->
@K_Michael
Instead of defining personhood by species or genetics, administer a personhood test. Anyone who passes the test qualifies as a legal person, whether they be alien, robot, dolphin, or a furry claiming to be a deer.
What would you include in your test for personhood?  What question(s)?

If part of their identity means that they don't want that legal protection, then that is their choice.
If I kill a furry who didn’t want legal protection and eat their corpse if they identify as a deer, nobody is going to care that the furry didn’t want legal protection; I still get prosecuted.  No sane person would be okay with me killing a human that identifies as a deer.
#54
K_Michael
K_Michael's avatar
Debates: 38
Posts: 749
4
5
10
K_Michael's avatar
K_Michael
4
5
10
-->
@TheUnderdog
I don't have a specific set of questions but this legal text from the Terra Ignota series might prove insightful on my general stance.
A Minor is defined as a sentient being, regardless of age [or species], who has not passed an examination demonstrating sufficient mental competency to make moral, legal, and life-or-death decisions, or who has passed such an examination but can be demonstrated to have lost said competency and can no longer pass a comparable examination. No person shall be prevented from taking such an examination for any reason including age [species or synthetic origin]. No limit shall be placed on the number of times a person may take such an examination. The Office of Minors of the Universal Free Alliance must make the opportunity to take such an examination available to any Minor within 24 hours of request. Such examinations may be offered by the Universal Free Alliance Adulthood Competency Exam Office, or by any other Authority whose examination process is approved by said office.

Topic's author
#55
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 3,292
3
4
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
4
10
-->
@K_Michael
I’ve never passed a morality exam.  Neither have the majority of adults.  By that logic, most Americans are minors.
#56
K_Michael
K_Michael's avatar
Debates: 38
Posts: 749
4
5
10
K_Michael's avatar
K_Michael
4
5
10
-->
@TheUnderdog
That's not an argument, just a statement. Yes, this law is different than anything currently in place and would require big changes. That doesn't make it good or bad by default.
Topic's author
#57
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 3,292
3
4
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
4
10
-->
@K_Michael
What would you include in the morality exam that would separate minors from majors?  My standard is if you live on your own or with a partner, you’re an adult.  Otherwise you’re a minor.  This doesn’t answer the question, “What is a human?”
#58
K_Michael
K_Michael's avatar
Debates: 38
Posts: 749
4
5
10
K_Michael's avatar
K_Michael
4
5
10
-->
@TheUnderdog
"human" is simply the vernacular for homo sapiens. A trans woman (at least with current technology) is genetically male (XY). Similarly, I don't care if someone decides to identify as another species. I expect that if I live long enough to see the technology develop, I will become something that you would not define as human either.
Topic's author
#59
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 3,292
3
4
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
4
10
-->
@K_Michael
Furries are very rare.  Technology isn’t coming around for such a small portion of the population.  But I define a human as someone having human chromosomes.  You would have to change your chromosomes to a hyena’s chromosomes for me to believe your a hyena.

#60
K_Michael
K_Michael's avatar
Debates: 38
Posts: 749
4
5
10
K_Michael's avatar
K_Michael
4
5
10
-->
@TheUnderdog
I'm not changing my chromosomes to be a hyena. Whether it's by brain uploading or CRISPR editing, I intend to become something beyond human limitations. i.e. transhuman.
The technology probably won't be developed with that intent, but I genuinely think we will get to a point in the next thirty years that anyone (with enough money and connections) who wants to grow a tail can do so.