• Fur Affinity Forums are governed by Fur Affinity's Rules and Policies. Links and additional information can be accessed in the Site Information Forum.

NSFW: Online versus IRL

Are you more or less sexual irl than you are online?

  • More

    Votes: 4 7.4%
  • Less

    Votes: 28 51.9%
  • About the same

    Votes: 17 31.5%
  • Not Applicable/I'm innocent and smol uwu

    Votes: 5 9.3%

  • Total voters
    54

ResolutionBlaze

Angry Local
Banned
This poll is personal so if you dont like it you dont need to answer. I was just curious about this as I tend to be more sexual online than irl.
 

Shoiyo

Smartass skunk
Meh. I'm the kind of guy who has a fairly high libido when I'm getting some.

But I haven't in 3 years, so I'm pretty meh about it all right now.
 

Telnac

Fundamentalist Heretic
Online I’m pretty restrained. I assume everything said or done online is preserved forever and will be made public at the most embarassing time possible. So... yeah, no NSFW role-playing for me!

When irl, what happens behind closed doors stays behind closed doors. ;)
 
B

BahgDaddy

Guest
Online I’m pretty restrained. I assume everything said or done online is preserved forever and will be made public at the most embarassing time possible. So... yeah, no NSFW role-playing for me!

When irl, what happens behind closed doors stays behind closed doors. ;)

Eh I doubt if I'll ever have an important enough job for this to cause me problems if someone found out who I am IRL. Unless I was a senator os something. I'll just be a conservative Republican - that way I can do whatever kink I want and get away with it!

boingboing.net: Roy Moore's scandal is just the tip of American evangelical Christianity's child bride problem

Moore isn't alone in liking very young girls as sexual partners. The grooming of children to marry adult men is a common practice in American evangelical circles, and infamous child-bride advocates are celebrated on the lecture circuit, especially among home schoolers.

These "courting" experts counsel parents to encourage their children to seek marriage with adult men, advocating for marriage in the "middle-teens."

Someone get me a puke icon!
 

Telnac

Fundamentalist Heretic

JustSomeDude84

Active Member
If online means how you interact with other people online, then I'd say about the same. I'm just as much reserved online as I am IRL.
 
B

BahgDaddy

Guest
Uh, wtf?! Love the defamatory article with next to no supporting references. The one documented example they do site is hardly representative of the evangelical Christian movement. Despite what that article asserts, sick predators exist across the political & religious spectrum.

I've hardly got just one example.
 

Sarcastic Coffeecup

Hand. Cannot. Erase.
I keep all my sexual stuff behind closed doors and that's where they'll stay.
I have no intentions of letting that spill out onto the world wide web wherein it will be forever.
 
B

BahgDaddy

Guest
I think Americans are too sexually repressed. We need to let it all hang out there more.
 
G

Ginza

Guest
I really am the same online as I am irl. I don't change my behavior much. I'm a little more blunt online, a little more obnoxious irl. For me, always been the same :p
 
B

BahgDaddy

Guest
I agree. It's pretty ridiculous how we don't even have real sex education in schools, no wonder teen pregnancy's such an epidemic here.

A school district near me (Salem OR) recently passed a requirement that if ANY teen is engaged in sexual activities of ANY SORT, that the teachers report them to the police/authorities immediately. I'm not joking. I was like, "I though I moved to the liberal northwest, not same puritan bastion of medieval nonsense!"

It will do nothing except make young people feel bad about being normal, sexual creatures. It also breeds regression, suppression, and perversions - you see this really strongly in the Bible Belt, for instance. *simmers*
 

Beatle9

Asexual coywolf and amateur writer.
A school district near me (Salem OR) recently passed a requirement that if ANY teen is engaged in sexual activities of ANY SORT, that the teachers report them to the police/authorities immediately. I'm not joking. I was like, "I though I moved to the liberal northwest, not same puritan bastion of medieval nonsense!"

It will do nothing except make young people feel bad about being normal, sexual creatures. It also breeds regression, suppression, and perversions - you see this really strongly in the Bible Belt, for instance. *simmers*
My guess is this could also lead in an increase in teen depression and suicide rates. They're going to be taught that these normal urges they're feeling are wrong, and aren't going to have a way to escape them except through repression, which is just a giant gateway to depression.
 

JustSomeDude84

Active Member
A school district near me (Salem OR) recently passed a requirement that if ANY teen is engaged in sexual activities of ANY SORT, that the teachers report them to the police/authorities immediately. I'm not joking. I was like, "I though I moved to the liberal northwest, not same puritan bastion of medieval nonsense!"

It will do nothing except make young people feel bad about being normal, sexual creatures. It also breeds regression, suppression, and perversions - you see this really strongly in the Bible Belt, for instance. *simmers*
My High-School (it was a private Catholic school) had a system called PDA, that is Public Display of Affection. Technically, you couldn't even hug people, but a lot of the faculty were friendly and often the students would try to be funny and group-hug them.
 

Telnac

Fundamentalist Heretic
I've hardly got just one example.
The article claims Roy Moore is just the tip of the iceberg, further claims that older men hooking up with teenagers is “mainstream” among right wing evangelists yet references, but not quote a reality TV star as “evidence” and then goes on to blast documented activity at one church.

Ok, let’s break this down. Roy Moore’s alleged conduct is on his own head. As for Duck Dynasty’s star’s supposed comments, the writers of the article have the entire Internet availble to them. Quotes or it didn't happen.

That leaves one documented example of a bad church. There are literally a million churches in the USA alone. Citing one bad church as an example of behavior you claim is widespread and mainstream is like saying that all churches are like the Westboro Baptist Church. Sorry but that doesn’t fly. Defamatory article is defamatory.
 
B

BahgDaddy

Guest
The article claims Roy Moore is just the tip of the iceberg, further claims that older men hooking up with teenagers is “mainstream” among right wing evangelists yet references, but not quote a reality TV star as “evidence” and then goes on to blast documented activity at one church.

Ok, let’s break this down. Roy Moore’s alleged conduct is on his own head. As for Duck Dynasty’s star’s supposed comments, the writers of the article have the entire Internet availble to them. Quotes or it didn't happen.

That leaves one documented example of a bad church. There are literally a million churches in the USA alone. Citing one bad church as an example of behavior you claim is widespread and mainstream is like saying that all churches are like the Westboro Baptist Church. Sorry but that doesn’t fly. Defamatory article is defamatory.

I grew up in the Bible Belt. I know how these people think! The Bible Belt consumes the most amount of gay porn. I don't have a problem with that, but it's deeply hypocritical and indicates an underlying problem of deep, systemic rebellion against their own rules. The evangelical community routinely espouses young-age marriages. I saw lots of older men marrying young women in my area, but not the other way around. If someone was pastor, it was pretty much guaranteed they were going to grope you (if you were a woman) and rip you off either way.

It's not defamation. Not when they defame themselves.
 

Rakiya

Well-Known Member
It depends on what constitutes as sexual for me.
For example I'm pretty similar online as I am IRL in the sense that I'll make and laugh at the odd dirty joke.
I'm not ashamed to speak out in terms of what I think is appealing or unappealing in a sexual way.

But at the same time I'm a lot more sensible and mindful of context.
For example if I meet a Furry Artist who's taking on commissions, I'm more likely to ask them for something sexual than someone I chanced upon in an art gallery.
I'm more willing to flirt and toy with people online, whereas IRL my significant other wouldn't take too kindly to me complimenting someone's ass. (Neither would the person the 'compliment' is directed at).

In terms of my personality I'd say I'm pretty equal in both regards.
But if we're talking in a literal sense; Neither IRL or online am I masturbating every time I see someone that's hot.

So I guess less?
Restrained by a different set of rules (common sense), context, and just general respect.
 
Last edited:

Yakamaru

Mr. Villanous charm
I am slightly less. I don't have anyone to crack jokes 'n shit with IRL. Not that I give a shit though. Doing that shit is kinda awkward in person anyway. Especially when you do sex jokes with your mom.. Zero sense of humor. Sheesh.
 
Top