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

RANT: Stop oversexualizing your fursonas; treat them like characters.

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Deleted member 134556

Guest
1616440698431.png
 

Hogo

Unrespectable Member
There are a lot of furries for whom it's mostly sexual because they identify with anthro art because they're sexually attracted to animalistic features but prefer it on an anthro package. Aside from this, I think we shouldn't forget there's a lot of over sexualization in modern culture and that contributes to the SFW anthro stuff still sexualized in design. Fursonas are also quite often idealized.

Where it gets complicated is the history of tying people who are interested in anthropomorphism to fetishists because of the fetishism exists and isn't ever going away. Frail people who use othering to make themselves feel less insecure cherry pick something about a group of people to try and make them feel inferior for being who they are or what they believe or enjoy. Ranges from race, religion, nationality, disability, sexuality, hobbyism/subculture, or even personality and behavior. Especially with hobbyism, subculture, and behavior people feel justified in shaming because it's something you have a choice in.

I think "anthro enthusiast" is a better term than "furry" and it also seems less attached to the old misunderstanding in non-internet-saavy society that a furry is someone who dresses up in a fursuit and has sex. But "furry" is far too ingrained at this point and follows a subculture naming formula (emo, goth, etc).

Tl;dr: live with it?
 

Jaredthefox92

Well-Known Member
There are a lot of furries for whom it's mostly sexual because they identify with anthro art because they're sexually attracted to animalistic features but prefer it on an anthro package. Aside from this, I think we shouldn't forget there's a lot of over sexualization in modern culture and that contributes to the SFW anthro stuff still sexualized in design. Fursonas are also quite often idealized.

Where it gets complicated is the history of tying people who are interested in anthropomorphism to fetishists because of the fetishism exists and isn't ever going away. Frail people who use othering to make themselves feel less insecure cherry pick something about a group of people to try and make them feel inferior for being who they are or what they believe or enjoy. Ranges from race, religion, nationality, disability, sexuality, hobbyism/subculture, or even personality and behavior. Especially with hobbyism, subculture, and behavior people feel justified in shaming because it's something you have a choice in.

I think "anthro enthusiast" is a better term than "furry" and it also seems less attached to the old misunderstanding in non-internet-saavy society that a furry is someone who dresses up in a fursuit and has sex. But "furry" is far too ingrained at this point and follows a subculture naming formula (emo, goth, etc).

Tl;dr: live with it?

As a dog owner, no I don't "live with it". My characters have human features that are attractive because I like human women. If you're getting off to literal animal parts you're no better than that Kero person. There is a line you should never cross. You are homo sapien, you should be attracted to completely developed and mature homo sapien parts.
 

Chomby

Monsters are hot. :)
As a dog owner, no I don't "live with it". My characters have human features that are attractive because I like human women. If you're getting off to literal animal parts you're no better than that Kero person. There is a line you should never cross. You are homo sapien, you should be attracted to completely developed and mature homo sapien parts.
I'll use dog willies as an example because it seems to be the most popular thing in anthro art.

I've noticed that anthro dog parts look much different from real dog parts. I'm not a fan of dog willies in anthro art. I always prefer human or tentacle willies... or alien willies. But yeah, sometimes for commissions, I gotta draw dog willies. I had to google them so I could get a good reference for the anatomy. Real dog willies are fucking gross. They are absolutely repulsive. They look like rotting meat.

My point is, dog willies in anthro art never look realistic. They always look like some bad dragon toy had been implanted into their groin. I don't think you can equate liking the shape and function of a dog willie in anthro art to someone being a zoophile. Like I said, the art and the real thing look very different. I do not think everyone into knots is some creepy dog-loving zoophile.

I'm sure many here like animal genitalia depicted in anthro art for its function and anatomical accuracy to their character. Liking animal parts on an anthro character that walks and talks like us is far removed from some four-legged, voiceless animal that cannot consent. Please don't be THAT person. You are making a very damaging assumption about a lot of people.
 

Jaredthefox92

Well-Known Member
I'll use dog willies as an example because it seems to be the most popular thing in anthro art.

I've noticed that anthro dog parts look much different from real dog parts. I'm not a fan of dog willies in anthro art. I always prefer human or tentacle willies... or alien willies. But yeah, sometimes for commissions, I gotta draw dog willies. I had to google them so I could get a good reference for the anatomy. Real dog willies are fucking gross. They are absolutely repulsive. They look like rotting meat.

My point is, dog willies in anthro art never look realistic. They always look like some bad dragon toy had been implanted into their groin. I don't think you can equate liking the shape and function of a dog willie in anthro art to someone being a zoophile. Like I said, the art and the real thing look very different. I do not think everyone into knots is some creepy dog-loving zoophile.

I'm sure many here like animal genitalia depicted in anthro art for its function and anatomical accuracy to their character. Liking animal parts on an anthro character that walks and talks like us is far removed from some four-legged, voiceless animal that cannot consent. Please don't be THAT person. You are making a very damaging assumption about a lot of people.

I care not for how people do it in a style that is "totally not actual". My characters have tits and willies, like humans. The mere fact anyone is even considering drawing them non-human at all is concerning. Then again, my characters shoot guns, fly ships, and get jiggy with it in the bed. I care not how people justify it, you are human, you should be into human sexual parts. If you're not, it's concerning.
 

Chomby

Monsters are hot. :)

Jaredthefox92

Well-Known Member
oof the kinkshaming is real in this thread.

Yes, I hold people accountable to basic societal standards, especially in regards to the potential threat of beastality. Do realize that I see this as something normal people don't converse about, you shouldn't have to give excuses at all why you're into anything that deviates from natural mainstream human reproductive organs.
 

Lucyfur

United forever in friendship and labour
Banned
Ah so we also conflate having anthro sentient beings that have 'knots' and such to a threat of "beastiality".
And basic societal standards? those are things that always change with the times, say we get some batman beyond type bio engineering and we can splice our DNA like the splicers. Would standards not change as more people take on animal features through this or would we try and stay stagnated and not allow progress of people having the freedom of their body? Or if say some extra terrestrial beings come and they come from a line where evolution gave thumbs to and favored many species of animals and it is like planet Beastars? would that also be a taboo?
 

Jackpot Raccuki

Fucking Racon
Yes, I hold people accountable to basic societal standards, especially in regards to the potential threat of beastality. Do realize that I see this as something normal people don't converse about, you shouldn't have to give excuses at all why you're into anything that deviates from natural mainstream human reproductive organs.
If this is your view on things like knots I can’t wait to see what you say about vore.
“These people are potential cannibals in the making!!!”


I hate the idea of people doing beastality as much as the next guy, but I wouldn’t go out and say people who like any other dicks that aren’t human are beastality threats.
 

quoting_mungo

Well-Known Member
Yes, I hold people accountable to basic societal standards, especially in regards to the potential threat of beastality. Do realize that I see this as something normal people don't converse about, you shouldn't have to give excuses at all why you're into anything that deviates from natural mainstream human reproductive organs.
You shouldn’t have to give excuses, no. Because it’s not something that needs excused. Goodness gracious!

It’s okay to prefer human-style junk on your anthro characters. If people deliberately draw your OCs with the wrong junk they’re assholes. But walk into any sex shop and you’ll find plenty of socially acceptable (to the degree that sex and sex toys are at all) toys that don’t all look like human reproductive organs.

If it’s fictional genitalia on someone’s fictional self-representation (since FAIK that’s the most common use of “fursona” and that’s what the thread is about), its existence/design is endangering exactly zero animals. Far as I’m concerned any objection to bestiality that isn’t based on harm coming to the animal through the practice is... dubious. Sounds more like moralizing (a close friend of kinkshaming) to me.
 
D

Deleted member 134556

Guest
Yes, I hold people accountable to basic societal standards, especially in regards to the potential threat of beastality. Do realize that I see this as something normal people don't converse about, you shouldn't have to give excuses at all why you're into anything that deviates from natural mainstream human reproductive organs.
Okay, I'm going to be more direct, but don't mistake this as aggression please.

There is a very vast distance between sometimes incorporating nsfw elements in fictional cartoon animals and being sexually attracted to your neighbors dog. I don't think I have to elaborate on this further, considering mungo and a few others have explained it well, but I'm stepping in because I feel your argument about morality and standards is rather flawed. If you believe furry pornography is a legitimate issue with modern society we should be concerned about (in this case that you believe it's going to lead to beastiality), I suggest you step back and take a look at the world in the big picture, and also ask yourself why you are on a furry forum, socializing with furries, to begin with (considering you have stated several times in the past that you are not a furry yourself ._. ).

Lastly, I would recommend thinking before comparing anyone here to Kero of all people. That's a pretty wild comparison.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

FureverWolf

Well-Known Member
I'll use dog willies as an example because it seems to be the most popular thing in anthro art.

I've noticed that anthro dog parts look much different from real dog parts. I'm not a fan of dog willies in anthro art. I always prefer human or tentacle willies... or alien willies. But yeah, sometimes for commissions, I gotta draw dog willies. I had to google them so I could get a good reference for the anatomy. Real dog willies are fucking gross. They are absolutely repulsive. They look like rotting meat.

My point is, dog willies in anthro art never look realistic. They always look like some bad dragon toy had been implanted into their groin. I don't think you can equate liking the shape and function of a dog willie in anthro art to someone being a zoophile. Like I said, the art and the real thing look very different. I do not think everyone into knots is some creepy dog-loving zoophile.

I'm sure many here like animal genitalia depicted in anthro art for its function and anatomical accuracy to their character. Liking animal parts on an anthro character that walks and talks like us is far removed from some four-legged, voiceless animal that cannot consent. Please don't be THAT person. You are making a very damaging assumption about a lot of people.
I agree. Art is art. It's ment to be expressive, accurate and yet creative. From what things I've seen so far, the creativity is mostly the main goal. "What would my character be like with this and how would it affect his/her life and relationships?" It's delving into the deep end of the pool of how real some people feel about their sonas, and so they would like accuracy and a realistic sense to their creation. I'm a wolf/fox hybrid, and should I ever chose to go the route of giving him a lover, the created parts will be a mix of creative realism. I'm not into the zoo scene, but one has to accept that having a non human sona means probably having non-human parts that come with it, but that's up to the views of the owner. I'm sure there are likely people's characters out there that, for example, is 99% Dire Wolf, but that last 1% is because he has a completely human dong. That's not at all accurate, but it's the creators choice as a preference. It's not for us to judge how accurate a person can be with their sona. That's the point of creativity.
 

Jaredthefox92

Well-Known Member
Okay, I'm going to be more direct, but don't mistake this as aggression please.

There is a very vast distance between sometimes incorporating nsfw elements in fictional cartoon animals and being sexually attracted to your neighbors dog. I don't think I have to elaborate on this further, considering mungo and a few others have explained it well, but I'm stepping in because I feel your argument about morality and standards is rather flawed. If you believe furry pornography is a legitimate issue with modern society we should be concerned about (in this case that you believe it's going to lead to beastiality), I suggest you step back and take a look at the world in the big picture, and also ask yourself why you are on a furry forum, socializing with furries, to begin with (considering you have stated several times in the past that you are not a furry yourself ._. ).

Lastly, I would recommend thinking before comparing anyone here to Kero of all people. That's a pretty wild comparison.

1.I'm here because I'm bored and because I have Sonic OCs which while are not human, they're not exactly furries.
2.Nowhere have I had to sign up and say "sure I'm okay with yiffing and sexual content". I made no agreement to say I condone this in the furry fandom or any fandom.
3.It's not incorporating NSFW elements, but the fact you do it for characters who clearly show more animal aspects than humans. I'll use a character from my neck of the woods, Rouge is constantly swooned over in the Sonic fandom, but the way she acts she acts like well, a human. She doesn't act like a bat other than flying around, furries on the other hand have characters act like animals and as a pet owner that concerns me.
4.Nobody fucking can tell me to be here for sexual content. If you see my own FA you'll see it's all SFW and when I do RP's I always like actual human interaction and buildup. I have lore and characterization, I'm not on here for smut shit.
5.I also may add if we're going with the notion that "you must be okay with it if you're on here", I would also say there are minors on this forum. So by association of furry=yiff, this means this place is indeed a creeper haven. Not that I believe that, but to say "well look at where you're at", then you'd basically say a forum where people under the age of 18 are on is forcing sexual content on others.

In terms of this Kero individual and other furries out there who want sexual content of non-human genetalia. I am of the notion that if it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it is in fact a duck. True, many furries who are into animal parts haven't been caught, but you have to understand that in terms of sexual drives people who cannot control their libidos will just go more and more into sexual depravity. This is a rabbit hole that goes further and further, and just look at the main gallery of the website. Moderation in terms of sexual cravings is not something the main site is known for.
 
Last edited:

Jaredthefox92

Well-Known Member
You shouldn’t have to give excuses, no. Because it’s not something that needs excused. Goodness gracious!

It’s okay to prefer human-style junk on your anthro characters. If people deliberately draw your OCs with the wrong junk they’re assholes. But walk into any sex shop and you’ll find plenty of socially acceptable (to the degree that sex and sex toys are at all) toys that don’t all look like human reproductive organs.

If it’s fictional genitalia on someone’s fictional self-representation (since FAIK that’s the most common use of “fursona” and that’s what the thread is about), its existence/design is endangering exactly zero animals. Far as I’m concerned any objection to bestiality that isn’t based on harm coming to the animal through the practice is... dubious. Sounds more like moralizing (a close friend of kinkshaming) to me.

I don't draw junk on my men, (mostly because due to Sonic style), but in terms of lore they probably have it some sort of mutated biological way under their fur or it retracts. Truth be told, I don't do much sexual content with my males at all. Females have more depiction, but that is because as you can tell from my art style, I tend to prefer the natural beauty of women over the handsomeness of men. (That is mostly because I have one or two 'chad/alpha' men that I focus on and every other male simply pails in comparison to handsomeness to them. This is mostly to promote certain characters who are important in my story and are male over others.)

However, I'll stop you right there with "it's fictional because it's okay". I hail from Deviantart, I've seen people do all sorts of horrors and there's a lot of people who have wanted real life people in their "fictional art". While of course these people are low caliber and don't make actual art, they still are a factor in this. Also, I would like to bring up an infamous piece of shit in the Sonic fandom, Paulandamy. A guy who liked Amy Rose so much, he actually molested a girl who looked like her. Now, I know this is the most radical of notions, but the fact is there are people out there who cannot control their urges from fiction to reality. You don't know the mind of the person who is making the art, and as far as I've seen on the main site. A lot of people simply cannot be trusted to control their urges. Deviantart has had a lot of people with creepy art in their galleries and faves, and they turned out to be scumbags and got arrested IRL.
 

Jaredthefox92

Well-Known Member
"there are people that do bad things that like thing, therefore thing is dangerous"
Chill

Honestly this whole thread should chill, why care what someone does with their own characters?

I don't care, until you end up like Kero. My problem is that from what I've seen, a lot of people who are in the furry fandom have little in the notions of moderation and control. There's way more out there lewd art than there is on Deviantart. Knowing how human libidos work, that is concerning.
 

Lucyfur

United forever in friendship and labour
Banned
In terms of this Kero individual and other furries out there who want sexual content of non-human genetalia. I am of the notion that if it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it is in fact a duck. True, many furries who are into animal parts haven't been caught, but you have to understand that in terms of sexual drives people who cannot control their libidos will just go more and more into sexual depravity. This is a rabbit hole that goes further and further, and just look at the main gallery of the website. Moderation in terms of sexual cravings is not something the main site is known for.


So uhhh... yeah I guess according to you every furry who has animal parts in their art are closeted zoos as you said "haven't been caught"
That is quite a heavy handed statement there.
Like... should we presume since you like sonic characters and on average many of the sonic characters are minors that you have some fixation there?
Is that your rabbit hole that goes farther and farther?

Like it is called imagination and fantasy in the case of anthros y'know.
Like imagine an alien and it has bits that look like a sea anemone and that is a fantasy of someones. that doesnt mean that they want to sexually please themselves with a real sea anemone.
 

Jaredthefox92

Well-Known Member
So uhhh... yeah I guess according to you every furry who has animal parts in their art are closeted zoos as you said "haven't been caught"
That is quite a heavy handed statement there.
Like... should we presume since you like sonic characters and on average many of the sonic characters are minors that you have some fixation there?
Is that your rabbit hole that goes farther and farther?

Like it is called imagination and fantasy in the case of anthros y'know.
Like imagine an alien and it has bits that look like a sea anemone and that is a fantasy of someones. that doesnt mean that they want to sexually please themselves with a real sea anemone.

Well for one, almost all of my characters are OCs and adults. So if you'd think that you'd be an utter moron. If you'd look at my roster, there's only like three kids out of like, over 60-70 adults. So yeah, if you're that petty and stupid.

However, I don't trust furries to the same level as I would people in other fandoms. Simply put, unlike other fandoms furries have a way of showing no shame and that to me is a sign of mental instability. I'm in the Fallout fandom, the Star Wars fandom, I like some anime, and I am in the Warhammer fandom. While they all have their bad apples, they never are just "okay" with their sexual deviancy, at least to the point the fandom as a whole.

Having imagination is fine, looking at an actual animal and saying "maybe if this is was on a fictional character than it would be okay" is not fine.
 

quoting_mungo

Well-Known Member
However, I'll stop you right there with "it's fictional because it's okay". I hail from Deviantart, I've seen people do all sorts of horrors and there's a lot of people who have wanted real life people in their "fictional art". While of course these people are low caliber and don't make actual art, they still are a factor in this. Also, I would like to bring up an infamous piece of shit in the Sonic fandom, Paulandamy. A guy who liked Amy Rose so much, he actually molested a girl who looked like her. Now, I know this is the most radical of notions, but the fact is there are people out there who cannot control their urges from fiction to reality. You don't know the mind of the person who is making the art, and as far as I've seen on the main site. A lot of people simply cannot be trusted to control their urges. Deviantart has had a lot of people with creepy art in their galleries and faves, and they turned out to be scumbags and got arrested IRL.
I don’t know the mind of the person making the art, true, and neither do you. Choosing to assume the worst because of your own puritanical hang ups is not a good hill to die on.

You’re welcome to not be comfortable with consuming adult content, but suggesting that all or most people who do are bestialists because bestialists exist is frankly so divorced from reality that you should be paying alimony. There are accusations you should never throw around without serious evidence, and this is one of them.

You can be uncomfortable with it, but pretending that it’s evidence of bestiality or that this fictional content is doing real harm is still wrong. You are not better than a furry artist who draws dog dick just because you choose to play with characters inspired by a franchise aimed at children. Now, do I think that adults shouldn’t be able to be fans of children’s media without stigma? Hell no. But you need to realize that if imaginary genitalia damns furries, by that same logic your choice of media damns you. So it may be time to leave that high horse in the stable. And no, the age of your derivative OCs doesn’t matter; else the derivative genitalia on people’s freaking made-up animal-people wouldn’t matter.

What goes on in someone’s head or in their artwork is not real and unless and until they take actions in the real world, it’s at the level of thought crime. I don’t think anyone wants to go there.

(Also, if you think there isn’t fascination with non-human genitalia outside furry fandom, you may want to read up on the A/B/O romance/erotica sub genre. Particularly, look into Addison Cain. I won’t link her work or the New York Times article about her possessiveness about some of the genre tropes here, as, well, erotica, but it’s... a thing.)
 

Lucyfur

United forever in friendship and labour
Banned
Well for one, almost all of my characters are OCs and adults. So if you'd think that you'd be an utter moron. If you'd look at my roster, there's only like three kids out of like, over 60-70 adults. So yeah, if you're that petty and stupid.

However, I don't trust furries to the same level as I would people in other fandoms. Simply put, unlike other fandoms furries have a way of showing no shame and that to me is a sign of mental instability. I'm in the Fallout fandom, the Star Wars fandom, I like some anime, and I am in the Warhammer fandom. While they all have their bad apples, they never are just "okay" with their sexual deviancy, at least to the point the fandom as a whole.

Having imagination is fine, looking at an actual animal and saying "maybe if this is was on a fictional character than it would be okay" is not fine.
"Sexual Deviancy"
Oh no something that falls outside of the norm like literally most any kink or fetish like idk... Macro and micro content for instance.

You certainly do seem to have a fixation on macro and micro content based on your RP ads and such.

You make not hiding things about yourself and being openly apparent with things sound like it is somehow bad because people have "no shame". Like I am sorry you are so repressed that you find that to be something so outlandish and alarming really.

Also to clarify I said many SONIC characters are minors and you seem to base yourself here heavily by your OCs there. Also DID you just say you have 3 kids on your roster? OMG "If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...." *Rolls eyes*
Seriously you are making non starter arguments and really just sound very repressed and prudish and tbh I hope one say you can find yourself more free to express and be you and such.
 

Ziggy Schlacht

Hasn't figured out this "straight" business
I don't care, until you end up like Kero. My problem is that from what I've seen, a lot of people who are in the furry fandom have little in the notions of moderation and control. There's way more out there lewd art than there is on Deviantart. Knowing how human libidos work, that is concerning.
A guy shot up a school. He also played violent video games. Therefore, violent videogames must have caused the shooting.

That's how you sound.

Everyone else covered the rest of my points. But are you sure you aren't projecting your own issues on others?
 

Jaredthefox92

Well-Known Member
I don’t know the mind of the person making the art, true, and neither do you. Choosing to assume the worst because of your own puritanical hang ups is not a good hill to die on.

You’re welcome to not be comfortable with consuming adult content, but suggesting that all or most people who do are bestialists because bestialists exist is frankly so divorced from reality that you should be paying alimony. There are accusations you should never throw around without serious evidence, and this is one of them.

You can be uncomfortable with it, but pretending that it’s evidence of bestiality or that this fictional content is doing real harm is still wrong. You are not better than a furry artist who draws dog dick just because you choose to play with characters inspired by a franchise aimed at children. Now, do I think that adults shouldn’t be able to be fans of children’s media without stigma? Hell no. But you need to realize that if imaginary genitalia damns furries, by that same logic your choice of media damns you. So it may be time to leave that high horse in the stable. And no, the age of your derivative OCs doesn’t matter; else the derivative genitalia on people’s freaking made-up animal-people wouldn’t matter.

What goes on in someone’s head or in their artwork is not real and unless and until they take actions in the real world, it’s at the level of thought crime. I don’t think anyone wants to go there.

(Also, if you think there isn’t fascination with non-human genitalia outside furry fandom, you may want to read up on the A/B/O romance/erotica sub genre. Particularly, look into Addison Cain. I won’t link her work or the New York Times article about her possessiveness about some of the genre tropes here, as, well, erotica, but it’s... a thing.)

Wrong, I assume the worst in everyone. I assume the worst in human nature, it's just how I am. Don't think I single people out, I just don't have good faith in people when it usually has shown to go up against my better judgement.

I'm sorry, but the rest of the internet throw around these accusations. Who are you to tell me who to judge and not to judge? I can have my doubts if I please, you cannot force people to be okay with sexual degeneracy. At the end of the day I will still hold firm to my beliefs until I die. You can however, prove that I am unfounded, however as it stands the furry fandom still has shown that it has no intent on being moderated. Do I blame everyone? No, but unlike other fandoms there are a lot of people who simply do not control their urges and the most shilling out porn artist is the most popular. Sorry, but it's the truth on how I see it. Do I want it like that? No, but sadly that is what separates furries from simple anthro character enthusiasts.

Um once more, actually read my fucking stories. It's a war story where characters fight and die in wars I have designed. It doesn't matter the source material if canon characters rarely show up and I have a sandbox of OC's that I focus on. It's like saying you cannot make your own Pokemon story, because Pokemon is a series all itself.

People have gone there, and that's the issue. You're acting like there's never been accounts of furries abusing animals, there's been multiple.

(I don't care about errotica. I'm sure there are, but I would call that degeneracy as well. I call that "Dollar store" bargain bin smut. If anyone I knew read that I would seriously consider disassociating myself with it. If some erotica writer rapped a woman, I'd grill them just as well. My genres are warfare, science fiction, and grimdark fantasy.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top