One of the reasons I ask is because I see way too many people who seem to conflate/correlate the concept of community with being a Furry, i.e. being a fan of anthropomorphic animals to that of having some social cohesion/things in common beyond that of a hobby/interest. Expecting the same set of values, morals or just the same or similar interactions that they have/have had with someone else. In any community you have interactions and to a degree social cohesion as well as the association to go along with it. An example of this would be a small town IRL where most people know each other as well as that actual sense of belonging. Over the internet though that becomes more difficult as most of us are strangers who interact and talk, although not necessarily belong to any specific group or community. It's one of the reasons I never use the term "Furry community" as the fandom isn't one, although you can obviously have communities inside it such as FAF or Discord servers/Telegram groups.
And nah, I agree. I am not interested in zoophiles or pedophiles being welcomed either. It's one of those things you'd think would be universally condemned, but this shit is being pushed on Twatter in particular. Hell, have people defending sex offenders/rapists on there too.
The people who expect a group to agree with them just because they share an interest are usually the people who are the least educated and/or open minded on a given topic since they rely on others to tell them what to do, where to go, and who to sleep with at night.
In short: I agree. It's foolish to base your morals or values on a group. That isn't a community. It's a Cult. Confusing the two can be rather dangerous sometimes.
That said, I do think that Furries can form an overarching group or "community" at conventions and in forums such as this. Especially when a goal is perceived, such as raising money for a shelter or helping FA stay up through donations.
There is not an inherent evil associated with the term community for me, but that's because I define it as what it is, and not what people can associate it with.
are you talking about those with the paraphilias?
Absolutely not.
Essentially all Furries have a "Philia" of some sort; usually all falling under the umbrella term of Teratophilia (attraction or appeal for monsters; though this sometimes can mean deformed people, I mean the prior). "Monster" can group anything that is fantasy or nonhuman with human or humanoid traits, or even just a humanoid consciousness which is what any Fursona is. When you break it down.
So, no. I'm not bashing people who have their kinks, attractions, appeals, or Aesthetics. I am however suggesting that we avoid those who misunderstand their psychological damage/illness for a Kink or an Appeal, and those who take that a step even farther and use that as a reason to harm innocents or depict/outwardly express the want harm to innocents. Sometimes unabashedly.
I feel this is a fairly easy distinction to understand.
The only allowed "non offenders" should be the ones who know their attractions are wrong and actively seek continual treatment. Otherwise no. Absolutely not.
I'm in agreement here, but at that point, those who actually feel guilt or shame and want to change likely wouldn't be expressing it publicly or even privately to anyone except a therapist. So I tend not to take public announcements of guilt seriously.
forms.gle
