Furries just don't like it cause it speaks partly of the truth. I mean the show had to have researched somewhere. Probably asked furries at a CON about the fandom then picked out the parts that would make an interesting storeyline in the show. I very much doubt CSI deliberately targeted the worse side of the fandom. They used what they could make a storey out of, big deal, live with it.
That's pretty much what happened. They did have technical advisors on the show, but the producers ignored them when the facts were inconvenient to the story. Whether or not it spoke the truth in any way is what's highly debatable. It seems they simply took the most visual and vicarious aspects, of which is only a tiny percent of a real furry con; can it really be said that this tiny part is really the truth, even if its factual? It's like saying that it's true that all soldiers are mindless and soulless killing machines bent on atrocities because a very, very few actually have done so; the statement is really a distortion of the truth, and everybody suffers as a result.
Yep. If it showed what furries were really like it would be boring to most of the TV show's viewers.well in order to make it a crime, of /course/ they had to use the dark side of the fandom... no one would've thought the episode would've been good if they used the lighter side..
in my opinion, I'm honoured that CSI acknowledged the existance of furries, and being a fur myself I have no problem with it.
well in order to make it a crime, of /course/ they had to use the dark side of the fandom... no one would've thought the episode would've been good if they used the lighter side..
There is something called freedom of speech. If something offends you, refute it politely, or suck it up.
Yep. If it showed what furries were really like it would be boring to most of the TV show's viewers.
No, the show spoke the truth, wether we like it or not. And please use the multi-quote button.
If you really believe that, then you've never really been to a furry con. I've been to several off and on since the fandom first got together, and no con was ever like the one portrayed. No, the show was fixated on one aspect and that was all they were interested in.
And how do you know what furries do behind closed hotel room doors?.
And if you believe that no fursuiter does anything sexual in their fursuit, then i suggest you take a trip to Xtube.com and search fursuit. That and ONE con does not represent ALL cons.
Oh yes and may i remind you of that guy that was mentioned earlier in thread organising a sexfest in his hotel room at the next con?, now tell me CSI was bullshitting.
If you believe CSI was lieing then you are comeing across as a bit naive to me.
THE ENTIRE FURRY FANDOM REALLY IS THE SHIT HOLE THAT THE MEDIA PRESENTS IT TO BE, SO QUIT BITCHING ABOUT THE 'LIES' WHEN YOU'RE LIVING OUT THE HORRIBLE TRUTH YOURSELVES YOU FUCKING FURFAGS. CONSIDDER YOURSELVES LUCKY THAT THE MEDIA HASN'T REALIZED THE TRUE CANCER OF THE FANDOM IS THE DRAMA. DR. PHIL COULD DO AN ENTIRE SEASON ON FURRY DRAMA. ONE WHOLE EPISODE DEDICATED TO STUMBLES THE STAIR DRAGON EVEN!
Hell, the best-known joke from the furry fandom is the fucking "Cockwaffle", which is the most idiotic thing ever.
EDIT: also, now that i'm thinking about it, who the hell would get the money if we had sued CSI and won? that wouldn't happen, but who were you thinking would get it? Blotch? Adam Wan? Our Motherland, the Furaffinity?