this post was submitted on 02 Aug 2023
115 points (96.0% liked)

NonCredibleDefense

3502 readers
1 users here now

Rules:

  1. Posts must abide by lemmy.world terms and conditions
  2. No spam or soliciting for money.
  3. No racism or other bigotry allowed.
  4. Obviously nothing illegal.

If you see these please report them.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago (6 children)

I think it's the fact that furries tend to bring their kink public. I have not consented to engage in your sex games. If he showed up to a ceremony in leather and a ballgag no one would be ok with it, but the fur suit is the equivalent and I'm expected to applaud.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

bring their kink into public

But it's not a kink for them.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You sound like the kind of person that wants to ban drag story time at the libraries because "kids shouldn't be exposed to someone's kink"

[–] [email protected] -4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

So the distinction I feel here is that women are people. If a man wants to dress like a woman, sure, most people can interact with women in public, whatever. If you want to call them both, broadly, a form of cosplay, then drag is a costume that doesn't fundamentally change much. Animals aren't people.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

The fursuit is the equivalent??? I'm actually laughing rn people think this???

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

A big part of this misconception is actually from That Episode. You can actually google the phrase That Episode. No need to even specify the show, just those two words are enough (but the show is CSI). There's a bunch to read into if you'd like, but the important bit is that a big part of public opinion - which has only recently begun to change, and only in some parts of the internet - comes from That Episode's portrayal of furries

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

the fur suit is the equivalent [of] leather and a ballgag

I mean, no. It's really not.

I do get what you're saying and generally agree otherwise. That one was just a bit much.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I agree. I’ve seen furries in public and while I find them odd, I never saw any of their costumes as inherently sexual.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They do, though, and therein lies the non-issue.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

except they don’t though, where are you coming up with this?

say someone is attracted to women, right? is every female body they see gonna be viewed exclusively through a sexual lens?

some people get kinky with ropes, are those inherently sexual too? where’s the line?

[–] [email protected] -4 points 1 year ago

Would you say the same about police officers, nurses, nuns, motorcycle wear and so on?

If the body isnt indecently exposed i find it hard to draw the line, since everything and nothing is someones kink.