NationStates

Jelmatt wrote:

United Muscovite Nations wrote:This. Neko is not furry, do I have to get the chart?

I am not knowledgeable on this discussion. All I know is that the artist didn't sexualize them and it was pretty much entirely a stylistic choice.

All he is saying is that kemomimi (animal ears and tails on humans) isn't furry

Jelmatt wrote:

Collatis wrote:That's far from the best reason to ban furry comics.

Not even furry comics. The artist in question is the person who drew the subreddit's banner, and the comic was essentially a political soapbox for her (she is socialist) but since the characters had cat ears and tails that's a no-no. No sexualization or anything, just had cat ears and tails for whatever reason.

As a child, it was conservatives railing on about "sexualization." now it seems some leftists have taken up the cause.

War Gears wrote:

Jelmatt wrote:
Not even furry comics. The artist in question is the person who drew the subreddit's banner, and the comic was essentially a political soapbox for her (she is socialist) but since the characters had cat ears and tails that's a no-no. No sexualization or anything, just had cat ears and tails for whatever reason.

As a child, it was conservatives railing on about "sexualization." now it seems some leftists have taken up the cause.

I miss the good ole days.

War Gears wrote:

Jelmatt wrote:
Not even furry comics. The artist in question is the person who drew the subreddit's banner, and the comic was essentially a political soapbox for her (she is socialist) but since the characters had cat ears and tails that's a no-no. No sexualization or anything, just had cat ears and tails for whatever reason.

As a child, it was conservatives railing on about "sexualization." now it seems some leftists have taken up the cause.

That was what /r/socialism used to label it misogynistic. I'm saying it wasn't and that the subreddit's mods were looking way too far into it.

Jelmatt wrote:

War Gears wrote:
As a child, it was conservatives railing on about "sexualization." now it seems some leftists have taken up the cause.

That was what /r/socialism used to label it misogynistic. I'm saying it wasn't and that the subreddit's mods were looking way too far into it.

I don't disagree. Just pointing out it's ironic how the trend changed.

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that being against getting horny for animals should not be a controversial position.

MERIZoC wrote:I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that being against getting horny for animals should not be a controversial position.

Deprived of the proletarian work ethic in society, such depravity is inevitable. The working class is a major bedrock of society, that it has been largely dismantled in the developed world as a coherent group leaves open degeneration of communist thought and ethics, as the "bourgeois-proletarians" (per Lenin, Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism) replace all key positions in working class movements.

MERIZoC wrote:I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that being against getting horny for animals should not be a controversial position.

Aren't humans animals?

MERIZoC wrote:I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that being against getting horny for animals should not be a controversial position.

But furries (antro-beings, whatever) ain't the same as animals.

Proctopeo wrote:

MERIZoC wrote:I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that being against getting horny for animals should not be a controversial position.

Aren't humans animals?

Don't be a pedant.

United Muscovite Nations wrote:

Proctopeo wrote:Aren't humans animals?

Don't be a pedant.

United Muscovite Nations wrote:

Jelmatt wrote:
Not even furry comics. The artist in question is the person who drew the subreddit's banner, and the comic was essentially a political soapbox for her (she is socialist) but since the characters had cat ears and tails that's a no-no. No sexualization or anything, just had cat ears and tails for whatever reason.

This. Neko is not furry, do I have to get the chart?

GLASS HOUSES

United Muscovite Nations wrote:

Proctopeo wrote:Aren't humans animals?

Don't be a pedant.

I'm not being a pedant, I'm being accurate.

Proctopeo wrote:

United Muscovite Nations wrote:Don't be a pedant.

I'm not being a pedant, I'm being accurate.

When I talk about people wanting to fuck animals, normal people understand what I mean. You understand what I mean. However, you want to annoy people, so you point out technicalities, with no real argument behind your points. That's being a pedant. Nobody likes pedants.

MERIZoC wrote:

Proctopeo wrote:I'm not being a pedant, I'm being accurate.

When I talk about people wanting to fuck animals, normal people understand what I mean. You understand what I mean. However, you want to annoy people, so you point out technicalities, with no real argument behind your points. That's being a pedant. Nobody likes pedants.

Did it work? :^)
Also, it's not like I'm wrong.

Proctopeo wrote:

United Muscovite Nations wrote:Don't be a pedant.

I'm not being a pedant, I'm being accurate.

If you value using correct scientific jargon over using conventional language, you're a pedant.

United Muscovite Nations wrote:

MERIZoC wrote:I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that being against getting horny for animals should not be a controversial position.

Deprived of the proletarian work ethic in society, such depravity is inevitable. The working class is a major bedrock of society, that it has been largely dismantled in the developed world as a coherent group leaves open degeneration of communist thought and ethics, as the "bourgeois-proletarians" (per Lenin, Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism) replace all key positions in working class movements.

> says this while being a petit-bourgeois who owns a cabin.

Uh-huh.

Neo-liberal, signing on. Why am I not included in the poll... ;-;

Kassaran wrote:Neo-liberal, signing on. Why am I not included in the poll... ;-;

Because get out.

Proctopeo wrote:

MERIZoC wrote:I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that being against getting horny for animals should not be a controversial position.

Aren't humans animals?

Humans are organic, biological beings like every other living thing. But I consider the word "animal" to refer to non-human biological beings.

B-but, I want to be noticed.

Anyways, the RWDT was orignarly where I thought to be, but upon hearing some of the less logical arguments they were coming up with, I decided to shrug and walk away for some time before turning round to look here.

Humans are animals, not all living things are. I wouldn't consider bacteria and the like to be 'animals', as such.

Secondly, cat ears and tail would seem pretty furry to me, but if the 'experts' say it's not, I'll take their word for it.

Lastly, we lefties are an odd bunch, aren't we?

Kassaran wrote:B-but, I want to be noticed.

Anyways, the RWDT was orignarly where I thought to be, but upon hearing some of the less logical arguments they were coming up with, I decided to shrug and walk away for some time before turning round to look here.

The left and right wing threads don't just mean liberal/socialist or conservative/capitalist.
But ALL ideologies that happen to be on their branches including things like anarchism and theocracy.

So yes it can be a bit tiring if you identify as closer to the center.

Albrenia wrote:Humans are animals, not all living things are. I wouldn't consider bacteria and the like to be 'animals', as such.

Secondly, cat ears and tail would seem pretty furry to me, but if the 'experts' say it's not, I'll take their word for it.

Lastly, we lefties are an odd bunch, aren't we?

For simplicity reasons, I consider animal ears and tail to be furry enough to be considered a furry.

And yes, we are a very odd bunch.

Well, I'll admit I'm a rather big fan of the skeptics community, more directly Sargon. My major issue in RWDT is they seem to be of the idea that if someone uses YouTube as their medium for communication, they're trash... and they don't have to explain why because 'it should be obvious pleb'.

So, if that's what RWDT is, I was hoping the other side wasn't so much that, and might (ironically given the current status of the more vocal fringe groups of the left right now) actually be willing to put some support rather than feelings and generalizations into what they say. You know, qualitative stuff and all that. Bread alone does not sustain a man and all that good stuff.

E: I'm also a kemonomimicon. Fite me.

War Gears wrote:

Jelmatt wrote:
That was what /r/socialism used to label it misogynistic. I'm saying it wasn't and that the subreddit's mods were looking way too far into it.

I don't disagree. Just pointing out it's ironic how the trend changed.

Muh horseshoe brings all the prudes to the yard.