GameBanshee Forums

i know i can't spell it, does that help?

[QUOTE=C E]I don't see an association between interest for horses and adreneline - do you try to provoce them to kick you or what? [/QUOTE]
No I obviously do not encourage them to kick me. 1 Any person can't just jump up on any horse and go for a freaking joyride. It's not that glamourous. I work at a world class facility, there's a lot that happens behind the scenes. There are the problem horses, whose problems my coworkers or I didn't create, but are paid to work through. One girl I work with won't go into a certain horse's stall to catch him because he is all that and a tombstone. Horses also pick up on human emotions and can take advantage of that. Horses are big and we are small. A horse could squash me. Humans master horses. It takes a ton of dilligent patient consistentcy experience and understanding to make them look nice under saddle. Concidering those facts, I know that being an adreneline junkie is right up the alley of a horse trainer. Putting myself at risk and such. I do understand the behavior, to the point where I can master an animal ten times my size and that's the risk. But that wouldn't give me any sort of adreneline; dodging away from the hooves of a 1,500lb rearing equine, knowing it's just me and him, he could crack my skull like summersquash, and I must recollect the animal so it doesn't cause havoc to the point where work can't continue. The show must go on. I generally try to treat the horses like I would myself, does that classify me as a furry? I mean, I don't pin on fake tails, but still, we are one in the same...

1 (~edit, in my life's work at this profession, I have been kicked once, in the leg, it got a little swollen. Horses fighting over an apple with me between them, one bit the other, that one turned and tried to kick the one that bit it. My inexperience at the time and the fact that I wasn't paying attention and didn't move fast enough got me kicked, and it was in the leg.)

edit (never mind, realised I was spamming a no-spam thread) sorry

I was about to write a long deriding reply, but it struck me that Hill-Shatar claimed that yiffing, donning ridiculous costumes, and most other furry craziness is actually only practiced by few furries who are shunned by the furry community as a whole.

Hill, can you please explicitly elaborate on what exactly constitutes a "normal" furry? I know you alluded to that in the thread, but unless I missed it you never concretely stated what activities define a "normal" furry, as opposed to a normal person, on one end, and a full-fledged yiffing, alter-ego carrying, costume donning sack of crazy on the other end.

Sorry for my laggard reply. I'm recovering from a nasty case of food poisoning.

Hill-Shatar wrote:The work there is ok. I admit to not enjoying it as much as random chance encounters where I find some good stories, and the first link, well, although I've been sent links to it often, I never visited. *shrug*

I think you're missing my point. Let me restate it: My impressions from reading some of this literature is that it's very different from the better grade of fiction, in two respects. First, it either simplifies people into stereotypes whose emotional reactions, in turn, are stereotyped, or second, it recreates a society devoid of any cultural nuance, where anthropomorphic people exist in a commercially induced vacuum of easy consumerism. There is no past, save as it relates to modern television and popular films. There is no future considered, and no sense of a greater world with its larger concerns. There is only an eternal present, occupied by trivialized personal worries and joys. Or at least, that's been my take on it. In short, I did it for a feature I was writing, I read a good deal of it, and frankly, I hope never to read any of that dreck again. From my perspective, I have a limited number of years in which to engage in a variety of (hopefully) enjoyable activities. Wo why should I waste my reading time on three-rate literature, when there's so much excellent fiction in so many languages that I have yet to read?

It's furryMUCK, yet another forum/site that has been taken over by the 'New Gen' and leaving the oldies in the dust. You have to expect something along these lines from people who, as mentioned, are in a bit more of a radical group compared to the rest of us. Unless, of course, you think I visit furryMUCK often, and I can tell you I've read some of archives a bit more than the others. I'm afraid you beat me to making an account on that particular site.

That's alright, you're welcome to it. I only went there (and to roughly 20 others) for a large feature some years ago, and would gladly never return to any furry sites.

There are tribes in Africa that had rituals involving men dressing up as woman, and practicing the part by acting as one for several months before. However, I rarely visit these sites and a lot of other people choose not to either. Really, it's more along the lines of how Hentai followed Anime as it slowly growed into the world wide industry that it is today.

I think CE dealt with this excellently. Your remarks above no more hold water than did your comparison between "furries" and legittimate traditional godforms employing animal images (and plenty of other images, at the same time) as symbols. Shamanistic practices and their reasons are well-documented. I can give you some references, if you'd like.

I know all of three people who are actually part of this, and they have problems discussing it with me, basically because I'm part of the fandom and not exactly ready to give over my immortal soul or whichever they want to become a Furry in the next life.

From what I know, those who 'worship' these ideals hope to become Furries, through some sort of "Advanced Learning" or worship to find out how to ascend or shift over to such forms. I have to admit, I find the religion to be a bit excessive myself, so have never really followed that extensively... I'll go around and ask when they are actually awake, instead of calling on them at half past midnight.

This all reminds me too well of what we call "fluffy bunny Wiccans" with their beliefs that every one of them is a Lord or Lady, and a reincarnation of somebody like Cleopatra. I don't find this amusing, but very unhealthy, and the sign of a personality that needs genuine assistance in dealing with reality, and learning to enjoy the pleasures it offers.

Part is definitely escapism, but half the things we do now are just to escape. *shrug*

Not an excuse, nor is it the same thing, by any means. Unless you want to try and build a case for how my re-reading Chaucer's Canterbury Tales is the same as some kid who hates life stroking him/herself off while reading furry porn?

Hill, can you please explicitly elaborate on what exactly constitutes a "normal" furry? I know you alluded to that in the thread, but unless I missed it you never concretely stated what activities define a "normal" furry, as opposed to a normal person, on one end, and a full-fledged yiffing, alter-ego carrying, costume donning sack of crazy on the other end.

Normal furries are a varied group, but typically it's more along the lines of people who enjoy the work and other such things as a whole above other types of art, literature, or 'worlds', and no, this is not the porn. There are two major groups that are considered slightly more radical, and since fable appears to have actually come through some of them, he has probably learned at least a bit about them.

There are basically the groups that go to furry conventions dressed up in fur suits and similar additions such as tails, and go onto sites such as furryMUCK and hit on 50+ people.

There's another which has formed a sort of religion based around this, and although I know two or three people involved with this, I never really noticed before, as they don't act all that different from other people (ie no strange suits). That's about as far as my knowledge goes on that one.

In short, I did it for a feature I was writing, I read a good deal of it, and frankly, I hope never to read any of that dreck again. From my perspective, I have a limited number of years in which to engage in a variety of (hopefully) enjoyable activities. Wo why should I waste my reading time on three-rate literature, when there's so much excellent fiction in so many languages that I have yet to read?

It's a form of entertainment for a group of people, and not all of it (although some of the newer members' pieces of work) are excellent at all. Usually you have to hunt round to find what you want... it's just another form of fan fiction. It's a nice break from reading my way through another book that I think is getting a little heavy for me to finish that day, and save it for another.

That's alright, you're welcome to it. I only went there (and to roughly 20 others) for a large feature some years ago, and would gladly never return to any furry sites.

Out of curiosity, may I ask what feature this was for?

I think CE dealt with this excellently. Your remarks above no more hold water than did your comparison between "furries" and legittimate traditional godforms employing animal images (and plenty of other images, at the same time) as symbols. Shamanistic practices and their reasons are well-documented. I can give you some references, if you'd like.

The original reply was that you could not understand why some people would immerse themselves so completely. I gave you an example. It might be something similar to these people, and as mentioned, I am not part nor do I want to be of that specific group of people.

This all reminds me too well of what we call "fluffy bunny Wiccans" with their beliefs that every one of them is a Lord or Lady, and a reincarnation of somebody like Cleopatra. I don't find this amusing, but very unhealthy, and the sign of a personality that needs genuine assistance in dealing with reality, and learning to enjoy the pleasures it offers.

There are many different religions out there who have theories of reincarnation. In these cases, it is more that they want to become it in the next life, whichever it is for them, and that they were not once furries.

In either case, how is this different from the African Tribes to be comparing Furries to Wicca, unless there is some alterior meaning in comparing these together? Otherwise, your basically saying that all in this particualr religion need help as it is unhealthy for them to particpate? Sorry, it's early for me here, I must have missed something.

Not an excuse, nor is it the same thing, by any means. Unless you want to try and build a case for how my re-reading Chaucer's Canterbury Tales is the same as some kid who hates life stroking him/herself off while reading furry porn?

Once again, you rotate it back towards the sub group. I am not speaking of those who read and look at the freaking porn, fable, as I'm sure there are tons of people out there who look at it and are not furries. Unless I have made some error in typing in typing my last eight or so posts, in which I said clearly that they are not what I am speaking about in any form unless the discussion is thrown in that direction.

Hill-Shatar wrote:It's a form of entertainment for a group of people, and not all of it (although some of the newer members' pieces of work) are excellent at all. Usually you have to hunt round to find what you want... it's just another form of fan fiction. It's a nice break from reading my way through another book that I think is getting a little heavy for me to finish that day, and save it for another.

And you're entitled to read whatever you want, whether it's cheap pulp or classics. That doesn't make cheap pulp into classics, and I have yet to read a single piece of furry fiction that qualified as more than second rate. The best of it--a six volume series that came out on the DAW paperback series in the late 1970s, and which I reviewed at the time; sorry, I don't recall the author or titles--was decent enough to make me wonder why the writer had bothered introducing furries at all into it. It made no sense, since his characters were too broad and well designed to fit the anthropomorphic skins he'd given them. The series made no impact, and sold poorly.

Out of curiosity, may I ask what feature this was for?

A study of the furry sub-culture phenomenon on the Web.

The original reply was that you could not understand why some people would immerse themselves so completely. I gave you an example. It might be something similar to these people, and as mentioned, I am not part nor do I want to be of that specific group of people.

But you could research the phenomena you discuss before mentioning them, and thus have some idea just have far they are from furries.

There are many different religions out there who have theories of reincarnation. In these cases, it is more that they want to become it in the next life, whichever it is for them, and that they were not once furries.

There are very few religions out there that employ reincarnation, though these are well known in the West and almost completely misunderstood and misrepresented by pop culture. None of the religions I can think of believe that you go to whatever form you desire most. Again, that's pure personal wish fulfillment, and reveals a staggering lack of self-worth. Don't misunderstand me: I am genuinely concerned for these people. They need help.

In either case, how is this different from the African Tribes to be comparing Furries to Wicca, unless there is some alterior meaning in comparing these together? Otherwise, your basically saying that all in this particualr religion need help as it is unhealthy for them to particpate? Sorry, it's early for me here, I must have missed something.

Do you mean, you want some understanding of why a given tribal shaman will spend months working on elaborate techniques to "become" a woman? The reason is in part social. The distribution of social taboos and work falls along sexual lines, as established after the boy or girl enters puberty, and moves through a series of rites "welcoming" them to that sex. Each sex is also in charge of certain rituals during life. It could be said that any member of the tribe has access to half the tribal animist wisdom.

The shaman who engages in transexual rites does so specially for the goal of understanding the cultural taboos, practices, and spiritual contacts available to the other sex. This grants them greater wisdom, which they keep, despite transitting back to their birth sex.

Since you've not indicated an interest in any books on this subject, I won't link any, but the rituals required for this are very complex and extensive, and soundly based (whatever one might think of them) in human psychology. This isn't about personal wish fulfillment by people who have severe social/personal problems.

If I just answered a question you didn't ask, forgive me, but I really had trouble understanding your paragraph, above.

Once again, you rotate it back towards the sub group. I am not speaking of those who read and look at the freaking porn, fable, as I'm sure there are tons of people out there who look at it and are not furries. Unless I have made some error in typing in typing my last eight or so posts, in which I said clearly that they are not what I am speaking about in any form unless the discussion is thrown in that direction.

The reason I mention the furry porn is simply that there is so very much of it. I can't link to sites that provide it, here, but I have found something under 1000 stories easily on the Web, and considerably fewer stories that aren't. This would seem to point to one major fetish element within the furry movement, and it's perfectly legitimmate to note that as an indication why a fair number of these people are involved in their community. But if you want to eliminate the porn element from discussion, I can only ask what you specifically get out of reading a halfway decent novel with humans wearing anthropomorphic skins, which you wouldn't if they didn't have those skins? And again, what leads you to believe that I would read Chaucer's Canterbury Tales for escapism?

Reply

Hello, fable, as it appears to be you that is the lead of the most arguments between others here, then some of my comments might be directed more at you then other members. I only ask that those who believe that reading the Wikipedia article, as I have seen used in the first three posts alone, gives them a view on this, please perform some more research before you place your opinions or ideas here.

My name is Martin, from New York, and I'm pleased to meet a few of you here. When I got an e-mail with a link to this I was interested in Hill-whatever-name-he's-chosen-here's thread almost immediately, and he showed it to me when I came to his house recently for a visit. As the topic seems to have swerved a bit in the recent posts, let's get it back on topic of what people here actually know of the furry phenomenon, rather than there opinions on it or those who are active members of the legitimate-but-little-known-of religion. Yes, I'm part of it, which I have no problem mentioning. I also work as an executive in a bussiness, leading to having to move myself and my wife of four years to this forsaken city, so this is not the preaching of a back country hick. ;-)

What you need to know is that our religion is something that I believe whole heartedly in, and that yes, it is a small group of the more radical "Furs" that originally made it up. Although Hill never was really interested in it over the years, he tried to learn a bit of it over the years. In essence, we hope through study and similar texts of whatever form to find a way to leave and come back a different form. No, this is not exactly new, as there have been what have been called "Cults" throughout our history which have failed in the task. As for reincarnation, well... I do suppose Buddhism is not included here in a quest for Nervana, with millions of followers? Our way is close to the tennants of their's. We are not currently ready for such a form, but we are making slow advances towards it.

As for the African tribes, no, that was not an excellent description from Hill, but you did ask whether people immerse themselves so completely into these forms of roleplaying. Like it or not, those African tribes can fit into that description, even if it is a ritual. As for us, we find joy trying to find what our view is of the world through their eyes, even if we can't truly understand it. C Elegans, we don't think we have a special connection, but we hope that one day we will. As for your description, Athena, thank you, I was going to write something similar myself to such a statement when I planned to join yesterday. Fortunes diverged, I guess.

It is unfortunate about the large amount of porn in the internet... back a while ago both Hill and I were still part of the original Furs being crushed by a group of people who were making increasingly more pornographic and, as Hill described to me at the time, totally nasty (he was eighteen at the time) and far too outragous to be compared with the typical lifestyle, if that's what you want to describe it as. Perhaps you would like to see what is left? It is unfortunate that we disbanded some time ago... people like Hill gave up on it and I moved on to the small forming religion, but there are still traces of it left. As I can see, all your views on the Furry lifestyle as a whole, fable, were more than likely typing in "Furry" and expecting results that you wanted from the internet. Most of these were probably from the time when Burned Fur was still around, and if you read it, I congratulate you. If you didn't, then no reason you described it in one paragraph as "some kid who hates life stroking him/herself off while reading furry porn?" Unless I have slits on my arms and am currently stroking myself to the picture of some macro wolf, I highly doubt your blatant insult to the community is anymore than the ramblings of a person who has been causing us problems for our entire time in this fandom/religion? I am not sure what to take from this fable... are you any more than a person who wants to facade a knowledgable front on the subject by argueing, from a short experience in the lifestyle on several sites that involve porn, with an actual Furry who has been a part of the actual group for the past eight years? As for the work of authors such as C.S Lewis and Brian Jauqes (Redwall), the latter of which has a huge following and has "people" with animal qualities such as swimming and climbing trees with ease, are they two bit stories that are not half way decent with no need with animal skins, when the entire basis of stories is on fighting more "Vermin-like" animals with all sides having abilities due to one's race?

As for your fetish, read here: http://burnedfur.mv.com/faq.html , the part about that particular group. Without reading this, you would never have known that the actual furries that Hill speaks of do NOT BELONG TO THE SAME GROUP! Of course, Hill has mentioned this several times, and it looks as if you all decided to walk right past that without doing any actual research on it. I'm sure once I'm gone people will answer me that we were just a splinter group, but we were the original group that were slowly pushed out due to people who make porn on sites such as VCL, which is mentioned in the lacking and obviously outdated Wikipedia article on Anthropomorphism.
As for your obviously misinformed "information" that has lead you to obliviously post such crap, or whoever it was, that we want to be animals, let's look at one of the few sites that Wikipedia got right, shall we? ( http://furry.wikia.com/wiki/Burned_Furs )

""ANIMAL WANNABES": And finally, we confront the long-held notion that Furries secretly wish they WERE animals. I'm sure there are some that do, but they're in the minority. Trust me. I'm rather fond of being a homo sapien. I've grown quite attached to the idea of opposable thumbs, full-color vision, and the dawning of self-awareness. Space travel, Chinese food, swing dancing... the perks ain't bad, either. No, I'm holding my own on this end of the evolutionary ladder, thank you. Most furries are. But for the poor shmucks who want nothing more than to transform into an elk or bear or something equally ridiculous, a stay in an institution, not a fandom, is in order." "

Now, how about you actually visit the page and learn about the actual point of this thread and some misconceptions, such as the beastiality one that is similar to what you keep bringing up with all this porn speeches. Yes, we know, there are tons of people out there who should not have access to a computer to make this, and the originals and a lot of the newer guys and gals agree on that. Unfortunately, we all just gave up and now read or look for art in the comfort of rare trusted pages, e-mails of new pics and books we pick up from the book store. However, if you carry out a search for Burned Fur, you can learn a lot of things about our culture, and not from typing in a search engine the words "Furries" and expecting results that will explain everything for you. I could care less if you read eighty of these stories, then read some stories by those just starting out and expecting them to be better than Anime, or whichever type of Fan fic you were comparing it to, or if you just read them all from the same type of "Yiff" sites accross the internet. Perhaps searching for "Yerf" might get you minutely better results? Perhaps reading the below will help you learn a bit from obvious misconceptions you harbour, from here ( http://www.answers.com/topic/burned-fur ):

1. WE SHALL institute ourselves as a monkey wrench in the gears of mainstream fandom--not to destroy it, but to improve it. If all else fails, and improving the fandom seems impossible or a waste of time, then we shall institute ourselves as an alternative to mainstream fandom.

2.WE STRONGLY DISCOURAGE the support of acts such as bestiality, plushophilia, fursuit sex and other things seen as "wrong" by non-fandom individuals (known by fans as "mundanes"). It will be easier for non-fans to sympathize and identify with anthro art if these elements are, if not eliminated, then pushed to the far outer fringes and rendered irrelevant to the fandom at large.

3. WE LEAVE the concept of "furry lifestylers" up to debate. It is generally stated that this facet of mainstream fandom is not a part of this 'counterfandom', but the aspects of the "lifestyler" contingent are not as problematical as the acts mentioned in point two.

4. WE ENCOURAGE aesthetic, cultural and philosophical diversity. While this may lead to potential inter-group conflict, it will also inspire much-needed debates and exchanges of ideas.

I leave you with this. I may return some time to hear the arguments as they come in, but I see no reason to argue with a self proclaimed expert from the internet, and I don't want to watch as Hill tries to argue with you, which I have no idea why he is really doing that anyways, considering how you are analyzing such things as African Religion and then using Wicca as an example. I might have confused your meanings, but for the most part, your arguments make little sense to me at all, and they don;t seem to have much reason behind them either.

Martin

I was going to mention the thing on literature too, there are many authors who may refer to a talking animal at some point, C.S. Lewis being one of them. These books are decent fiction and certainly not pornographic or deal with such adult material.
How about Animal Farm for one, an excellent book that uses metaphors and such to describe Communism?
Or Alice in Wonderland?
Other books refer to religion, war, common interests, allegiances, a great many issues.

Nice defense of the point Inter and welcome to GB.

Marty has come to GB? Hide your children! *tosses five bucks in collection box*

Martin has a lot more experience defending his views than I do, so he decided to stop by for a post or two before going back into the lands of the GB-unknowns.

Inter wrote:as Hill described to me at the time, totally nasty (he was eighteen at the time)

I actually used several more words to describe how I was feeling at the moment, if I remember correctly, right about six months before I cut all public connections with knowing the newer Furries.

and I don't want to watch as Hill tries to argue with you

I like to argue, and you made a lot of sentence structure mistakes in your last paragraph, Marty.

Inter wrote:Hello, fable, as it appears to be you that is the lead of the most arguments between others here, then some of my comments might be directed more at you then other members. I only ask that those who believe that reading the Wikipedia article, as I have seen used in the first three posts alone, gives them a view on this, please perform some more research before you place your opinions or ideas here.

Inter, hi. Good to see you. When you get to know me well, have read many posts of mine, I'll take seriously your request that I do more research. Until then, you haven't established your own credentials yet. And I don't believe you know anything about me, my work, or what I think or do to offer a view concerning my knowledge.

I also decline the honor of being "the lead" in most arguments in this thread. I do, however, acknowledge that you're most angry with my remarks, which may explain why you don't bother dealing with any of the questions I've raised. Anger clouds judgement. I think, in fact, that you'll find CElegans is actually a lot more definite in rejecting whatever you accept.

My name is Martin, from New York, and I'm pleased to meet a few of you here. When I got an e-mail with a link to this I was interested in Hill-whatever-name-he's-chosen-here's thread almost immediately, and he showed it to me when I came to his house recently for a visit. As the topic seems to have swerved a bit in the recent posts, let's get it back on topic of what people here actually know of the furry phenomenon, rather than there opinions on it or those who are active members of the legitimate-but-little-known-of religion.

Wrong. The topic Hill-Shatar created was as follows:

Recently I got wondering on what you guys actually know about Anthropomorphism. It's basically a form of culture revolving around humans who look like animals. At least, that's what most of it is about... some are animals who can talk, and some such.

I've noticed how large Anthro is getting in today's culture, even if the actual population of "Furries" isn't exactly growing to huge amounts of people. Fans have been popping out of nowhere. So... what do people know about it? Your opinions? I'm a bit curious, see.

As you can see, the topic was about our opinions, which Hill-Shatar wanted to know. So you misunderstood the very first post, and continued throughout the rest of yours based on that misunderstanding. Please don't try to correct us on how we are supposed to run our threads, however.

Yes, I'm part of it, which I have no problem mentioning. I also work as an executive in a bussiness, leading to having to move myself and my wife of four years to this forsaken city, so this is not the preaching of a back country hick. ;-)

I take exception to your implication that because somebody came from a rural community, their opinions would be worth less than those from an urban background. I think you'll find that we have a lot of people from diverse backgrounds and cultures on GameBanshee, including rural ones. They're no less valued for what they have to say. And I really mean that.

What you need to know is that our religion is something that I believe whole heartedly in, and that yes, it is a small group of the more radical "Furs" that originally made it up. Although Hill never was really interested in it over the years, he tried to learn a bit of it over the years. In essence, we hope through study and similar texts of whatever form to find a way to leave and come back a different form. No, this is not exactly new, as there have been what have been called "Cults" throughout our history which have failed in the task. As for reincarnation, well... I do suppose Buddhism is not included here in a quest for Nervana, with millions of followers?

Except that Buddhism teaches reincarnation is something bad, a matter of chaining yourself to illusion. Achieving nirvana is to escape from reincarnation, and the sequence of birth and death. So I'm not quite sure why you're bringing it up.

So since you claim to represent a religion, could we have some details of your religion? You provide none. In their pure form (not as offshoots developed much later), religion is all about answering the whys of the universe: Why am I here? Why was I born, and why am I going to die? Why do perfectly good people end up being killed? So what are the answers to these questions that your Furry religion provides? And what else makes your religion a "religion?" And what are the methods of worship? Some clear exposition on this is required, and your links furnish nothing of the kind. Anybody can establish something they claim is a religion, whether it is or isn't.

As for the African tribes, no, that was not an excellent description from Hill, but you did ask whether people immerse themselves so completely into these forms of roleplaying.

Only it isn't roleplaying, as I think I made clear, above, just as the use of animal symbology in, say, Egyptian and Hindu religion, doesn't mean a worshipper believes they are worshipping somebody with a hawk's head. To argue that African religions are engaged in some form of roleplaying completely misunderstands everything about those religions.

Most of these were probably from the time when Burned Fur was still around, and if you read it, I congratulate you. If you didn't, then no reason you described it in one paragraph as "some kid who hates life stroking him/herself off while reading furry porn?" Unless I have slits on my arms and am currently stroking myself to the picture of some macro wolf, I highly doubt your blatant insult to the community is anymore than the ramblings of a person who has been causing us problems for our entire time in this fandom/religion?

So we're in agreement that any kid who writes, and reads, furry porn is in need of real help? And that they furnish a large part of the furry community, unless 5 or 10 people are sitting around writing close to 1000 stories on the Web, and occupying numerous MUDs? Meaning no offense, but where do you get off attacking me in the name of a religion you haven't even established, especially since the documents you link to use the strongest language as I have in condemning these same porn furries?

Furry who has been a part of the actual group for the past eight years? As for the work of authors such as C.S Lewis and Brian Jauqes (Redwall), the latter of which has a huge following and has "people" with animal qualities such as swimming and climbing trees with ease, are they two bit stories that are not half way decent with no need with animal skins, when the entire basis of stories is on fighting more "Vermin-like" animals with all sides having abilities due to one's race?

I can't say I have ever heard of, or read, Brian Jauqes. If by CS Lewis you mean the fairy-tale elements in his Narnia series, those have nothing to do with furries and everything to do with using anthropomorphic animal elements to make his point to kids, in imitation of the bestsellers of his age: Mother Goose. You do realize the Lewis was a fundamentalist Christian who would probably have had a heart attack if he were alive, and found his name dragged into this conversation? Trying to claim anything Lewis wrote as "furry" is like trying to claim the Mahabharata for feminism. The terms have no relevance. If anything written that uses a talking animal constitutes furrydom, then every cartoon is, every fable is--in short, the word furry ceases to have any meaning. It becomes useless, as well as inaccurate.

As for your obviously misinformed "information" that has lead you to obliviously post such crap, or whoever it was, that we want to be animals, let's look at one of the few sites that Wikipedia got right, shall we? ( http://furry.wikia.com/wiki/Burned_Furs )

First of all, I request that you keep a civil tongue in your head. I may have differences with Hill-Shatar, but I respect him, and he respects me. If you want to discuss anything with me, you can do the same, and that applies to all conversations with anybody else, as well. You agreed to this when you joined this board. Consider this fair warning.

Second, if you're one of a group of furries defining yourself as being separate from another group, that's all well and good: but Hill-Shatar's initial question didn't ask specifically about one group, or another. If you'd bothered to truly read and undestand his initial post, you would have realized that. He simply wanted to know what our reactions were to the sub-culture. Not sub-cultures plural, note.

AsI leave you with this. I may return some time to hear the arguments as they come in, but I see no reason to argue with a self proclaimed expert from the internet, and I don't want to watch as Hill tries to argue with you, which I have no idea why he is really doing that anyways, considering how you are analyzing such things as African Religion and then using Wicca as an example. I might have confused your meanings, but for the most part, your arguments make little sense to me at all, and they don;t seem to have much reason behind them either.

So you're the kind of person who likes to post-and-run, then? Not willing to provide evidence to back up claims? So much for dialog. And I don't suppose you'd be amenable to explaining how I used Wicca as an example of African religions? I'm still trying to figure that one out.

Be that as it may, thanks for coming by. I hope that if you do show up again, next time your remarks will be a bit more courteous, and far more explanatory rather than simply asserting you follow a religion, which anybody can claim.

Hill-Shatar: You still owe me a response. When you get the time.

Ravager wrote:How about Animal Farm for one, an excellent book that uses metaphors and such to describe Communism?

The fable setting (no joke, literally fabliaux) with barnyard animals had nothing to do with furries. It derived from the medieval "talking animals" fables, and before that, all the way back to Aesop. It was deliberately and ironically used to tell a brutal tale of Communist insinuation and subjugation.

Or Alice in Wonderland?

The Reverend Dodgson, in showing the state of Alice's mind during sleep, delilberately mingled fairytale stories with contemporary political satire. Just because a novel uses speaking animals, doesn't mean it has anything to do with a small, modern group of people who wish they were anthropomorphic animals. To argue otherwise is anachronistic.

I take exception to your implication that because somebody came from a rural community, their opinions would be worth less than those from an urban background. I think you'll find that we have a lot of people from diverse backgrounds and cultures on GameBanshee, including rural ones. They're no less valued for what they have to say.

I don't think he was saying they're less valued. More so he was painting a perspective to us of who he is,

[QUOTE=Athena]I don't think he was saying they're less valued. More so he was painting a perspective to us of who he is, [/QUOTE]

Athena, he placed it in the context of reflecting negatively on people from rural areas. In other words, in defining himself, he belittled some others. I don't see how else I could interpret that.

Okay, maybe it was degrading in it's context, but [QUOTE=fable]..some kid who hates life stroking him/herself off while reading furry porn..(Athena edit, did you actually type that?)

How you can make what I wrote about this into "a blatant insult to the community" is admittedly beyond my limited intellectual capacity.[/QUOTE]
I can understand where the community would be insulted. Don't you think you are stereotyping a bit? Then again, you both are.

Also, I think we have defined 2 kinds; root furries and hyped-up following.

[QUOTE=Athena]Okay, maybe it was degrading in it's context, but
don't you think you are sterotyping a little bit?
Then again, you both are.[/QUOTE]

But how would I be stereotyping by telling him not to stereotype? Besides, telling others not to stereotype various groups is what I'm supposed to do here, as a mod. It's part of Buck's divine commandment.

That said, I could have been a bit less stiff in my reply. But I don't know anybody sane (or otherwise) who responds well to being immediately attacked by someone who hasn't even bothered to read the first post in the thread, and wants to tell me what I can and cannot discuss.

And for everything else, as Hill-Shatar knows, I remain open to new knowledge when it's presented. So far, we know from Inter's post that he belongs to a furry group that utterly rejects furry porn and its creators, and he claims he belongs to a furry religion, as well. That's about it. I accept that the first part, but then, I never said otherwise. And I've asked for evidence showing that he follows a genuine religion, rather than simply an elaborate, multi-person form of wish fulfillment. It's a fair question. It's the kind of question I've repeatedly suggested to my confreres in the pagan community at large, only to be met for years by largely hostile stares.

I think there is a bit posted by Inter on belief systems, I didn't read into much of the links, so I can't talk here. Just don't be so sure to doubt.(I understand your personality I think Fable, you'll read it if it's in front of you) This thread has scratched the surface for me of defining the lines between true believers and some kind of hyped-up following, I think. NHF no hard feelings It think I'm signing off for now.

[QUOTE=Athena]I think there is a bit posted by Inter on belief systems, I didn't read into much of the links, so I can't talk here. Just don't be so sure to doubt.(I understand your personality I think Fable, you'll read it if it's in front of you) This thread has scratched the surface for me of defining the lines between true believers and some kind of hyped-up following, I think. NHF no hard feelings It think I'm signing off for now. [/QUOTE]

Oh, no hard feelings at all! But I've read through his posted documents, and I see nothing that goes into how his personal beliefs and wishes translate into a religion. It is a fair question for me to ask, you know.

Nor is it simply a matter of defining true believers, etc. Simply put, there are some qualifications that are used to determine whether something is a religion, just as there are whether something is a government, or a currency, or a book, or a piece of music. And while we can arbitrarily define, say, a few seconds of silence as music, that just ignores the definition rather than answering it.

Meanwhile, many people who have wish fulfillment fantasies will (and have) insist that they are followers (or starters) of religions, and they will become outraged when anybody asks for further details. But the definitions enable us to discuss these matters, and tossing them out is not a good idea unless we wish to doom all discussion and reside in uncritical acceptance of everything anyone claims.

Which is not a reflection on Inter. He may be a follower of a religion, or he may not. It hasn't been established yet, and I for one am genuinely curious. Personally, I hope he is. Finding a new wrinkle on the age old search for spiritual knowledge about the universe has always fascinated me.

What a nice coincidence, Fable is home with the flu and I am home at sick leave for OHSS (ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome, a condition caused because I was egg donour to infertile couples recently. It's not legal to pay people for egg donating in Sweden, so nobody wants to do it. Now I understand why )

To the point, first the light ones then the heavier:

Athena wrote:Any person can't just jump up on any horse and go for a freaking joyride.

No? Maybe not any horse, but most people who can ride seems to be able to ride most horses, providing the horses are trained to carry people (I don't know the English word for this, what is it called when you train the young horse to carry people? And is there an adjective form of this word, when a horse is trained to carry people it is...?)

To train horses to carry people is obvioiusly not something anyone can do, and it's even more difficult with camels. You need people with a special knowledge, skill and personality to do this. However, just riding already trained horses is a completely different matter.

Horses are big and we are small. A horse could squash me. Humans master horses. It takes a ton of dilligent patient consistentcy experience and understanding to make them look nice under saddle. Concidering those facts, I know that being an adreneline junkie is right up the alley of a horse trainer. Putting myself at risk and such. I do understand the behavior, to the point where I can master an animal ten times my size and that's the risk. But that wouldn't give me any sort of adreneline; dodging away from the hooves of a 1,500lb rearing equine, knowing it's just me and him, he could crack my skull like summersquash, and I must recollect the animal so it doesn't cause havoc to the point where work can't continue. The show must go on. I generally try to treat the horses like I would myself, does that classify me as a furry? I mean, I don't pin on fake tails, but still, we are one in the same...

We all have different needs for adrenaline release, and it varies widely what triggers our adrenaline release. Sure working with horses can be dangerous, a lot of things can be dangerous...living is sort of dangerous when you think about it. If you focus on it, it is very dangerous to drive a car, too. Lots of people are disabled or killed in traffic. A collision can easily make minced meat of your body. As a pedestrian, getting hit by a car or even a motorbike can crack your skill, tear off your limbs, make you paralysed, kill you etc in a second. It's a question of what we choose focus on. You are obviously thrilled by horses and get adrenaline rushes whn you focus on the possible danger of the situation. Personally I am quite bored with horses, riding is nice sometimes but not more than nice to me, and working with horses have never attracted me. As a kid I had a friend who was a race horse jockey. She trained and kept her horses in the same stable as some of the internationally most successful Swedish trottlers. She was not at all an adrenline junkie - perhaps she ought to have been because later she died in an accident when she was training a young horse to get used to the starting box.

I would absolutely not say your profession as an equestrian and your interest and knowledge about horses makes you a "furry" in any way. "Furries" is a term that denotes a specific fandom and fan-fiction based subculture. Are the camel men in the Sahara or the horsemen in Central Asia Furries? Of course not. They are just people who live closer to, and socialise and work with, certain other species than other people do. It would be such an overinclusive use of the term Furries so it would be meaningless if we apply a fandom culture like furries in this context. If you call yourself a Furry, fine, it's not a problem to me how you define yourself, but the lexiographic use of the term does not imply that everybody who has a relationship to other species is a Furry. More about that later when I reply to Hill and our new poster Inter.