At 1/19/10 08:40 PM, HeavyMetalGuy wrote:
Some how, we will have to prove that we don't fuck animals. Everyone we hear talk about it thinks that what the word "Furry" means "Animal fucker". For most of us, it simply means that we like anthropomorphic art. Why can't people understand that?
Its because of the rampant and overly creepy sexualization most of the fandom has on anthro characters. Even when they have clothes on and are depicted casual, the sexual aspects of the character are usually put in full focus. Also the realistic art doesnt help. When you say a fandom doesnt have any sexual interest in real animals, and then you have these photo realistic pieces with realistic breasts and wangs, it gets rather... disturbing in the eyes of non-anthro fans.
At 1/19/10 08:46 PM, zachdamacman wrote:
Also, we could shed some light on the belief that all anthro art is pornographic, even though only a small portion of it is.
Yes a lot of the art isnt porn, but a lot of it is self-serving and derivative. Animu and Disney derived art syles are all over the place. Cliche fantasy and emo angst make up a lot of the subject matter in furry work too. So maybe only some of the work is porn (35% maybe) but barely any of it is competent, fewer is of any intrest to other demographics besides the fandom, and just about none of it is memorable and/or unique.
Wow I typed to much.