Feed aggregator

submitted by SilentCicada
[link] [2 comments]

im a new fur. wanna be friends?

submitted by jcuberdruid
[link] [16 comments]

You have one identity. The days of you having a different image for your work friends or co-workers and for the other people you know are probably coming to an end pretty quickly. Having two identities for yourself is an example of a lack of integrity.
- Mark Zuckerberg (http://venturebeat.com/2010/05/13/zuckerberg-privacy/)

 

Many furries choose to interact with the world using two or more identities. At the simplest level this might be a legal (“real”) identity and a furry (virtual) identity, and many furries maintain several more.

It’s a simple exercise, internally, to manage multiple identities. People typically see themselves as a background manipulator, with various outwards-facing facades depending on the context: work identity, furry identity, kink identity, and so forth. This compartmentalization is normal, and everyone—furry and non-furry—does it to a degree.

It’s less simple to keep outward-facing identities separate and discrete. For the most part, people are happy enough to allow their identities to leak into one another, such as when one’s co-workers meet one’s family. Problems occur when people want to keep some element of themselves private: perhaps their sexual behaviour, perhaps a hobby that is prone to misunderstanding… furry, for example.

Facebook presents a problem, because it’s largely a central clearinghouse for identity. You might consider Facebook to be designed for the internal manipulator of the multiple identities; not for expression of the identities themselves.

The Google Plus social network is similar to Facebook in that there is a ‘common names’ policy. G+ requires a consistent name across all products that require a Google account. And that name most be provable: either a legal name or a pre-existing pseudonym with a provable history. So you can’t be Jane Smith in some contexts and Blazing Hyena in others; it’s one or the other.

It makes sense that social networks require close ties to the legal identity of their users. It’s a business opportunity: if a Facebook login (say) becomes an online-based de facto proof of identity, then this becomes a service they can sell.

That sounds bad, but it’s not unreasonable for a business to be motivated by the potential to create a new market. Businesses exist to make money. It is absolutely reasonable, of course, to expect businesses to be law-abiding and moral, just not benevolent.

Today, in 2014, it seems like we’re having a sea change in the way identity is stored and proved. Currently proof-of-identity is a service offered by governments; a way of assuring the integrity of individual transactions like voting, or getting a driver’s license. But the ubiquity of online social networks is providing a second route to proof-of-identity. Large fiscal institutions like credit agencies or banks already track individuals, creating a type of identity assurance, but their reach pales in comparison to the scope of identity services potentially offered by the likes of Facebook.

Governments are currently looking into the best ways to manage the transition to online identity (see here for a discussion of the UK government’s plans). It may be, in the not-too-distant future, that businesses like Facebook will provide legal online identity assurance.

Of course there is no (current) requirement for proof of online identity, and social networks like Facebook are opt-in. And there are other ways to prove your online identity, ways that don’t require a connection to your legal identity or ‘common name’.

Services like Twitter and OpenID offer a consistent virtual identity, one where Blazing Hyena doesn’t need to be connected to Jane Smith. But even here, Jane is at risk of ‘doxing’, and anyone who links her to Blazing Hyena will be able to find out whatever else Blazing Hyena is up to.

Unfortunately it’s not possible to maintain persistent multiple identities without risking them being linked. Guaranteed and absolute privacy is impossible: there is necessary conflict between physical identity and virtual identity.

Consider Jake Rush. Jake is a LARPer, the sort of hobby that is prone to be misunderstood, and so he kept it separate from his work identity. He is an attorney.

On March 20 this year, Jake announced a bid for Congress. His online LARP identity was shortly discovered, and he became a figure of fun. Pictures of him in costume were published alongside out-of-context quotes… you can imagine the rest. Jake’s use of multiple identities was seen as him having, to quote Zuckerberg, a “lack of integrity”.

Still, online anonymity is not always desirable. Consider Michael Brutsch, a programmer who was the subject of an article on Gawker in 2012. Online, Brutsch was known as Violentacrez, moderator of a subreddit dedicated to posting covert, voyeuristic photos taken of women in public (‘Creepshots’) as well as the creator of another subreddit dedicated to posting sexualized images of underage girls (‘Jailbait’).

Brutsch’s outing as Violentacrez seems like a positive step, but the ethics of his outing is not so black-or-white. The journalist who did the research and wrote the article (Adrian Chen) is, essentially, enforcing Zuckerberg’s single-identity ideal. Chen could not have written the article if he had a separate online identity himself. His decision to out Brutsch demonstrates the risk taken by anyone with multiple identities, be they abhorrent (like Brutsch) or innocuous (like Jake Rush).

It’s a pity that having multiple identities poses these risks and challenges. Identity play is completely normal, and part of a healthy internal life. Furry might be seen as an edge case, given that our identity play includes obfuscation of species, but that doesn’t make it internally problematic.

Having said that, there is a lot of research that demonstrates that a hallmark of maturity and good mental health is self actualization (ref). Self actualization is a term that describes how the various elements of one’s identity are integrated into a balanced whole, including positive acceptance of unusual elements. Examples of unusual elements of identity might include gender identity, or sexual orientation, or sexual interests. (That’s not to say that identity play via personality splitting is a negative thing; quite the opposite in fact. But it’s a complex issue and the subject of many articles here on [adjective][species] – click here to browse our ‘identity’ tag.)

Consistency of identity is a good thing from a psychological point of view. But this refers to internal personality—the internal manipulator of facades—and not the editing of outward-facing personalities depending on the context. It is normal and healthy, and respectful of those around you, to manage outward appearance to match society’s expectations. To use an extreme example, it’s okay to enjoy masturbating to weird furry porn (and be happy about that), but you probably shouldn’t share the details around the office watercooler, even if someone asks you what you did on the weekend.

Interestingly, there is evidence that having disparate identities is an indicator of poor mental health. This specifically includes furries: the IARP have shown that furries with diverging fursonas are more at risk of negative psychological states like repression or dissociation (ref).

Some personality splitting is normal. It’s normal to act and feel different in different contexts: online vs offline, friends vs family, lovers vs workmates. Yet there is a lot of value in being able to act in ways that reinforce the validity of your identity. It’s good to meet online friends in real life. It’s good to turn sexual fantasies into sexual realities. It’s good to talk about the furry world with non-furry friends. And it’s good to talk openly about sexual fetishes, or sexual and gender identity.

There is a balance to be found, and it’s not easy. It’s good to merge our online world with our offline world, but this should to be done in a safe fashion, and should be respectful of those around us. Some editing and personality splitting is necessary and reasonable. It is completely unreasonable to suggest, as Zuckerberg does, that managing different versions of yourself in order to respect other people and to stay safe is ‘an example of a lack of integrity’:

To get people to this point where there’s more openness — that’s a big challenge. But I think we’ll do it. I just think it will take time. The concept that the world will be better if you share more is something that’s pretty foreign to a lot of people and it runs into all these privacy concerns.
- Mark Zuckerberg

 

Zuckerberg’s point of view is completely reasonable if you happen to be male, white, heterosexual, and rich. He is speaking from a position of privilege, one that disregards the need for privacy for those of us who don’t conform quite so easily to the mainstream. (But then nobody would mistake Mark Zuckerberg for a philosopher, or suggest that he is well known for his emotional intelligence.)

There is always risk that an unusual online identity will be linked with a staid offline identity. This is not a problem if, like Zuckerberg, you can express yourself fully and still meet society’s norms. And it’s easy for such privileged people to assume that their experience is universal.

For the rest of us, we must bear the risk that we will have our ‘hidden’ selves outed. We’re especially vulnerable if we hold any public or semi-public position. The accusation we risk facing will be a familiar one to many furries: something along the lines of “pretends to be an omnisexual transgender fox on the internet”. We’re not doing anything other than expressing ourselves, yet we’ll be tarred by the suggestion of weirdness, and of lacking integrity.

We furries risk being shamed for being ourselves. There is no solution, beyond carefully curating our online presences to give ourselves as much privacy as possible. Unfortunately, it’s a challenge that comes with the territory.

 

- with thanks to Drat for the inspiration and the help

submitted by PendoFur
[link] [9 comments]

submitted by HymenTester
[link] [12 comments]

Hello, Papabear,

Lately I have been thinking about dating another furry, though what's stopping me is the lack of commitment that my ex's had. Every mate I have had has cheated on me. This is rather troublesome and has caused many trust issues for me. 

I am not possessive, mean, or hanging over them. In fact I am maybe too out of the way? I love to cuddle and care about them greatly. However ... I am not too ... sexual. I care more about cuddles and showing love rather then rubbing bits together. 

I am not sure if it is just my age group that can not keep it in their pants around others. Or is it simply me...?

From,
A kitty

* * *

Dear Kitty,

Yours is a chicken-and-egg quandary—as in, are you having problems with men because all men in your age group are oversexed cheaters or are oversexed cheaters attracted to you and so you are flattered and choose them as mates only to be, surprise surprise, cheated on? Your affectionate nature could be misconstrued as sexual availability by many younger men who, admittedly, often think with their penises. Then, when they discover that you’re not all that interested in sex, it is not surprising they go elsewhere to find it.

Much of this frustration is very possibly exacerbated by the tendency of younger people to leap into bed too early on in a relationship—like, first or second date early. Even if you are more into just cuddling and kissing than actual sex, if you are bringing men into your bed, or visiting theirs, too early in the game then men will get the wrong message from that. You don’t even need a bed—just snogging on the couch or petting can give a hormone-rich young man an erection.

What you are looking for, it sounds like, is a man about your age who, like you, is okay with sex but it’s not a major priority (they do exist). To discover such a man, you need to date for a while in non-intimate encounters before agreeing to take it to the next level. Go out to dinner and a movie or some other activity in public in which being amorous is off the table. What do I mean by “for a while”? At least a couple of months of regular dating should suffice, though longer is not unheard of. At that point you should discover two things: 1) whether or not the guy is actually interested in you or just your body, and 2) whether or not this guy has good character and a compatible personality.

This is what I call, in a biblical manner, weeding out the chaff from the wheat. There's a reason why it used to be a tradition for young men and women to "court" one another for long periods of time before getting engaged, and we can still learn from that, even in our more sexually open modern world. Take the time after a harvest to thresh the wheat, separating the nutritious grain from the inedible stuff, before you eat it and get a mouth full of sticks.

With patience, you’ll find someone.

Wishing you love,

Papabear

Hello, Papabear,

Lately I have been thinking about dating another furry, though what's stopping me is the lack of commitment that my ex's had. Every mate I have had has cheated on me. This is rather troublesome and has caused many trust issues for me. 

I am not possessive, mean, or hanging over them. In fact I am maybe too out of the way? I love to cuddle and care about them greatly. However ... I am not too ... sexual. I care more about cuddles and showing love rather then rubbing bits together. 

I am not sure if it is just my age group that can not keep it in their pants around others. Or is it simply me...?

From,
A kitty

* * *

Dear Kitty,

Yours is a chicken-and-egg quandary—as in, are you having problems with men because all men in your age group are oversexed cheaters or are oversexed cheaters attracted to you and so you are flattered and choose them as mates only to be, surprise surprise, cheated on? Your affectionate nature could be misconstrued as sexual availability by many younger men who, admittedly, often think with their penises. Then, when they discover that you’re not all that interested in sex, it is not surprising they go elsewhere to find it.

Much of this frustration is very possibly exacerbated by the tendency of younger people to leap into bed too early on in a relationship—like, first or second date early. Even if you are more into just cuddling and kissing than actual sex, if you are bringing men into your bed, or visiting theirs, too early in the game then men will get the wrong message from that. You don’t even need a bed—just snogging on the couch or petting can give a hormone-rich young man an erection.

What you are looking for, it sounds like, is a man about your age who, like you, is okay with sex but it’s not a major priority (they do exist). To discover such a man, you need to date for a while in non-intimate encounters before agreeing to take it to the next level. Go out to dinner and a movie or some other activity in public in which being amorous is off the table. What do I mean by “for a while”? At least a couple of months of regular dating should suffice, though longer is not unheard of. At that point you should discover two things: 1) whether or not the guy is actually interested in you or just your body, and 2) whether or not this guy has good character and a compatible personality.

This is what I call, in a biblical manner, weeding out the chaff from the wheat. There's a reason why it used to be a tradition for young men and women to "court" one another for long periods of time before getting engaged, and we can still learn from that, even in our more sexually open modern world. Take the time after a harvest to thresh the wheat, separating the nutritious grain from the inedible stuff, before you eat it and get a mouth full of sticks.

With patience, you’ll find someone.

Wishing you love,

Papabear

submitted by SethTheChozo
[link] [8 comments]

submitted by HappyWulf
[link] [3 comments]

Would you consider Demons to be Furries? I mean, theres the multitude of animals like reptiles, fish, birds, etc. but would you consider Demons into the generalization of "Furry"? Or would that fall into something else? also how do you feel about other non-conventional mythical creatures such as manticores, minotaurs, hydrae, harpies, etc.

submitted by fuckitthrowaway1
[link] [6 comments]

submitted by yamicat
[link] [5 comments]

submitted by fxscreamer
[link] [1 comment]

submitted by JaggedJosh
[link] [5 comments]

In a forest, a Lion capture a mouse to snack on. But this one has a deal for him…

submitted by Lethero1
[link] [13 comments]

submitted by Yiffing_Time
[link] [16 comments]

This week’s illustration is from the kickstarter for Claiming 2014 by Cassandra Rounds. 

Hard at work–well, allegedly at work–on the Patreon webpages, and finally cleaned those up and started adding new content! It’s all a bit “write up five, find 10 more.” Pushing a boulder uphill, if that boulder was filled with foxes. A lot of the other weird little errors fixed as well, I’m overall pleased with the new WordPress theme and the new site. 50 shades of green!

Reviews this weekcycle: Illustrated novel “Caelum Sky” and “Dog with a Mission” platformer/explorer, “Buck.”

Reviews

  New Projects

For a “complete” list of furry/fur-friendly crowdfunding projects, check out the Project Page and Patreon Page!

Art

Claiming 2014 (Ends: 5/19/2014)
Strangely liquid animal imagery and dripping spectra in this print/tee series

Willo Resin Sculpture (Ends: 5/22/2014)
I am not, exactly, sure what a Willo is, but they’re cute and kind of lumpy and have antlers, so maybe they need to exist.
Met goal!

Audio

Ponyville Wub House (Ends: 6/22/2014)
Bronie dubstep radio show to be hosted by Fillydelphia

Books/Print

The Magician’s Cat (Ends: 5/7/2014)
Delicate water color and children’s storybook line art in this take of goblins, griffins, and a magical cat…

Caelum Sky Illustrated (Ends: 5/19/2014)
A story of a spirit who finds herself in the body of a demon (well, a dinosaur-dragon thing, supercute)
Artwork by Firefeathers

Comics/Graphic Novels

Bosco & Fleet: Detectives of the Occult Sciences (Ends: 5/11/2014)
A sentient octopus and a thuggish ape fight Occult crime in Victorian England. Huh.

Tales of the Wolfman (Ends: 5/16/2014)
A lanky, lanky werewolf and his romance with Red. Art and comics.
More information on Instant Press Comics

MIRRORS.EXE (Ends: 5/25/2014)
A post-apocalypse, Supers story of quests and mystery
Slow start, super-low (possibly dangerously low) goal. Not sure what to make of this one.

The Adventures of Ribbit and Snibbbet (Ends: 6/9/2014)
“Think LOST meets Winnie the Pooh…” Post-apoc, steampunk village populated by swamp and pond animals, with a few rabid weasels for good measure.
Graphic novel proposal, with a side of animated series and charitable organization? Yay Indiegogo…

Costumes/Clothing

BioHazardous Creations (Ends: 5/14/2014)
This IS the first fursuit project I’ve seen on Kickstarter, so Biohazardus deserves a look for that, but…slow start…
Kickstarter’s for project launches and entrepreneurship, not for a pure commission project, and I think it’s hitting Bio’s support base. That, and no internet presence.

Film/Animation/Theater

Chasing Stars (Ends: 5/18/2014)
A stop-motion short about Laika, the first animal to explore (?) space.
Remember: Laika is a subject matter that practically guarantees an unhappy ending…

Luigi’s Ladies (Ends: 5/19/2014)
A one-woman musical launching in Chicago featuring the life and conquests of Luigi the Leopard, cereal mascot and serial lover
Slow beginning, probably a non-starter, but an amusing concept.

We Are Monsters (Ends: 5/25/2014)
Indie horror film featuring three young boys and their transformations into strange animal creatures.
By Olivia Vaughn, maker of the documentary “Fursonas“

Tiger Creek (Ends: 5/27/2014)
Documentary about exotic pet ownership from the eyes of wildlife refuges and breeders

Video Games

The Runners (Ends: 5/24/2014)
A parkour/survival stealth-platform game. Is it furry? I’m not sure, but the main character hides his secrets behind a fox mask, so…maybe.

Buck: A Game About a Real Dog (Ends: 5/28/2014)
Metroidvania type game: a dog with a gun, looking for his lost love in a surreal desert town…

Adult

The Epic Loads Bestiary (Ends: 6/15/2014)
A strange journey through a land of very, very male monsters. And an otter or two. Seriously NSFW.
Artwork by Pedrono. Already past its very modest $350 goal.

…Coming Soon

Sanctum Polis (Coming Soon): A 32-bit game of investigation, fantasy, and dreamquests (also on FurAffinity. Check out their trailer!)

One dog’s well-armed quest to find his love…

Buck

Kickstarter ending 5/28/14

I’m going to go out on a limb here and say there’s not a lot that’s ground-breaking in this game, there are ancient cuneiform tablets describing the first side-scrolling explorers. Heck, Pitfall II had quite a map, and that was on the Atari. So a lot of what Buck describes as features seem to be more the core elements of a Metroidvania game – “Choose your own adventure” style branching dialog, a rich map with a non-linear, “take it as you find it” plot, and customizable weapons (well, that’s a bit unusual, but not in itself worth tweeting about.) That, and a “find your lost SO” plotline, spells a certain level of “we’ve played this before…” so let’s move on.

I promise, I’m not being cynical–well, maybe a bit, but this game is really pretty, with brooding and impressionistic backgrounds, a great-looking main character with a mean wrench, and a supporting cast with a poundful of NPCs pulled out of the “Buck” community, a bit of fan collaboration that extends into the Kickstarter’s stretch goal. For character art and background alone, the game’s worth a look (and a playthrough, but that’s down the road a bit.)

So, protagonists. Buck’s got a lot going for him in life. He’s damned handy, a tinker and mechanic able to build or repair pretty much anything he finds in the blighted Cordova desert. And he’s got a beautiful girl, but alas, you should never date a plot device. Finding out what happened to her is a big chunk of the game’s plot. He’s also pretty good with a gun–one he’s trained with his entire life.

You have to wonder if some people ever wake up knowing they’re in a video game. Anyway.

Buck’s based on the designer’s first dog. I’ve never been to Australia, but I know in Texas we arm our dogs, so it’s all good. A lot of the background characters are also collaborations with the fan base–the cat NPC with a mission is one person’s tabby, and so on. The hyenas? No, they’re probably just hyenas.

What’s really caught me about this game is the backgrounds, which are just weird. Buck’s cool in that “Vin Diesel in Shades” sort of way, but the backgrounds have a dark, gritty, and a bit surreal look, fitting the wasteland the game’s set in–kind of like the gloomy claustrophobia of The Maxx.

Anyway…I’m feeling I’m not really selling this one so well! It’s a genuinely neat-looking product, and solid anthropomorphic games seem like a once-a-year sort of thing, and a compelling setting and story can outweigh innovation for innovation’s sake. Watch the video, the visuals are well worth it.

Note: Images used above are included to promote the work of crowdfunding artists, and are owned by the original creator.

submitted by Fur_Bot
[link] [67 comments]

submitted by awesomeme99
[link] [18 comments]