Feed aggregator

"Ohio" by Lamb

Read by Stoker Bramwell

Music cues by Infinity Squared

Nothing compares to a river... Lamb's story is a lyrical tale of life and loss and finding your way in the world amidst family tragedy and the journey of adolescence.

Lamb notes that this story is dedicated to Eldyran, who probably didn't know what he did for me in my bizarre time of need. Thank you, coyote.

AD 041 - Ohio - "Ohio" by Lamb Read by Music cues by Nothing compares to a river... Lamb's story is a lyrical tale of life and loss and finding your way in the world amidst family tragedy and the journey of adolescence. Lamb notes that this story is dedicated to...

submitted by 123not-it
[link] [2 comments]

Hello, I'm working on my first fursuit. It's going to be a panda. O.o

The situation I have is regarding gloves. I like the three finger and thumb look. What have you all found works better in the past, two fingers in the middle glove finger, or two in the pinky glove finger?

Tldr; I have too many fingers!!

submitted by steamtroll
[link] [3 comments]

Hello, Papabear.

Why are people so upset with the thought of a third gender? Furries, etc, seem to be mostly fine with it.

I’m an androgynous pseudohermaphrodite (“shemale,” in porn terms) and I like myself, but people always seem to have a problem with that… I didn’t become this, I grew into it, for the most part.

Some research showed me that men don’t like it when you’re attractive for them, while having a penis and women don’t like that you’re not a valid prey for them… :\

Do you know the answer?

Thanks,

Jen

 

Dear Jen,

Wow, this is a big question. There’s no way I could give a fully satisfactory answer within the scope of the “Ask Papabear” column, but I will try and provide a little basic insight.

From what you say above, you are a male pseudohermaphrodite, in which you appear to be female at first glance but you have a penis. (I believe “androgynous pseudohermaphrodite” is redundant, but I could be wrong).  Pseudohermaphroditism is sometimes called being “intersex,” in which a person exhibits some characteristics of both genders. It’s not so much a “third sex” as it is a combination of the other two.  There is also female pseudohermaphroditism (having ovaries but outwardly male in appearance) and true hermaphroditism (having both ovaries and testes). I’m writing this for the benefit of my readers; I’m sure you already are familiar.

As to why men and women may be uncomfortable with your being androgynous, the answer is pretty basic. Human beings, as with all animals, are biologically programmed to reject individuals who they feel would not make viable reproductive partners. This is the same reason why many people are cruel to and reject people who are different from them in other ways.  Humans, no matter how much we aggrandize ourselves and believe we are superior to other species, are just animals with big brains.  We still behave in very fundamental ways, for the most part, that have to do with survival of the fittest and reproduction. The results can sometimes be hurtful. Let’s face it, humans still have some evolving to do. (Perhaps furries are more evolved, having shown they accept you!)

Of course, in a happier world, we would have all evolved beyond such prejudices and accept others for what they are. What matters, as you know, is what’s on the inside. You, Jen, have clearly accepted yourself. You like yourself, and that is so wonderful! Some hermaphrodites opt for surgery, but you are staying true to yourself.

But now you have a really tough task. If you don’t want to be alone in your life, you’re going to have a challenging time finding someone who accepts you for you. This is certainly not impossible; it’s just going to be tough.

You might wish to consider checking out the Intersex Society of North American at http://www.isna.org/ which lists some support groups and has more information on the subject.

I hope this helps, Jen. Good luck!

Hugs,

Papabear

Disclaimer
Opinions and advice expressed in the “Ask Papabear” column are not necessarily those of the Furry News Network, its staff, sponsors, or advertisers. Papabear is not a trained therapist, physician, or social worker, and the author of “Ask Papabear” will refer readers to licensed professionals in cases where such recommendations seem in order.

submitted by RainyDayMissy
[link] [30 comments]

submitted by killabydemand
[link] [9 comments]

In this episode we go over some basic information about the fandom Fursonapod Ep. 39- Furry 101

submitted by cheecid
[link] [23 comments]

Fursonapod Ep. 39- Furry 101

Everything breaks! TK's headphones die resulting in a rather A-Team attempt at a fix, Eeve3 arrives late, advertising doesn't happen, and stuff like that. Things get on track eventually and once we break the Gaming News. For Done and Dusted TK gives us his thoughts on Soul Calibur 5 on the PS3, and the 2009 film Sherlock Holmes. Xavier reviews Twisted Metal (Demo), Under Siege (Demo), and Section 8: Prejudice on the PS3, and the film Buried. Felis reviews Warehouse 13, and Radiata Stories for the PS2. Starring TK, Xavier, Eeve3 and Felis. TigerTails Radio - Season 6 - Episode 24 - A Wild Felis Attacks, Again

submitted by Spazzie
[link] [2 comments]

One in six furries self-identify as zoophiles. The real number is probably higher.

This piece of information comes courtesy of Klisoura’s survey and I don’t think it would surprise many furs. A quick mental poll of the furries I know — the ones that I’m close enough to have an insight into their sexual preferences — suggest that it’s about right.

Like many things in the furry world, exactly what comprises a zoophile is a little blurry. It’s arguable that furry porn, as appreciated by a large majority of the readers of this blog, might be considered zoophilic. Taking the non-furry world as our reference point, furry erotica is certainly a half-step in the zoophilic direction.

In the psychology world, there is a growing consensus that zoophilia is a legitimate sexual orientation. Research taking place this century is roughly equivalent to the human sexuality research famously performed by Kinsey in the middle of the twentieth century.

A sexual orientation is usually judged to be valid based on three criteria:

1. Affectional orientation (who we emotionally bond with)
2. Sexual fantasy orientation (who we fantasize about)
3. Erotic orientation (who we prefer to have sex with)

Using these three criteria, it’s easy to qualify homosexuality as a legitimate orientation. (You would struggle to make an argument for plushophilia.) There is growing scientific evidence that zoophilia qualifies on all three counts.

There has been very little research into zoophilia. Up until very recently, scientific research focussed exclusively on mentally disadvantaged or low-IQ subjects. However research in the past few years has started to focus on so-called ‘high functioning subjects’, which is a slightly weaselly euphemism for ‘normal people’.

Jesse Bering, a research psychologist and regular contributor to Scientific American, is probably the world’s leading mainstream voice on zoophilia. Bering has explored the topic on several occasions in his Scientific American column and elsewhere. Among his data and discussion is the rather startling statistic that around 1% of people probably qualify as zoophiles.

1% is a lot. Consider that around 5% of people are homosexual.

Bering, however, is a pragmatic scientist. He will argue that the facts support zoophilia being a legitimate sexual orientation, and that there are a lot of zoophiles out there. (And many more amongst us furries.) But Bering doesn’t touch the other side of the argument: the moral argument. And it’s a big one.

Is it okay to be a practising zoophile?

Peter Singer, the ethicist I mentioned in my article on vegetarianism a couple of weeks ago, bases many of his arguments on the simple premise that humans are animals and therefore not a special case. This is not to say that the life of a human being should be considered as valuable as, say, an ant: quite the opposite. Singer argues that the suffering of a human being should be given equal consideration as the suffering of any other species. So a species with little capacity for suffering, like an ant, gets proportionally little consideration.

Singer, in his tragically-titled 2001 article Heavy Petting, makes the point that interspecies attraction is completely natural. He mentions a few obvious examples including incidents of zoophilia in humans, but also sexual attraction towards humans by other species. He discusses a typical amorous housepet and also a case of a male orang-utan making overt sexual advances towards a female human.

The best documented case of a non-human anthropophilia is Lucy the chimpanzee. Lucy was observed to have no sexual attraction towards members of her own species, but would masturbate to pictures of naked (human) men displayed in Playgirl.

Dan Savage, the sex columnist and ethicist, responded to a zoophile correspondent in 2008 (link). The question posed was a simple one, and one probably on the mind of many zoophiles: I’m emotionally, mentally and sexually attracted to dogs. I’m not attracted to humans. What do I do?

Savage acknowledged the difficulty of the situation. Importantly, this included the tacit concession that his correspondent was a zoophile by orientation, and not by choice. The zoophile would not be ‘cured’ by therapy (no more than a homosexual might be) and the zoophile would be well served to learn to accept, rather than fight, his orientation.

Savage suggested that his correspondent find a canine partner and keep his personal life to himself. This qualified endorsement was made on the condition that the zoophile keep himself safe (from prosecution or persecution) and his dog unharmed (from the sexual acts committed in the relationship).

This is the crux of the issue, I think: harm.

Both Singer and Savage make the obvious comparison between eating animals and having sexual contact with animals. They both conclude that bestiality is less harmful than eating meat.

I’ve touched on this topic before in other forums and I know it’s a controversial statement. It’s not easy to conclude that a societal norm like meat eating could possibly be worse than bestiality, a taboo sex act widely reviled for its perceived cruelty. However, if you can put aside those preconceptions, it’s easy to see that the harm caused by a practising zoophile pales against that caused by someone eating (say) one factory-farmed chicken a week.

Even if you are vegan, I don’t think you can hold a strong aversion to bestiality on ethical grounds. The harm caused by the myriad of meat-eaters is overwhelming compared to the relatively few practising zoophiles. This comparison holds even if you assume that the zoophile is harming the animal in question.

This is not to say that zoophiles don’t have a responsibility towards the welfare of animals: of course they do. Most zoophiles are attracted to horses or dogs. The duty of care of a zoophile is exactly the same as that of an owner of one of these domestic creatures. From a harm point of view, the sexual component is not relevant.

The large majority of zoophiles will be ethical and responsible carers. Because of the emotional connection — something required for the zoophilia sexual orientation to apply — it’s likely that zoophiles make excellent pet owners. There will always be a selfish, sex-driven cruel minority, however it’s unfair to tar all zoophiles with that brush.

This allows me to wheel out one of my favourite phrases: the most visible members of a minority are rarely its best ambassadors. To put it another way: the majority of zoophiles are not doing harm and they are largely invisible. Recall that upwards of 1 in 6 furries are zoos.

Through most of last century, and still today in many parts of the world, homosexuality was considered to be abhorrent. This belief, of course, didn’t prevent or reduce the number of homosexuals: it simply made for a lot of unhappy people. Freud believed that elevated suicide rates of young homosexuals was evidence that homosexuality is a mental illness. Fortunately this belief no longer prevails and homosexuality is accepted as a legitimate sexual orientation.

Zoophiles are in a similar bind in today’s society. Tolerance and acceptance amongst the furry group, where zoos are so numerous, will do a lot of good.

Many furries argue that the community is too tolerant. This is a point of view with some merit; self-policing helps reinforce positive behaviour. However I think the sentiment is often misguided — it’s important to differentiate between what is innate, and what is a choice.

I’m not arguing for unconditional tolerance.

Instead, I’m arguing that zoophiles should be accepted for who they are. They should not be castigated or shunned for something that’s innate. Zoophilia is a sexual orientation. We should encourage discussion about how one might become a happy, ethical zoophile.

submitted by MrPete81
[link] [2 comments]

submitted by Kidsune
[link] [6 comments]

submitted by HappyWulf
[link] [1 comment]

submitted by HappyWulf
[link] [6 comments]

submitted by Scrimno
[link] [9 comments]

Your humble ed-otter was pleased and proud to attend the 2012 presentation of the Annie Awards for 2011, which took place at UCLA on Saturday the 4th. The Annie Awards are the “Oscars” of the animation industry, presented every year by the International Animated Film Society (ASIFA). It was a busy year for the awards, with many of the numerous categories having up to 10 nominees.  And of course, entries with an interest for furry fans were well-represented. The big winner of the evening was clearly Rango, with five wins including the big one, Best Animated Feature.  It also won for Writing, Character Design, and Editing, as well as the new Members’ Favorite category (the single category voted on by all ASIFA members, regardless of their professional or fan status). Interestingly, it was not a complete Rango sweep, as Rio won for Character Animation (by Jeff Gabor) while Kung Fu Panda 2 won for Production Design, and Best Director (Jennifer Yuh Nelson). Secrets of the Masters, the back-up short included on the Kung Fu Panda 2 DVD, also won for Best Animated Special Production (which honors OVA’s and direct-to-DVD projects). Disney’s 2D Winnie the Pooh also racked up one win, for Feature Film Storyboards by Jeremy Spears.  The winner of Animation in a Live Action Production (a new category that was just introduced last year) was Rise of the Planet of the Apes. Minkyu Lee won Best Animated Short Subject for his 17 minute 2D film Adam and Dog. In the category of Best Game, the honor went to Insanely Twisted Shadow Planet, the creation of well-known funny animal and fantasy cartoonist Michel Gagne. In the television categories, the big winner of the night was Prep & Landing: Naughty vs. Nice from Disney, which won four awards.  (However the big prize, Best General Audience TV Production, went to perennial favorite The Simpsons). Penguins of Madagascar won for Editing in a TV Production, and Voice Acting (for Jeff Bennett as Kowalski). The entire show as hosted by comedian and actor Patton Oswalt, the voice of Remy in Pixar’s Ratatouille.  At the after-awards dinner party, Rango director Gore Verbinski remarked that the show was “The strangest thing I’ve ever seen”. We’d be hard-pressed to argue. For a complete list of all the winners and nominees, make sure to visit the Annie Awards web site. And remember, a membership in ASIFA not only gets you a discount on tickets to the Annie Awards, but lots of animation screenings and seminars throughout the year as well.

image c. 2011 Paramount Pictures

submitted by Deliquescent
[link] [10 comments]

submitted by 123not-it
[link] [18 comments]