Nice game, but...

I just don't GET the furry "lifestyle" (or even fetish--sorry, not into beastiality). I mean I can MAYBE understand a catgirl/woman look but that's about it. To the extent that people are into furries, to me, is just disturbing.

Granted, I have smurf avs and enjoy "role-playing" them every so often (comes and goes) but I can only take so much of that before I have to return to my true self--yes, my SL av looks pretty much like my RL me.

I don't know but maybe I am just being picky but I suspect the motives of someone who complains about the lack of trees in Second Life but who doesn't even take the time to look at the places with plenty of trees.

I do have vistor counters at my places.

Furry is not beastiality ok? im tired of people saying this. Read this website and check out the links and you will find out how wrong you are. http://furry.wikia.com/wiki/WikiFur_Furry_Central

Unlike the age players us furrys have reference to use as defence from these flames.

its whatever it is to whoever is talking... trying to pin it to a category is always gonna piss people off and fall short of really getting the point across...

i'd say in reality to *MOST*, its somethin fun to play with online, to some its more, and that 'more' falls in any of a hundred 'categories'

Some people just don't get computers or virtual communities or how anyone could possibly call someone you have never seen or actually spoken with in RL your pal....so we're all deviant losers. Let's hug.

He didnt persist...he hovered at the edge of my property for a few minutes (I had banned and muted him by then). He went away after that. I assume because he got bored.

I reported him with the "report abuse" button immediately after he did it. I havnt had a lot of problems with stuff like that, but then, I live on the edge of town (Hogback region) and I dont see a lot of other people.

animal sex = beastiality


I don't care -how- you dress it up

Notice I've never called you out on your kink until you tried to seperate them? Sayinh furry yiffing isn't beastiality is like saying male on male sex isn't homosexual.

Hold on, bestiality is when a human and an animal have sex.

It's ok i've reported this topic and the ones who insulted my lifestyle.

Now back on topic. And next time DO A LITTLE RESEARCH before you insult people.

I think a little order would go a long way towards increasing the appeal of SL and making it a more friendly place to some people.
You have to realize that the target audience of SL is everyone, and everyone has different needs and wants.
These wants can fall into a number of catagories, but I know a lot of people would want to be able to create their second life in a place thats not going to look like some bad B movie.
It really hurts nothing to have areas zoned as residential, commercial, etc.
it hurts nothing to have limits on how high you could build in a given zone, or how much land you could purchase in an area (thus limiting your build size) So long as these restrictions are known ahead of time.

My recommendation might be to that new sims that are added maybe have a more realistic feel to them. You slap a few roads in, so you get a few less sellable square meters per sim, if adding a realistic feel to an area encourages new paying users though, thats not really a big deal is it?

We probably can't do anything to change existing areas, people would freak way too much.They want change, but only the change they want. Any change that would benefit the community is no good if its not what they want.

So split the difference, leave them to their ways, but introduce a few places for people who want other stuff and don't have the financial means to do it themselves.

As much as I have a distaste for yiff, it isn't bestiality. Furries are not "beasts", and hence the definition does not fit.

My yiff tolerance is low, but my bestiality tolerance is zero.

Go ahead yiffle. Sex with an animal is beastiality. Take insult if you want and try to seperate it if you want, but I will just assume you think two men having sex isn't homosexual if they are both heterosexual.

geepo: beast = animal. Furry sex = sex with animal. Furry sex = sex with beast

edit: do a little research before you try to say furry sex isn't beastiality

Now if I said you shouldnt yiff or that yiffing should be banend because of this classification- that would be intolerance.

This might help: I consider furries to be playing animals. though as humans portraying them I can only see it as humans replicating sex with animals- beastiality. I also see ageplay as pedophilia, so you can see where I come from.

if in ageplay you have one play a child and one play an adult, then yes. Pedophilia is when an adult is sexually attracted to a pre-pubescent child. However bestiality is defined as sex between a human and an animal. Yiffing is two individuals playing as animals having sex.
You can't have it both ways, if you want to pretend that one of them is a human having sex with an animal, you can't assume in the case of ageplay one is really a child. You don't get to pretend one role over another is valid and mold it to fit your definition.

I typically lurk, and stay out of such arguments, but this is a rather poorly supported assertion. Perhaps you should actually look at something called a dictionary? Most furries in sl, and elsewhere, are in general, anthropomorphic characters. There are exceptions, of course, but they are rare enough that it's really a non-issue in this comparison.

Anthropomorphic:
Attribution of human motivation, characteristics, or behavior to inanimate objects, animals, or natural phenomena.

Beast:
Animal nature as opposed to intellect or spirit.
Or
An animal other than a human, especially a large four-footed mammal.

Having human setience(intelligence), as well as 'spirit' and such things if one believes in such, is one of the MAIN POINTS about furry characters. Of course furries dont qualify as humans, because they are basically animals with human characteristics(or the other way around) but they don't qualify as animals either, since animals are often defined by having a lack of certain types of intelligence (self awareness and that junk) when compared to humans. The term furry exists just because the characters are not humans, (duh), but not beasts either, due to having human intelligence. Furries are somewhere inbetween those two terms. Hence furry..
The word furry is, by its 'social' definition, is meant to be a distinction /from/ both beasts, and humans. Thanks for trying tho. I'm sure the large amount of furries in SL appreciate being labeled as beastists.

Edit: I cant leave the edit button alone.

"The fact that I dont want my nose rubbed in it means I "cant handle other people's fetishes"?"

Someone walking past you with ears in a tail is not "rubbing it in", any more than me holding my boyfriend's hand on the street near you is "rubbing it in".

"Oh, but I keep forgetting; that the main purpose of the internet is sexual expression. Heh heh"

Sing it with me now: the internet is for porn.

"Apparently SL really is big enough for the both of us."

Yup.

"All the references to furrys I have seen so far invlove people that are turned on (sexually) by either role playing as anthropomorphic animals or actually dressing up as them. Most people consider that to be a sexual fetish."

If I got turned on by having a feline avatar, I'd never get any building work done. I mean, there I'd be, calculating angles and positions, working triangles into a geodesic...and I'd mess it up because just glimpsing those ears and that tail on my avatar would send me into such dizzying heights of lust that I cannot think of anything else.

Sure, a lot of furry stuff is porn...but so is a lot of anime stuff...and, come to think of it, plain old human stuff. Is all anime sexual? Is all human-related stuff sexual?

So is all furry stuff sexual?

"I will just assume you think two men having sex isn't homosexual if they are both heterosexual."

Sexuality (homo or hetero) is sexual attraction to a particular gender. It is NOT the act of sex itself. Therefore, two straight men can have sex with eachother and not be homosexual, if the sexual desire for eachother is not there (and it is possible to have sex with someone you're not attracted too; simple friction and a good imagination...or, indeed, alcohol...will suffice for the act itself).

"do a little research before you try to say furry sex isn't beastiality"

Not worth a comment, really.

...

Damn it! Too late.

Musuko.

Whether or not furries are "beastists", they ARE freaks.

"Whether or not furries are "beastists", they ARE freaks."

Nobody is "normal". Kinsey should have taught you that.

Musuko.

PS: Just looked at your profile, Eep. Playing a smurf ISN'T being a freak? *smirk*

Who?

There is a "relative normal" and furries aren't even close. Of course, then there's a "relative normal" within the furry community but, compared to what a human is classified as, furries aren't normal.

I have problems with people in other avs a lot of the time, too--like guys who use female avs; I have to wonder about them... I have a friend who does that but he MAKES them--still, I do get on his case about it every once in a while.

Finding one's identity is, stereotypically, an early adult thing. Granted, it can occur at any time, and throughout, one's life, but if it's a habitual thing I'd say there is a deeper psychological reason that should attempt to be evaluated. If you can't really ever truly be happy/satisfied with yourself, there's definitely something that needs to be addressed.

I'd say the same thing to an actor who can't really ever act normal or NOT act.

Oh and learn how to quote correctly.

No, they are not seperate from either. They are BOTH. There is no seperation for me. The definition of furry to me is half animal/ half human. As I would call soemone having sex with a teenager, a half child/ half adult, a pedohile- I call yiffers beastiality.

Thanks for trying though. I'm sure the furries love trying justification after many point at gor and say its unnatural.

I never said ban yiffing, only voiced my logic. Saying furries aren't human or animal is like saying a tomato isn't a fruit or a vegetable because of the mass 'social' definition varying.

edit: The internet is for porn

The rest of that post is tripe. It is indeed not both. Its impossible to fall under the defintion of animal and human. They are mutually exclusive. Furries dont exist in the real world, so we can't use the two words human and animal/beast when describing furries. They are the inbetween that does not exist in the solid english language.

Except your logic is flawed. As I pointed out you can't pick and choose how you want to relabel something purely to try and prove your point. Thats not logical at all.

And you ruin your own argument. A pedophile is an individual who is sexually interested in pre-pubescent individuals, as in before puberty. Teenagers are pubescent or occasionally post-pubescent dependent on maturation rate, they are NEVER pre-pubescent (except perhaps in very rare genetic cases)
Regardless of how the media wants the sensationalize the term, that is the accepted medical definition of the term and who it applies to. If you're going to try and form an opinion on something at least try and have it be an educated one.

!Nevermind. ;p

Keeping for context purposes:
"
I'm sorry. I though you were the one relabeling yiff as besatiality. I must have gotten confused. I'm just pointing out that you're trying to define an abstract concept with absolutes. Animals are defined as bascially 'not humans' and humans are basically defined as 'not animals' Please do tell me how you would logically manage to add something inbetween those to completley opposite definitions? I'm all ears. There is no such compromise in existance that we know of, so we *gasp* don't have a real word for it, yetalone a real concept of it either.
"

My bad.

You may want to go back, check who posted what and who's referring to who, because I think you got lost in there somewhere.
I wasn't trying to relable yiff as bestiality, I was defending against it. My comment I made wasn't directed at you either, it was directed at Jonas Pierterson

My mistake. Your names, they look the same, I swear!