Fluxy Posted July 19, 2011 Report Share Posted July 19, 2011 Gender identity... is the same as the furry fetish? I have to disagree there. While most furries will consider their fursona as part of their identity, it's totally seperate from their gender identity. Gender identity is the gender you associate yourself with, mentally, physically and emotionally. Your fursona is the animal you assicoate yourself with, which is a totally different species. And yes you may feel stronly about it, but there's a reason we don't have fursuits as an option alongside formal wear. I personally have a friend in real life who is otherkin, he's actually the partner of the owner of Bad Dragon. I think I'll pick his brains on this subject now to get a clearer view. And if you can suggest that skirts are merely costume, then the same can be said about trousers. Skirts express femininity, and trousers express masculinity. Both can be considered costume. Well damn, Red beat me to it really. Uhm... Not much more I can really think to add on at the moment in this state of mind, other than the psych terms she is using is pretty much right. So yeah, Way to ninja me, Red~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drasiana Posted July 19, 2011 Report Share Posted July 19, 2011 I disagree because they are the same thing. There are furries who consider it a part of their identity, (otherkin) so by that messure they are the same. If you claim that is not the case, then it also stands to reason a skirt is also just a costume and therefor has no place at work. I have a much easier time believing that someone's "true self" would prefer to wear a skirt than I can believe their "true self" is an anthropomorphic cartoon dragon with six penises. And yeah, otherkin? I seriously believe that this many wolves have been reincarnated as people that don't actually know that much about wolves. Where are all the snipe eel otherkin? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkyway64 Posted July 19, 2011 Report Share Posted July 19, 2011 Gender identity... is the same as the furry fetish? I have to disagree there. While most furries will consider their fursona as part of their identity, it's totally seperate from their gender identity. I've seen cases where it is one and the same. =V Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the Shrooms Posted July 19, 2011 Author Report Share Posted July 19, 2011 Yeah... We all should wear nothing! \o/ SECOND this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
"User" Posted July 19, 2011 Report Share Posted July 19, 2011 Most furries will vehemently deny their lifestyle/fandom as a fetish and insist you refer to it as a lifestyle or a fandom because "Fetish" is too politically incorrect thus offensive. There is no denying that these two terms go hand in hand most of the time. Also, I have to agree with Sabre's point regarding Otherkin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drasiana Posted July 19, 2011 Report Share Posted July 19, 2011 Otherkin is an intangible spiritual belief, not a gender identity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
"User" Posted July 19, 2011 Report Share Posted July 19, 2011 Otherkin is an intangible spiritual belief, not a gender identity. Technically yes, but you'll be surprised at how far some furries will take it sometimes - especially due to a lot of misconceptions and controversy within the fandom about the term itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drasiana Posted July 19, 2011 Report Share Posted July 19, 2011 Honestly, the furry fandom and otherkin do not surprise me; my former best friend went through a huge otherkin phase where she was convinced she was some kind of antelope-dragon that could see auras and tell the future (she's since converted to being an insane over-the-top Christian and doesn't acknowledge these supposed abilities anymore). But then Sabre's point contradicts itself anyways, being that there is nothing ever practical about a fursuit, wheras a skirt in an office job is perfectly fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabre Posted July 19, 2011 Report Share Posted July 19, 2011 I have a much easier time believing that someone's "true self" would prefer to wear a skirt than I can believe their "true self" is an anthropomorphic cartoon dragon with six penises. And yeah, otherkin? I seriously believe that this many wolves have been reincarnated as people that don't actually know that much about wolves. Where are all the snipe eel otherkin? I'm suprised you would say this. Just a few posts ago you said that trans weren't all tarted up showgirls, but all otherkin have to be cartoon dragons with 6 penis? I've met a few otherkin I've never seen one like that. One of my internet friends is otherkin and when I asked him about this topic he said Seriously though. Anyone trying to decide what's important to somebody else is an idiot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drasiana Posted July 19, 2011 Report Share Posted July 19, 2011 I'm more considering those who would campaign to be allowed to fursuit at work in a position where it will only impede them (seeing out of it, handling papers, etc.). If you want to tell people at work that you are really a wolf then go ahead, but my entire point has been that there is an extreme difference between dressing like the "opposite gender" and wearing an animal costume to work...even just from a convenience POV (if you're a sports mascot go ahead). What counts as an otherkin as a totally different debate anyway. And when did I ever decide what was "important to someone else"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psygonis Posted July 19, 2011 Report Share Posted July 19, 2011 I believe he meant "telling what/how other people think". The different between a fursuit and cloth is that a fursuit represents a new skin, while cloth are made to go over your own one. Affirming this explicitely that you reject your humanity by putting on yourselt a "new you" is way more extreme (and considered weird) than cross-dressing, in a world that at least acknowledge the concept of gender-identity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabre Posted July 19, 2011 Report Share Posted July 19, 2011 I'm more considering those who would campaign to be allowed to fursuit at work in a position where it will only impede them (seeing out of it, handling papers, etc.). If you want to tell people at work that you are really a wolf then go ahead, but my entire point has been that there is an extreme difference between dressing like the "opposite gender" and wearing an animal costume to work...even just from a convenience POV (if you're a sports mascot go ahead). What counts as an otherkin as a totally different debate anyway. And when did I ever decide what was "important to someone else"? True, but again, you are assuming the extrme is the norm. Not all fursiuts are a full mascot style suit, and even those that are, after a little time wearing one they compensate for it very well. What if it was something more along the lines of a partial suit that doesn't impede you more than a set of leather gloves? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drasiana Posted July 19, 2011 Report Share Posted July 19, 2011 Leather gloves aren't particularly easy to handle either. I certainly wouldn't use them at a desk/retail job, and fursuit heads aren't particularly easy to see out of. I suppose there's the matter of tails/ears, which I guess aren't particularly impeding, my main problem with them is that the majority of ears are just...not good looking. That and it's a degree of professionalism; if you worked at Hot Topic or something sure, wear your ears, but if you're a secretary at a law firm, ehh. Ears are exchangable with goth spiked necklaces or zebra striped tights here; just not within the realm of what a specific company will let you wear. Wheras, ignoring subculture and sects and simply taking a business casual outfit, and sticking it on the opposite gender, is what I'm talking about here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabre Posted July 20, 2011 Report Share Posted July 20, 2011 Leather gloves aren't particularly easy to handle either. I certainly wouldn't use them at a desk/retail job, and fursuit heads aren't particularly easy to see out of. I suppose there's the matter of tails/ears, which I guess aren't particularly impeding, my main problem with them is that the majority of ears are just...not good looking. That and it's a degree of professionalism; if you worked at Hot Topic or something sure, wear your ears, but if you're a secretary at a law firm, ehh. Ears are exchangable with goth spiked necklaces or zebra striped tights here; just not within the realm of what a specific company will let you wear. Wheras, ignoring subculture and sects and simply taking a business casual outfit, and sticking it on the opposite gender, is what I'm talking about here. I get that, and I agree with that point. Maybe we should leave the expanded topic for another time or place since we are already off topic already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drasiana Posted July 20, 2011 Report Share Posted July 20, 2011 Yeah this topic hasn't been on-topic for all two pages of its existence I don't think but uh yeah mentioning gay people in class is fine by me *totally went to school where that happened anyways* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Monroe Posted July 21, 2011 Report Share Posted July 21, 2011 I'd rather they mandate proper education on what homosexuality is. But that would require human sexuality classes and actual thinking, which we can't have in schools. So instead we'll suffice with the lip-service "Gay History". Gay history is human history. It is heterosexual history. It is black, white, asian, and native history. The fact we break history down into little chunks that aren't region-specific is ridiculous, but then again, America has never been terribly bright about history in the first place despite what it tries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts