• DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.mlEnglish
    30·
    15 days ago

    Furries are a great litmus test because they are furries by choice, and are “weird” by societal standards, but are also completely harmless and there’s literally nothing lost by just letting them live their lives.

    So anyone who takes a strong stance against them is highly suspect, and almost certainly has deeper prejudices they just know aren’t socially acceptable to say.

  • LaGG_3 [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.netEnglish
    29·
    16 days ago

    Imagine having “getting mad at others’ special interests/hobbies” as your special interest/hobby lol.

    Instead of thinking “not for me, but yeah, cool for them!” you just get pronounsfrothingfashmaddened. Sounds like a lousy time lol

  • certified sinonist@lemmygrad.mlEnglish
    23·
    16 days ago

    i don’t even get being broadly anti-furry today, coming from someone who is quite averse to the common conception of ‘furry culture.’ it’s edgy but not like, edgy racist edgy. It’s a weird safe sort of edge where the moralistic backing is ‘they fuck animals!!!’ until they find out they’re thinking of something different and then they just internally reset and pretend they didn’t hear that

    it’s 100% a losing battle too because the internet is owned by furries. like built funded and inhabited by furries. you’re out of place if you have a serious problem with furries, which i really can’t stress enough, is just sort of a benign hobby.

  • BelieveRevolt [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
    15·
    15 days ago

    Hating on furries seems super anachronistic on the internet of today, it was something that was popular on Something Awful 20+ years ago, who cares about furries now?

    There was also always a very short distance between picking on furries and picking on other ”weird” people including the LGBT community, which isn’t surprising since SA at the time loved using the F-slur as a generic insult.

    There are probably people well into their 40s who still think ”Cliff Yablonsky Hates You” is hysterical, that’s possibly even sadder than all the people who are still South Park brained.

      • infuziSporg [e/em/eir]@hexbear.netEnglish
        2·
        15 days ago

        Do you want an insular community that’s effectively just the size of a small clique, and still manages to be constantly at war with itself? Because that’s how you get there.

        Call me naive but I’ve operated under the principle of “we’re all friends commies here”. Many people I know IRL were caught up in a social circle that did constant witch-hunting, and it imploded after people realized it was a proto-cult formation.

          • infuziSporg [e/em/eir]@hexbear.netEnglish
            3·
            14 days ago

            Mostly not a bad thing, it depends on what is labeled as “misogyny”. I once had a very brief and measured pro-vegan question removed for “racism”, this was in a struggle session about vegans that we later learned was instigated by a wrecker. But if someone has a clear record of being hostile and/or reactionary or otherwise being particularly problematic for certain demographics, it’s okay to kick them. I will fully own up to my limited awareness of what people are like on this site, but my picture is very rosy.

            In the site’s early days I spoke up about mass bans, a user was critical of me for it, I messaged them about 20 banned accounts that I’d grown used to seeing, they responded by saying that 3 users on the list were problematic and demanding that I never message them again. At least 2 on the list were unbanned and remain active users to this day.

            Of course, they could just make new accounts, but is it wrong to want to grow that familiarity with each other?

            There was also at least one mod who would hand out bans for disagreeing with them, including for criticizing them for being too trigger-happy with banning.

            Idk I’m just very wary of most purges, and I think I have reason to be. In cases like this it would at least be a lot clearer if there was a count of strikes against someone visible on their profile.

            I have an opinion about one thing I think could make stronger socialist movements but at this point I’ll keep it to myself, as it feels less certain and important than many other things, and the climate still isn’t right for it.

            • ashinadash [she/her]@hexbear.netOPEnglish
              3·
              14 days ago

              Huh, I don’t disagree with this actually. I can say I’m finding the misogyny removals (very few bans yet) to be pretty even handed at least.

              • infuziSporg [e/em/eir]@hexbear.netEnglish
                2·
                13 days ago

                I just looked through those (normally I rarely can justify keeping track so closely).

                There was the new account who said he was pro-women’s liberation but was terrified of women having autonomy (real life cumtown bit, almost tagline material), and there was AndJusticeForAll, who- even to a casual like me- very obviously came off as DayOfDoom’s alt. Those two had it coming. Other than that, there were a couple temp bans of people arguing in good faith, and a couple bans of people merely being slightly rude. Idk I don’t think making a rash reaction without considering all the potential consequences is the same as misogyny. I don’t think our friendly neighborhood plumber dad was being misogynistic, especially because he later felt ambivalence, he had just acted without full consideration (which we all do all the time to some extent). The struggle session over Loss felt weird bit I’m not gonna tell someone they shouldn’t have a take like that.