From: peacock5293@iscsvax.uni.edu (Greywolf)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.furry
Subject: Re: Furries and sexuality (again)
Date: 7 Apr 92 15:47:17 -0500
Organization: University of Northern Iowa

In article <1992Apr7.072818.11351@muddcs.claremont.edu>, dgreen@jarthur.claremont.edu (David 'Mishael' Green) writes:
> In article <2070@ontek.com> john@ontek.com (John Alan Stanley) writes:
> ->In article <69702@ut-emx.uucp> hepfox@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Dave Peyton) writes:

{deleted}

> What, do you mean that if I can't say, "Hey, can we talk about something else,
> this makes me really uncomfortable."?  That strikes me as a conceivable reason

Makes sense to me, but I'm not sure how well that point will go over.  =) 
After all, let's say that I wanted to talk about a Christian furry comic here,
and in the course of things actually mentioned some sort of religious points
(gasp!).  Inevitably, it would make *somebody* uncomfortable.  Or, maybe if I
talk about the latest issue of Red Shetland, somebody might feel really
uncomfortable with all the violence...

Not that I'm totally against the point, but I'm afraid I can't totally agree
with the point, either.  (I'll have to think on this one...)

> ->}	Does that mean furries can't (or shouldn't) enjoy furry
> ->}erotica?  No.  But by the same token, they don't have to either.
> ->
> ->What on earth does that mean?  I suppose I don't have to do anything except

{delete}
> 
> Whoah, whoah!  He never _once_ said you had to stop enjoying furry erotica.
> What he said was that no one _had_ to enjoy furry erotica.  By my
> interpretation this means that if someone wants to enjoy furry art, literature,
> what-have-you, that erotica doesn't have to be -- and, in my opinion, shouldn't
> be -- the sum and substance of that, that if you want animation, if you want
> a novel that doesn't happen to be erotic, that if you want art depicting 
> furries that isn't suggestive, you can go out and find that.

Amen!  =)

> 
> That gets hard when it begins to seem that a large majority of the art that
> is out there is erotica.  Yes, perhaps it is a little selfish to complain
> that people aren't drawing what _you_ want them to draw... but it does seem
> that there's more than just a small call for the non-erotica out there.
> Perhaps it's time that this call be listened to with more than just
> half-an-ear.

All I know is that, whichever way I turn in furrydom, I can't seem to escape
blatant sexual themes all over the place ... I mean, I don't even feel
comfortable showing my folks any of the 'zines my art shows up in, because it
might be just across the page from something that would make my mom freak out. 
=)  Anyway, such things don't particularly thrill *me*, either.  Hey, I'm not
about to try to justify a call to shut down the "furvert" fanzines or to ban
this or that -- That just isn't the way to do it.  However, I do think that I
should have a right to say that "Hey, I don't like this," or even go so far as
to say that "I don't want to be *around* this" without being shouted down.  Of
course, I can always pack my bags and go home ... However, if that's the only
option that such persons have, then a large portion of potential furry fans are
going to be alienated from furrydom.

> 'Sfunny, I didn't once see "Why Sex Is Bad, and Don't Touch That!" in that
> article.  What I saw was, "Hey, can't we recognize furriness and sexuality as
> two entirely different issues," and "Erotica isn't the only reason for furries
> being furries."  Both of which seem quite valid points to me...

Dittos!
-- 
-Jordan            ..      PEACOCK5293@iscsvax.uni.edu
                  .OO.     Jordan Peacock (Jordan Greywolf)
                  O/\O     (New Address):  1610 Parker
                   --                      Cedar Falls, IA  50613