From: john@ontek.com (John Alan Stanley)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.furry
Subject: Re: Furries and sexuality (again)
Date: 9 Apr 92 04:46:06 GMT
Organization: Ontek Corporation -- Laguna Hills, California

In article <1992Apr7.153755.3624@iscsvax.uni.edu> peacock5293@iscsvax.uni.edu (Greywolf) 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:
}
}>> Perhaps.  Or maybe it is just that _any_ mention of such things is seen
}>> as being a loud statement, because one does not see such things very often
}>> in our society.  From what I have seen, it is the folks who think there is
}
}Hm... Whatever the "outside" world is, as you call it, for some reason when I'm
}around "furry" groups, sexuality is a big factor whichever way you turn...
}seems more so than the world at large.

Wasn't that what I said?  Yes, there is a large component of sexuality in
furry fandom, much more so than in other places.  Ergo, because the rest of
society is so repressed, we seem to be a bunch of perverts.  It's all really
a matter of perspective, and thus I can as easily say that "normal" society
is ridiculously hung-up about such things, and should just get a grip on
reality.  And so, coming from that perspective, you see us (the perverts)
as a bunch of drooling sex-fiends.  Neither view is strictly true, nor
strictly false, but both are present in the community.

}>> too much sexuality that seem to be making the most noise.  Or perhaps we
}>> are both indulging our biases too much, hmmm?
}
}Most noise?  Hm... I suppose I would have to make some sort of a study on that
}in order to be able to support or contradict that one.  All I know is that a
}whole lot of the furry art I run into is on the "furvert" side.

As I was saying, because a lot of furry folks have a more open attitude
about sex and sexuality than society at large, this will be the case.  We
tend to see depictions of sexual activity as no more out of place than any
other sort of activity.  To be fair, I think perhaps there is a much higher
level of interest in it than there is with something more mundane, like
tennis, but that is mostly a rebound effect, as most of us have emerged from
the larger society, and thus have a lot of ugly baggage about sex to work
through.

}Well, it might be kind of questionable when a large part of the discussion goes
}off about homosexuality, etc. without any pretense of being related to
}furrydom.  (Every time I post a response to the Denial of Humanity thread, I'm
}not helping things at all -- I think I'd best ignore that thread until somebody
}manages to tie it into furrydom.  =)  )

When that happens, we'll deal with it.  Like it or not, a lot of furry folk
are at least bi to some degree, and so those things are of interest.  Insofar
as they have impact on the community, they will be discussed.  I agree that
a discussion of sexuality per se would not be appropriate, but I have yet
to see that.

}Hm.  Looks like a pretty simple statement to me, and looks like you're reading
}a lot more into it.  "Does that mean furries can't (or shouldn't) enjoy
}furry erotica?  No."  Simple 'nuff.  "But by the same token, they don't
}*have* to either" (emphasis mine).  Looks like you ought to re-read that
}statement before you fly off the handle.

Yes, I agree that I seem to have over-interpreted that.  It happens, and I
can only apologise for it.

}Hm... Just for the sake of seeing where you stand on this, what say if I
}happened to put together a furry convention in Iowa that didn't have any furry
}art that had, say, nudity (well-furred furries that aren't anatomically
}explicit don't count, such as Rhudiprrt.  =)  ), sexual acts, graphic violence,
}etc. depicted?  Would I be guilty of censorship or some such crime?  (This
}isn't necessarily directly related to the topic at hand, nor am I trying to
}make a point.  I just want to try to get an idea of what sort of values are
}being expressed here, as I have repeatedly shown my ability to completely miss
}what one is trying to say...)

What you choose to display in your art show is entirely up to you.  I would
say that you were "guilty" of censorship, but only in the same sense that
any editor of a magazine or book is.  Which is to say, you have every right
to dictate what is displayed in an art show that you run, or a magazine that
you publish.  I have no doubt such a thing would be popular in some quarters,
and I would certainly not stay away just because there were no nekkid bunnies.
:-)  However, my feelings are that the community is best served by presenting
an open forum, where people are free to choose what they like out of the full
range of material available.  Thus, the art show I run is open to all types
of furry art, and, to some extent, to most any sort of art that would be
seen in a SF con art show.  So, I too am at least somewhat selective in what
I want in the show, but only because it is the furry art which people are
there for, and most other stuff is not going to do well.

The values I hold dear are those of freedom and independence, of peoples
right to choose for themselves what they wish to see and hear.  For better
or worse, that will mean that there is likely to be something to both offend,
and to delight, almost everyone who enters the show.  That is the price of
true freedom, that you must tolerate what is offensive in order to obtain 
what delights you.  I know that is upsetting; as I said before, there were
things in the show this year that I did not like very much.  In some ways,
I would have been happier if I had not seen them.  But they were an honest
expression of feelings by their creators, and so, no matter how distasteful,
legitimate parts of the show.  But then, those were isolated instances; I
think I see what bothers you when I consider how I would feel if there were
pictures of grotesque violence on nearly every side.  This matter obviously
needs further consideration, but please do try to see why I have set the
policy as I have.  It is not at all meant to make people uncomfortable, but
it can have that effect, depending on the person and the circumstances.
Life is like that...

JAS