• Neato@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Anthropomorphic animals have been a staple since Disney and freaking Aesop! 600BCE. People labeling it all the same as people who have a fursona are really weird.

    It seems like this is what the bigots and outrage enthusiasts have latched into since they’ve been thoroughly shunned for hating other demographics (trans people most recently). It seems like it’s getting more posts recently.

    • Mothra@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s exactly how it is. Bullying LGBTQ+ is shunned upon these days, so bigots are redirecting their hatred to the next thing on the list they don’t understand, furries

      • Squirrel@thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Eh, I guess, but it is a bit harder to understand. You mention LGBTQ+, so considering the sexual aspect of furries… sexualizing animals… yeah. As long as they’re not going to actual bestiality, I don’t really care. But no, I don’t understand.

        Tl;dr: You’re probably right and I’m rambling.

        • Mothra@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s not harder to understand, it just has had less media exposure which means it feels more alien to the majority out there. There is a lot of nuance in anthropomorphism, most of it isn’t even sexualised and doesn’t count as furry. But the masses have an aversion to nuance.

          Imo it’s very similar to drag, furries have an alt ego that just happens to be an anthropomorphic animal, period.

          Saying that liking any of these shows makes someone a furry is about as right as saying you must be queer or something if you liked watching Ms. Doubtfire. It’s clearly trolling.