Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >
Topic Options
#23383 - 01/30/04 12:20 PM Man is an animal...
TrojZyr Offline
CoS Witch

Registered: 07/25/01
Posts: 12990
Loc: The Solid State
Last night's episode of CSI brought an interesting lifestyle/fetish/hobby to my attention: furries. In the episode, the CSIs discover the body of a man in a raccoon suit, and they follow the trail to PAF CON, a Plushy and Furry Convention. These are people who dress up in animal suits or who wear costume ears and tails. Many of them affirm that they were born into the wrong species. One fellow masquerades as a sexy blue female cat named "Sexy Kitty," and no one is aware that Sexy is actually a bald guy named Bud. The CSIs performed tests on the cat suit, and confirmed that Bud had been ejaculating on it, indicating that he had sex with it. There's also a guy who dressed as a wolf who resented the raccoon for stealing his "mate", a lamb, and who, even when his mask was removed, snarled like an animal when he talked about the promiscuous, garbage-eating raccoon who had stolen his mate. (Grissom then noted that raccoons are not monogamous, whereas wolves are, and the man confirmed this.)

I looked stuff up on the Internet, and furry fans asserted that the CSI episode was inaccurate because it over-sexed furrydom, and featured too many people in suits, as suits are upwards of $800, so few people can afford to buy them and make them, and then, they naturally try not to get them dirty or ejaculate on them.

I found an interesting essay on the matter: http://pressedfur.coolfreepages.com/press/vanityfair/

I did notice that many of these people seem to be "zeta" males and females, as described in the article. This means that they are so low on the human totem pole that they move into a different species to gain some personal power and physical relationships. Grissom (the main character of CSI) notes that the deceased raccoon guy may have dressed as a furry so that he could be what he wasn't in reality--cute and lovable.

In any case, I believe this whole thing has some very interesting themes. These people get to establish connections with people even if they are normally shy, they get to express other aspects of their personality or primal cravings, they get to be more directly intimate and even sexual than is normally socially acceptable, they get to snarl and howl at their leisure without feeling awkward, and they (if they wear a full suit) get to exploit the benefits of being anonymous behind a mask. They also get to feel nice textures against their skin. Some of them get to connect with their totem animal, or even the species or character that they wish they were.

It reminds me on some level to LaVey's procedure on how to become a werewolf.

Thoughts? How do you interpret this within a Satanic perspective? What aspects of this are Satanic, and which are not, and why? How could the unsatanic details be rendered Satanic? How does this relate to the human condition? Does this Furry hobby/fetish intrigue you personally, interest you academically, or disgust you?

There are also people called Plushies who have sex with stuffed animals, but that doesn't interest me as much, because I just see that as sex toy play.
_________________________
"Gentlemen, the verdict is guilty, on all ten counts of first-degree stupidity. The penalty phase will now begin."--Divine, "Pink Flamingos."

"The strong rule the weak, and the cunning rule over all." HS!

Top
#23384 - 01/30/04 12:36 PM Re: Man is an animal... [Re: TrojZyr]
Anonymous
Unregistered


I read an interview in a recent copy of Bizarre magazine where CoS member Vexen Crabtree was talking on the very subject of Satanism and furries - I don't have the magazine with me, as I am currently in a different country to the copy I bought, but I believe it's available in the US, and I know it's available over here in Canada (albeit a little delayed). Perhaps you could hunt down a copy, or someone else may have one so that they could transcribe the interview.

Top
#23385 - 01/30/04 12:57 PM I'm a FURRY! [Re: TrojZyr]
Old_Pig Offline


Registered: 11/27/02
Posts: 3969
Loc: The Deep South
I didn't see the show, but heard about it from "fellow furries". Most of them feel things like that only perpetuate the misinformation and misconceptions about “furries”.

For starters, being a furry have nothing to do with dressing in an animal suit. "Furry" or “Anthro” describes fictional character that has both human and animal characteristics. It all started by “furry art” or “furry fiction”.

Most furries are comic characters (Like Pinton the Pig ) and some times the authors of those comics use their character as online alter-ego. So, by extention, the creators of furry art/fiction started being called "furries" themselves.

With time, there were “furry conventions” and other events, and the “fursuiting” started. People started making costumes of those “furry” characters and going to the conventions dressed as their favorite character. Some even started "living" the characters... and things went out of hand (or should I say out of paw?)

And then, there was the infamous MTV special dedicated to “furries”. That “documentary” was intended to show the world what the “furrydom” was, but instead concentrated on a very small section of it, the one of people in suits. The artists and writers were completely ignored (though some of the furry art was shown, authors not credited) The real heart of the “furry” thing, the artistically minded people who created all a universe populated with mythical human-animal creatures was completely ignored.

After that the whole world got the impression that “furries” was just a bunch of perverts who randomly fucked each other while dressed in grotesque dog masks. The fact is most real “furries” find the “fursuiters” despicable.

Today most “furries” don’t even like to use that name to avoid being mistaken with the guys dressed in rug suits.

Most people into “furries” don't even dress as animals, but are avid fans of furry erotica. There are web pages dedicated exclusively to selling this kind of material and I know artists that make a lot of money by selling their drawings. (I could be rich by now, but I'm not very good at drawing porn)

There is also sites like Furcadia where people can chat, interact and roleplay into a virtual "furry" universe.

(In case someone is curious, NO I don’t have a pig suit, thought I use a prosthetic pig nose when I “webcam” with my fans)

Top
#23386 - 01/30/04 03:10 PM Re: I'm a FURRY! [Re: Old_Pig]
TrojZyr Offline
CoS Witch

Registered: 07/25/01
Posts: 12990
Loc: The Solid State
Heh, you can tell by my avatar that I'm a bit of a furry fan as well.

Previously wasn't aware of what to call this stuff.

I do get the impression that there are lots of categories and that definitions get crossed. (Like, the distinctions between a furry artist and a fursuiter and a "furvert.") I'm just learning these terms.

I'm certainly familiar with people who dress up as their favorite characters and who even "role play" as those characters. That's business as usual.

I am most definitely a fan--and always have been, since I was a child--of anthro art featuring humanlike animals, or animals that possess humanlike characteristics, or vice versa. Naturally, it's part of my enjoyment of animation and cartoons overall, but humanlike animals and animal-like humans do hold a special place in my area of interest. I also enjoy trans-art (or whatever they call it) wherein humans turn into animals or vice versa---interesting concept, that.

So, I relate to this whole genre on multiple levels, but you certainly won't catch me fucking people dressed as a yak. The whole erotic aspect baffles me.
_________________________
"Gentlemen, the verdict is guilty, on all ten counts of first-degree stupidity. The penalty phase will now begin."--Divine, "Pink Flamingos."

"The strong rule the weak, and the cunning rule over all." HS!

Top
#23387 - 01/30/04 03:28 PM Re: I'm a FURRY! [Re: Old_Pig]
Anonymous
Unregistered


it's odd, I also have a comic character (though never saw the light of day)that I want to get back to dealing with that is a kitten. though not just any type of kitty, it's MorbiKitty (copywrittten and trademarked so nope, no one can steal it)

It was created by myself and a friend of mine in 1992, so I guess I have a furry

HAIL SATAN!

Top
#23388 - 01/30/04 08:26 PM Re: Man is an animal... [Re: TrojZyr]
reprobate Offline

CoS Warlock

Registered: 06/05/02
Posts: 7140
Loc: Canada
When I was five years old, I spent four months as a cat. My name was Whiskers. Whenever my mother took me out of the house, I would insist on wearing my jacket back-to-front, my rationale being that you never saw a zipper up the belly of a cat. If we saw people my mother knew but I didn't, I would never talk to them, only mew. This was really make-believe, not any kind of dysmorphia; I never felt like I should have "really" been a cat, nor did I need to anthropomorphize myself beyond changing the function of objects to suit the altered body organization I formed in my mind.

This, to me, is fundamentally different from what happens with furries. It is also different from lycanthropy. I would suggest that lycanthropy and this kind of childhood imagining have more in common with one another, than either does with the furry lifestyle, because lycanthropy is about changing the relations the body forms with the outside, whereas furrydom is about an anatomical longing or a feeling of lack.

Furrydom is to lycanthropy as a fat indoor house pet is to an actual wild animal.

Furrydom is about being domesticated, not about being wild. It's a fantasy, not a transformation. Snarling and being wild only occurs within the bounds of what is considered "safe", and most furries consider their activities to be a kind of innocent make-believe or escapist sex-play. When the lifestyle attracts somebody really creepy, whose body dysmorphia is less a matter of general social malaise and is rather more of a psychotic pathology, furries are mortified that someone injects something evil into what they want to be so child-like; this suggests that they have even less perspective than outsiders do regarding why the lifestyle would attract someone creepy.
_________________________
reprobate

Top
#23389 - 01/31/04 12:11 AM Re: Man is an animal... [Re: reprobate]
TrojZyr Offline
CoS Witch

Registered: 07/25/01
Posts: 12990
Loc: The Solid State
That was precisely the impression I got!

The idea of being a wolf, a fox, a tiger, or a dragon intrigues me, but there ain't nothing cute or fuzzy about it--it's about dark, predatory power. I wouldn't be content to be cartoony or just plain cuddly. It's why I don't relate to squirrels, mice, raccoons, and other prey animals that are cute but get eaten lickety split. (Raccoons are also not as cute as most people think--believe me, a very mean one broke into my house once.) If you can't wield or manifest the animal's true strength, majesty, and power, why bother?

These people would therefore definitely find me uber-creepy.

I wonder, where do the creeps hang out, and what do they do? What of them?

What do you think the social malaise these people suffer from is? (Is it that zeta male/female stuff I brought up, or is there more to it as you see it?) How could it be amended otherwise? Why this outlet?

How would a Satanist approach the matter from start to finish?
_________________________
"Gentlemen, the verdict is guilty, on all ten counts of first-degree stupidity. The penalty phase will now begin."--Divine, "Pink Flamingos."

"The strong rule the weak, and the cunning rule over all." HS!

Top
#23390 - 01/31/04 01:38 AM Re: Man is an animal... [Re: TrojZyr]
reprobate Offline

CoS Warlock

Registered: 06/05/02
Posts: 7140
Loc: Canada
Quote:

What do you think the social malaise these people suffer from is? (Is it that zeta male/female stuff I brought up, or is there more to it as you see it?) How could it be amended otherwise? Why this outlet?




I'd say it's a combination of factors. First, the zeta status, leading to an escapism. Notice that the fantasy isn't even to be alpha -- it's an egalitarian fantasy, in which everyone is content to be a zeta. Alpha status is the fantasy of a beta; egalitarianism is the fantasy of the bottom of the barrel.

Second, there's some degree of body dysmorphia that is typical of people who are not well-adjusted to their own sense of sexuality and identity. Furrydom is of a kind with transsexuality; it's based on the same sugary-sweet fantasy of being able to make personal adjustment problems go away by becoming (on the outside) a kind of creature who wouldn't suffer from them.

Third, I would expect there's a significant degree of touch-hunger that is aggravated by a lack of sexual status and by the convenience of socializing on the Internet, a touch-free medium. Furries fantasize about being petted, stroked, and toussled, and otherwise treated like pets. They fantasize about having a skin that people would want to touch, a skin that is stimulating to the sense of touch -- not just their own, but other people's as well -- because they want to be touched, and people (for whatever reason) aren't touching them.

Now, of course, different people experiment with this in different ways. You might have relatively successful and competent person who is an introvert and in a milieu where easy access to partners is difficult (a gay person in a more conservative environment, for example). This kind of situation may "react" with a particular fondness for sexy or sentimental animal motifs (kitty or bunny ears, say) to create a mild kind of furry inclination. There isn't a whole lot problematic with this, so long as the subject is aware of his own situation and the factors that are informing his preferences.

At the other end of the spectrum you have the obese, slovenly, disaffected nerd whose whole social life and sense of self revolves around fantasy and who only makes friends on the basis of this fantasy. When nobody in the SCA is going to "fuzzle" them, they pick up a fur suit and go cruising. They're as disgusted with themselves as everyone else is, and they're desperate for touch and starved for validation. They fall into these black holes of "subculture" in which they can surround themselves with the like-minded. It's a vicious cycle of positive reinforcement; they fall into this psychological toilet where no one has a right not to like them, and society is unfair for not accepting them "as they are" (the most hilarious irony of all).

Quote:

How would a Satanist approach the matter from start to finish?




Laughing.
_________________________
reprobate

Top
#23391 - 01/31/04 02:15 AM Re: Man is an animal... [Re: TrojZyr]
WvlfBlitzkrieg Offline


Registered: 01/19/04
Posts: 72
Loc: Dallas,Tx
I think the way furries are viewed now by the public anyway is very Satanic...it reminds me alot of Antons essay on Lycanthropic Metamorphosis in an odd way....apparently as according to tha pig furries are nothing like this...But...the Satanic 3rd side comes into play...perhaps furries are this and that...maybe not what the media portrays them as..but the very way the media twists them around could be a very useful tool for the Satanist..who says we cant learn from the medias ignorance...seems like this time they have taken an innocent pastime and twisted it to the Satanic...I wouldn't thank them per say.....but they made a very good point clear....funny how that works sometimes...
_________________________
Hail Satan! Klystronik MP3

Top
#23392 - 01/31/04 02:52 AM Re: Man is an animal... [Re: reprobate]
Wile_E_Quixote Offline
CoS Member

Registered: 03/14/02
Posts: 2493
It's a phenomenon that I tend to term "The Disney Factor". People projecting nothing but what they believe to be positive, beneign qualities in certain animals. It's that factor that very often leads to self-righteous vegetarianism. "How can you possibly eat that cutesy-wutesy little lamb?! Look at his widdle twitchy nose and the soooooooo sweet way that he walks."

Disney has turned nature into an egalitarian, altruistic cloud cuckoo land for a lot of people. They deny the beauty and relevance of nature's viciousness.

Top
#23393 - 01/31/04 03:19 AM Re: Man is an animal... [Re: Wile_E_Quixote]
Rev_Malebranche Offline
CoS Reverend

Registered: 06/03/02
Posts: 4136
Loc: Oregon
I agree, but I wouldn't JUST blame Disney.

I think that also has to do with how disconnected most of us are from the slaughtering process.

Fewer and fewer people have had the experience of killing an animal and eating it. We buy meat in cute little prepackaged bundles that don't really resemble an animal. Take an average American to any Chinatown and they'll be shocked and appalled! Chickens have heads?!!! Fish aren't naturally vacuum packed?

There is no acknowledgement that someone has to knock a cow out and slit its throat before you can order a double cheeseburger.

In the absence of that direct connection with our FOOD, people develop romanticized fantasy animals that are more like animal avatars (or furries) than the real thing.

I worked on a turkey farm when I was 12. Turkeys are hideous, stupid, disgusting animals. So are chickens. Anyone who thinks of them as having "feelings" or "personality" has obviously only been near those cute baby chicks they have at incubators at the state farm shows or at easter time.

Animal personification is useful in the proper perspective, but without the food connection - it gets a little out of hand.

Top
#23394 - 01/31/04 03:54 AM Re: Man is an animal... [Re: Rev_Malebranche]
Wile_E_Quixote Offline
CoS Member

Registered: 03/14/02
Posts: 2493
Of couse, it's not all the fault of Disney. I just used that as a suitably evocative label when making my point. Disney is, however, symptomatic of the times in which it came into being. As the Disney view of animals developed, the western world was fully entering a consumer culture, free of any reason to associate meat with the animal it was once wrapped around. I know quite a few people who certainly reflect this dissassociation. People who happily eat meat unless it is presented to them on the bone. It has a knock on effect to the culinary world. Meat in general cooks much better and turns out much more succulent when cooked on the bone. Today's people who only go for "processed" food, just end up with meals such as burgers and filleted fish. I fear that pleasures such as a roast leg of lamb, seasoned with rosemary and garlic will eventually become a thing of the past. A casualty of the growth of deeply unnatural "goody goody" notions about animal morality.

Top
#23395 - 01/31/04 04:35 AM Re: Man is an animal... [Re: Wile_E_Quixote]
Rev_Malebranche Offline
CoS Reverend

Registered: 06/03/02
Posts: 4136
Loc: Oregon
Oh, I agree - I didn't mean to suggest that you meant it was ALL Disney. I was just expanding.

The cartoon & stuffed animal factor influences the dissocaition from animals as food and vice versa. While personified animal characters have existed throughout history - only in this age of mass marketed meat could they become surrogates for the real thing. The idea of the actual animal has faded, and the cartoon has replaced it.

Top
#23396 - 01/31/04 05:14 AM Re: Man is an animal... [Re: Rev_Malebranche]
Wile_E_Quixote Offline
CoS Member

Registered: 03/14/02
Posts: 2493
I do think that the negative influences of the cartoons does depend on which ones you're talking about. Disney perpetuates the real stereotypes about animals - Tigers are all baaaaad and evil. Fluffy cutsey bunnies are all good. Other creations have been much less cliched and moralising. Bugs Bunny, for example, has none of the stereotypes usually associated with rabbits. He's wise talking, effortlessly cool and very intelligent with a fantastically cynical sense of humour.

Really, how I see the subject is as an extention of the way Christians try so completely to force their morality over existance. It'd be interesting to see just how many "Furries" out there identify with the ACTUAL characteristics of their totem animal, not the romanticised cartoon versions.

Top
#23397 - 01/31/04 07:08 AM Re: Man is an animal... [Re: Wile_E_Quixote]
Old_Pig Offline


Registered: 11/27/02
Posts: 3969
Loc: The Deep South
The “antropomorphization” of animals is probably as old as humanity itself. And it comes directly from the times men were hunters and scavengers and disputed the same piece of rotten meat with packs oh hyenas.

The very first expression of human art show us hunters dressed in animal skins, wearing tails, horns or other animal attributes. Imitation of another animal behavior and temporary turning into that animal was probably the same thing in the minds of primitive humans. It was the first form of magic.

As humans become civilized and gregarious, agriculture became their main source of food, and hunting was not their primary activity.

The communion with the animal became diluted but the magic remained. The kept turning into animals all the time, but since their contact with wilderness was now rare, their concept of animals changed. Now they didn’t assume the real characteristics of animals, but a new one that incorporated more human elements. Man’s imaginary animal started to humanize.

The human don’t turn into animal anymore. The animal turns into human.

From those times we start finding drawing of animals walking on their hind legs, carrying tools and weapons and mimicking human activities. Folklore fills with stories of animals that sport all kind of human flaws: envy, greed, jealousy… Aesop’s fables are best known example.

Thus, the real animal was lost. A new animal, fictitious, a mere reflection of man’s own flaws and weakness took its place in collective mind.

I think the necessity some people have of transforming into an animal (or into the stereotyped character that animal is supposed to be) comes from our instinct to be free again. To escape the boring urban routine. But since the animal in our minds is too distant, to distort by centuries of culture, we can’t reach it anymore. Instead we bring the animal to us. Instead of transforming ourselves into the animal, we take the animal and dress it like a man.

When a person dresses in a feline “furry” costume, he is not transformed into a cat. He is transforming into a cat transformed into a man.

Furry characters in comics and fiction aren’t wild animals anymore. They are animals walking on two legs, dressing in human clothes, driving cars, operating computers…

The constant was inverted. Magic turns thing upside-down. But still magic.

Man still wants to be the animal… but he doesn’t want to give up his civilized commodities. We don’t want to go out to the forest and be the wild animal anymore. We want the animal to come to our city and become us.
_________________________
You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having both at once.
Robert A. Heinlein


Top
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >


Forum Stats
12201 Members
73 Forums
43985 Topics
406074 Posts

Max Online: 197 @ 10/04/11 06:49 AM
Advertisements