Disposition and attitudes towards more mature (ex. yiff) art in StarFox?

[Lord Asriel]

First, I'd like to point out that I hate the word "yiff" and even more than that "yiffing." Let's make sure we're talking about the same thing; furry porn or furries going at it in suits? Because I'm pretty sure that's "viewing porn" and "sex" respectively.

I'm talking about any kind of sexual relations between furry characters, and well if humans dress up in suit, it's their problem, but it's still weird, yet more normal since they still have relations between humans.

So you propose it's a feeling of bestiality. How sure of you are this? Now ask yourself that same thing again after applying the same logic to other fetishes. Does a, say, lingerie fetishist want to get it on with the clothes themselves? Maybe a BDSM guy wants to do it with a ball gag and rope in a threesome. See how it works?

It's different. Bestiality is not a fetish, it's a deviance. Maybe I sound a bit old school, but well, if it's OK to have a fetish for zoophilia, as we won't go and have sex with animals, then why wouldn't it be for child pornography? There is a single step between each other. Not OK.

Humans are attracted to humans by nature. Anthropomorphic animals are human much more than they are animal. They way they act, speak, and even look is nearly spot on with few differences, and the reason behind those differences being attractive could be anything, including but not limited t your theory.

This statement can be understood in two different ways.

Either you're saying that anthropomorphic characters are just mere humans after all, with additional features, in which case there is no point in it and you can just stick to normal relations, either you're saying the same as me, that they are part human with the attribute of animals, therefore they are appealing to the bestiality thing.

[Milkyway64]

It's different. Bestiality is not a fetish, it's a deviance. Maybe I sound a bit old school, but well, if it's OK to have a fetish for zoophilia, as we won't go and have sex with animals, then why wouldn't it be for child pornography? There is a single step between each other. Not OK.

Because Bestiality =/= furry. You're still assuming that the two are they same by pointing out in what ways they are similar. You've yet to do anything more towards that point than just assume you are right.

This statement can be understood in two different ways.

Either you're saying that anthropomorphic characters are just mere humans after all, with additional features, in which case there is no point in it and you can just stick to normal relations, either you're saying the same as me, that they are part human with the attribute of animals, therefore they are appealing to the bestiality thing.

This statement can be understood in two different ways.

Either you're generalizing to the max, conveniently ignoring my point up there about how a vast variety of things can appeal to human sexuality without even being a living things, in which case you're covering your ears and going "LA LA LA IT'S BESTIALITY I'M RIGHT" or you're... well, going "LA LA LA IT'S BESTIALITY I'M RIGHT."

[Lord Asriel]

Lol'd.

Well, you're right. That's just like, my opinion man.

I don't have to justify myself for being against something I consider wrong, and deviant.

People today are discussing too much to make wrong things right. I just don't let myself go down this stream. Due to my consideration toward it, I don't want it in the series.

[Samantha Weltzin]

Lol'd.

Well, you're right. That's just like, my opinion man.

I don't have to justify myself for being against something I consider wrong, and deviant.

Oh, well I'm glad you admit that...

People today are discussing too much to make wrong things right. I just don't let myself go down this stream. Due to my consideration toward it, I don't want it in the series.

...Wait, you're going on, trying to get one last jab in in an argument you already bowed out of? That's not very sporting.

[Lord Asriel]

Excuse me but what kind of statement was that ?

I don't see the relevance of this post.

[Samantha Weltzin]

It means this is a debate sub-forum, and you bowed out of the debate, only you seemed to feel the need to get one last needle in after all was said and done. It's just a sneaky maneuver, is all.

While not directly relevant to the topic at-hand, I wrote it because it's bad form, and form is important on this sub-forum.

[Milkyway64]

Lol'd.

Well, you're right. That's just like, my opinion man.

And an incredibly shaky and poorly backed one at that.

I don't have to justify myself for being against something I consider wrong, and deviant.

People today are discussing too much to make wrong things right. I just don't let myself go down this stream. Due to my consideration toward it, I don't want it in the series.

Fair enough. I'll take that as a victory, thanks.

[Lord Asriel]

Hahaha oh wow.

Victory? Over what? Well, if you're highly satisfied by the only fact of expressing your opinion, I wish I could enjoy myself like you. It's not like you won anything, you didn't convince anybody, you didn't make me change my mind, and you did not prove anything.

This is not a game, I'm defending the point that children should not be allowed to witness deviant pornography while innocently playing a damned space shooter game, and you are talking about victory because I said I won't justify myself for being against something bad.

You sir, are a genius.

[Sarita]

You backed out, and refused to defend your points anymore. In the world of debate, that is a concession/loss. This is a debate board. You technically "lost."

If you'd like to continue, you're welcome to. Approach it with an open mind instead, this time.

[Xortberg]

Hahaha oh wow.

Victory? Over what? Well, if you're highly satisfied by the only fact of expressing your opinion, I wish I could enjoy myself like you. It's not like you won anything, you didn't convince anybody, you didn't make me change my mind, and you did not prove anything.

This is not a game, I'm defending the point that children should not be allowed to witness deviant pornography while innocently playing a damned space shooter game, and you are talking about victory because I said I won't justify myself for being against something bad.

You sir, are a genius.

I think you're forgetting one very important thing here, bro. This board is The Counter-Point. It is a board for debate, and bowing out of a debate is generally viewed as a forfeit. He has every right to claim a victory here.

EDIT: Damn, ninja'd by Sissi.

[Lord Asriel]

Intredasting.

The thing is that it wasn't int his section at first.

And seriously, wow, you're incredibly annoying with your debate losing/winning/bowing stuff. This is useless as F*CK

I couldn't care less about your debate rules and all, I don't care about losing. Ok, I lost your game, big deal. Then what? I'm still sticking to the IDEA behind this debate which shouldn't even exist. I don't care about winning or losing, I'm thinking about facts.

Would you put the controller in the hand of your 6 year old boy if there was deviant sex scene on the monitor ?

[LoneWolf]

Whoa...what happened to the topic.

["User"]

Whoa...what happened to the topic.

No idea, a lot of this apparently has been happening when I was out of the house doing stuff.

That being said everyone, please play nice and try not to be obnoxious.

[Milkyway64]

Would you put the controller in the hand of your 6 year old boy if there was deviant sex scene on the monitor ?

You want some more? Well here, enjoy;

Actually, I have very little to say other than your assumptions and hardheadedness are among the highest I've witnessed at SFO. Please show where anyone said this, as we were all in agreeance that freakin NINTENDO GAMES should stay PG-13 at worst.

Done reading through the topic again? Good. It should be clear that this topic pertains to outside the games and on the internet, and has since gone from SF to general furry art. You argue and judge with no evidence to back yourself up other than "It's bestiality" and "it's wrong" which I fought back with using an explanation that you promptly ignored. No one said it had to be your cup of tea, what I DID say is you're being a closed minded twat who utterly refuses to accept how human sexuality works. Yes, I already admitted that the ties to beast MAY BE the appeal to some, but saying the same holds true for all is ignorant ignorant ignorant and poor form. I'm sick of having to tell you to reread what I said about fetishes and how inanimate objects can stimulate human sexuality, as do other details. The ears and tail on a catgirl, for example.

So yes, I still think I've "won." Even if you didn't change your mind, you've said next to nothing that can stand to the defense I've been putting up. I think I've "won" because the only thing you've walked away from this with is gratitous butthurt and frustration. I don't even care about winning or losing, I do care about SHUTTING YOU UP, which I seem to have effectively done.

[Robert Monroe]

I'm just gonna drop in here and clarify some facts.

Fetishes and deviances are not mutually exclusive. A fetish is a psychological stimulation of arousal, a deviance is a cultural label on what is and is not acceptable. A fetish is always a fetish, but depending on your local community/culture, may or may not be a deviance. Bestiality is a fetish, and in most societies also considered a deviance, but it being a deviance is not an absolute. There are communities who accept and even embrace bestiality, and ergo to them its not a deviance. So yeah, same goes for child pornography.

On a similar boat, furry pornography is not all 100% bestiality, as bestiality by definition involves non-human animals.

[ballisticwaffles]

im going to go out on a limb here and Quote some scripture

" Id Really Rather You Didnt indulge in Conduct that offends Yourself, or your wliling consenting partner of legal Age and Mental MAturity. as for anyone who would object... Go **** yourself..."

The Gospal of the flying Spaghetti Monster Page 78 Chapter, The Holy Noodle

As much as we can say "well in some societies, its okay to hump a duck" i dont really think that makes it okay regardless. Its still a deviant and disgusting act, no matter the culture.

. There are communities who accept and even embrace bestiality, and ergo to them its not a deviance. So yeah, same goes for child pornography.

Just a quick question. What community allows the humping of Animals? and what community allows the touching of little children?

[Xortberg]

As much as we can say "well in some societies, its okay to hump a duck" i dont really think that makes it okay regardless. Its still a deviant and disgusting act, no matter the culture.

It's all a matter of perspective, bro. What you view as disgusting and sick, someone else may view as perfectly normal, and vice-versa. Saying what you are, and stating your opinions as an absolute fact just makes you look like an arrogant asshole.

Just a quick question. What community allows the humping of Animals? and what community allows the touching of little children?

A quick Google search might provide some answers, if you truly wanted to know.

[ballisticwaffles]

It's all a matter of perspective, bro. What you view as disgusting and sick, someone else may view as perfectly normal, and vice-versa. Saying what you are, and stating your opinions as an absolute fact just makes you look like an arrogant asshole.

If my position on dooing it with animals makes me look like that? good.

[Xortberg]

If my position on dooing it with animals makes me look like that? good.

Why? Why does nobody at all actually ever read my fucking posts? I never said "Hurr, not liking bestiality makes you stoopid!" I said that stating your opinion as a fact makes you look arrogant and narrow minded. Do I like bestiality? No, I don't even like furry. But that doesn't make it inherently sick or unethical or taboo or anything of the sort; that sort of shit is all decided by the individual in question, so when you claim your views as a fact you just look fucking stupid.

[Milkyway64]

And opinions ARE valid. I'd like to ask why we are on bestiality anyway, the topic of matter is furry. Beast is widely seen as wrong for some good reasons, furry not so much.

[Samantha Weltzin]

Why? Why does nobody at all actually ever read my fucking posts?

No, I'm not ass-patting. This is a serious answer: It's because what you've been saying is hard to argue with. It's a heck of a lot easier to pick and choose key phrases out of context, or put words in people's mouths, than to read the whole argument, understand it, and create a valid counterpoint.

It IS possible to contest what you've said, Xort, which is the whole point of this forum, but first, the debater needs to actually address what you said, not what he initially thinks you've said. It's just that a lot of people are awful at listening (yes, you can listen on the Internet), so they see something as inflammatory and try to poke holes in arguments they fabricated and tried to pin on you.

To Lord Asriel, and to a lesser extent ballisticwaffles, go back to this topic http://forums.starfox-online.net/index.php?topic=7481.0 and look up "Red Herring" and "Straw Man" again. You're both using those two logical fallacies right now.

Also, I want to make a bumper sticker: "Furry: It's only SEMI-bestiality!"

[ballisticwaffles]

to be fair, my response was a joke. I was intentially begin a smart ass. i would liek to apologize. Xort, i did read your post, and i did understand it.

[Xortberg]

No, I'm not ass-patting. This is a serious answer: It's because what you've been saying is hard to argue with.

Ego boost GO!

to be fair, my response was a joke. I was intentially begin a smart ass. i would liek to apologize. Xort, i did read your post, and i did understand it.

Well, thanks, and sorry for freaking out. That just has to be my biggest annoyance in just about anything I do.

[Samantha Weltzin]

to be fair, my response was a joke. I was intentially begin a smart ass. i would liek to apologize. Xort, i did read your post, and i did understand it.

Not to sound like Master Splinter or anything, but it is best not to poke an enraged animal with a stick. Your timing was awful to throw in a joke, and your joke really can't be read as one either, as I for one saw no humor in it. It sounded like you were arguing seriously, as that is a position many have taken in the past.

Remember: "It is not enough to write so as to be understood. You must write so that you cannot be misunderstood."

[ballisticwaffles]

Ego boost GO!

Well, thanks, and sorry for freaking out. That just has to be my biggest annoyance in just about anything I do.

i understand dood, sorry once more.

Not to sound like Master Splinter or anything, but it is best not to poke an enraged animal with a stick. Your timing was awful to throw in a joke, and your joke really can't be read as one either, as I for one saw no humor in it. It sounded like you were arguing seriously, as that is a position many have taken in the past.

Remember: "It is not enough to write so as to be understood. You must write so that you cannot be misunderstood."

Oh well.