Please don't put words in my mouth, just because your feeings were hurt. It's not civilized.
I said that people who call themselves furries "really" like said art. Emphasis on the "really". This is still fanatical, just not lurid. These people tend to own large catalogs of animation, and to have clipart or other memorabilia, and tend toward being quite posessive about them. This fanaticism is "harmless", but still fanatical. This is still different from people who simply like cartoons, but not to an extreme such that it defines part of their life.
The deeper, seedier layers of the fandom are considerably different from this subset, since their fixations are clearly sexual in nature, and are quite deserving of the "pervert" slur, in my opinion.
But nice strawman all the same. It could use a little work though. The angle was all wrong.
I am much more surprised at your lack of apoplexy at the carefully planted subject-verb agreement faux pax I made above.;)
Clearly you are not a "grammar" nazi, just a word nazi.
(/joke)
In all seriousess, I don't bother proofreading when posting from this POS android phone, because my thumbs input text faster than the IME reports, and the keybord drivers for this unit are notoriously shitty. This results in misspelled words, incorrectly injected apostrophes in words like "its", and combined with slashdot's abysmal mobile page code, trying to reposition the cursor to make corrections would result in inordinate amounts of my time being spent for minimal gain.
That this causes you discomfort is simply amusing to me.
I suppose it would have helped, if my limited experience with this fandom had been anything other than rabbid in nature I suppose.
It is also compounded by an admittedly unfair guilt by association with my rather negative experiences with the more purile of the furry community in its heyday. (I can only take being hounded to draw hyperschlongs for so long, you understand.)
I have no quibbles over people who like to watch cartoons. I myself liked Invader Zim's early episodes due to the cruelly sarcastic portrayal of adult life it extolled, for instance. I don't go around with an invader zim avatar, or scream "I NEED TACOS!" Inappropriately though, nor do I own zim merchandise. In don't fixate on it. I just found the show funny enough to like, despite being (somewhat?) Intended for children.
The cited charity, however, has been created by a group of people who's like for the show exceeds mere enjoyment, and has entered philosphical grounds. This is well into "minority" territory.
(Angering english nazis, a personal past time of mine. Always enjoyable. It amuses me that the most important things they have to say is that a word was misspelled, and that this has made them crazy. Such fun times.)
No, the irony of that situation is not lost on me.
But again, you are welcome, and even encouraged to examine the clinical definition of "mental disorder" yourself.
Considering your line of argument has been to assert the illogical statement "you misspelled "fetish", therefor, wrong.", and my reply was "check for yourself to be sure I misused it", which you have clearly failed to do, and now followed up with a "nobody has chimed in yet to support you, thus wrong" fallacy instead, I seriously wonder about you.
"Bronies", as a group, a people with this fixation. They are distinctly different from people who simply "like" MLP.
One is inclusive of the other, but not vise versa. Associating with the show to a level sufficient enough to ascribe a group identity implies membership in said minority.
Eg, "Bronies" is a subset of the completely harmless "fans of my little pony", in much the same way that "trekkie" is a subset of "people who like watching startrek"
The subject was about "bronies."
People who merey like MLP are not explicitly bronies, and mere accessories to the discussion.
My experiences with "the fandom" are mostly negative.
That said, a furry is basically a person who *really* likes images and media dealing with anthropromorphic animal characters.
It can be harmless appreciation for that kind of depiction, but can also be quite lurid in its manifestation.
There are several subgenres within the fandom that enjoy things like, "hyperschlongs", "enormous breasts", "spooge shots", and yes, sadly, "Guro" imagery. (Save yourself from the nightmare fuel. Guro is japanese for "gruesome". It is pure disgust made real through explicit imagry. Please don't google it.) Sadly, this also does include a fringe set of zoophiliacs, though the fandom itself tries to disown them I hear.
My experiences have left me rather jaded with the furry community in general, but I can tolerate the less extreme forms of the community. I prefer to distance myself from them, however. I can only take "It needs a giant penis!" So many times before my tolerance levels reach zero, which happened many years ago.
In deference to the my little pony following, I have to be subjected to pornographic pinkie pie pics, so I will retisently withhold judgement.
Adhominem man, ladies and gentlemen, let's give him a big round of applause for living up to his name.
(Here's a hint. Your personal foibles about how horrible it is to see a misspelled word are not conserved by everyone, and as much as you would wish for it to be, misspelling a word, even consistently, is not a sign of a lack of intelligence. Conflating the two however, sadly is.)
The irony here is thick enough to apply to sliced bread, and make into a sandwich.
I said when people's lives revolve around the fixation (the spock ears, et al of your post), *THEN* there is a problem.
Since those people represent a vocal minority, (not all startrek fans are "trekies". Some just think its fun to watch.) The are not the subject of discussion.
"Anyone who's favored dive is so compulsive that it dominates their emotional lives, at the deficit of other interests and social interactions has a disorder."
In other words, when your devotion to an object of interest (sports, ponies, animated characters, Jesus, whatever) is so intensely overwelming that it overrides all other interests, and dominates your life, it is mentally unhealthy.
All I can say with certainty about the furry fandom, and its predelections for depictions of sexual gratification, and other things commonly associated with being "perverted", is that during that particular era, I had numerous requests to illustrate such scenes, which I tacitly declined to do, and when I did make an anthropromorphised character, frequently had lurid demands of giving it a giant dick hurled my way.
My response to these tactics was to produce Guro images involving furries demanding giant penises, getting said penises in ways they clearly did not find favorable.
No, it's clinical fixation disorder when they fill their house with plushies, obcessively decorate their correspondence, make public displays of their obcesson, and insist that these are normal, and not obcessive.
In short, you can like my little pony all you want. But when you go so far as to modify your life such that it now revolves around that show, and you feel compelled to convert others to your obcesson, then there is a problem.
There is a difference between intolerance, and refusal to be converted.
Hooray for ad hominem man, who heroically charges into the internet to make the false assertion that because somebody misspells a word, they don't know what it means, and used it incorrectly!
Through his tireless efforts, people everywhere are led to believe that his accomplice, the malignant Grammar Nazi, is actually a force for good in the world (and not the pedantic a-hole he really is!), through diverting attention away from the original topic, and into deadends of nonsequitors and outright logical tautologies, thus ensuring that the topics he finds disfavorable are not actually the ones discussed, but instead the red herrings and other logical fallacies he drops at every turn!
Tune in next week kids, when Adhominem and grammar nazi man join a political discussion about tax reform, and assert that one of the participants is a slobbering idiot for holding a seemingly rational position on a topic, because he misspelled gubernatorial!
It however, is a fettish concerning a subject usually shared almost exclusively by little girls in the ages 6 to 12 category.
Startek nerds are similarly fettishistic, as are starwars nerds. It classifies as a disorder when it causes negative disruptions in your daily life, as defined by the DSM.
People with fettishes aren't evil, just a little odd. That oddity isn't always a bad thing. It's just important that people who have fettishistic obcessions be aware that the objects of those fettishes aren't always shared by the majority of other people, and the intensity of their devotion is often off putting.
I understand completely. This gives me a brain destroying case of cognitative dissonance.
On one hand, we have people who are clearly suffering from a clinical fixation disorder, complete with fettishistic compulsiveness...
And yet that compulsiveness causes them to attempt to improve the conditions of other people's lives, in a truly philanthropic fashion, and are deadpan serious about it.
Its like seeing bowel parasites that confer immortality.
Or honest politicians, honestly campaigning for real public good.
The usual stint from groups like this is "our fettishism is perfectly normal even though it imposes upon our daily lives in cleary deleterious ways! You simply HAVE to accept our brand of living as normal, when by the numbers, it clearly isn't!". We see this from furries, who dress up in costumes and do...(redacted).. and (redacted), and and generally make their presence as annoying pervasive as possible, frequently overwhelming message boards and game communities under cearly unsolicited image spam and flamewars.
But in this case? Nope. Not the outcome.
So, with trepidation, I approve of this tactic. Just don't activate the orbital friendship cannon, and please avoid the use of "everypony" in sentences.
Not everyone shares the... uniqueness... of that particular obcession.
Where I disagree, is in giving the lesser one carte blanc as they transform legitimate journalism into a 3 ring circus, and incite controversy where there is none, and yes, incite violence and death, and get away with it.
They BOTH need to be watched. The press functions best when the protections intended for the press are extended to anyone doing journalism, and not just their circlejerk buddies and friends. By preventing a "thin press line" (play on "thin blue line found in police depts) by allowing every blogger and camera wielding citizen the power of the press, we service that goal far better than the AP and its insular "legitimate press" nonsense does.
This probe couldn't happen to a more deserving group.
How silly you must be to believe that because I ask for accountability from people who wield power over the public (both explicit and implicit), that I must have been brainwashed by the "chicken in every pot! Oh, and free gas and heathcare too! With unprecidented government transparency, and rainbows, and unicorns!" Bullshit.
Centrist: left of the conservatives, right of the liberals.
Reflect long and hard on the many meanings and implications of this statement, and how it relates to the power that the press wields.
(Don't forget about how words galvanized very recent and dramatic events, like the arab spring, and the power that freely exchanged words had there, and how people indeed did die from it.)
The glib assertion that the press is a poor defenceless puppy that at most can only make you irritable when it piddles on the carpet is very much in the wrong. It's called the 4th estate for a reason, and people galvanized by it, are called the 5th column for similar reasons.
It is because the press holds such power that they too need to be accountable in some fashion, for their actions.
Except when the press flagrantly violates those laws, and illegally accesses phone systems, installs malware, and deletes voicemail on dead people's phones, to get their scoops, like murdoch's newscorp scandal.
Or, when they scolicit libeleous commentary for high profile criminal investigations, and diminish the defendent's right to a fair trial.
Because the public has a right, somehow, to know things they aren't entitled to, and to ruin the lives of people involved in a high exposure court case with their opinions.
You don't really understand me here. I don't want to neuter the press. I want the press to act with integrity. As long as dirty laundry sells eyeballs, the press will NOT act with integrity unless there are real consequences for them not to.
Slashdot Mirror
Please don't put words in my mouth, just because your feeings were hurt. It's not civilized.
I said that people who call themselves furries "really" like said art. Emphasis on the "really". This is still fanatical, just not lurid. These people tend to own large catalogs of animation, and to have clipart or other memorabilia, and tend toward being quite posessive about them. This fanaticism is "harmless", but still fanatical. This is still different from people who simply like cartoons, but not to an extreme such that it defines part of their life.
The deeper, seedier layers of the fandom are considerably different from this subset, since their fixations are clearly sexual in nature, and are quite deserving of the "pervert" slur, in my opinion.
But nice strawman all the same. It could use a little work though. The angle was all wrong.
Note the very long thread above this one.
Note how I indeed assert this as part of the requirement. (It's currently +4, you can't miss it.)
I am much more surprised at your lack of apoplexy at the carefully planted subject-verb agreement faux pax I made above. ;)
Clearly you are not a "grammar" nazi, just a word nazi.
(/joke)
In all seriousess, I don't bother proofreading when posting from this POS android phone, because my thumbs input text faster than the IME reports, and the keybord drivers for this unit are notoriously shitty. This results in misspelled words, incorrectly injected apostrophes in words like "its", and combined with slashdot's abysmal mobile page code, trying to reposition the cursor to make corrections would result in inordinate amounts of my time being spent for minimal gain.
That this causes you discomfort is simply amusing to me.
I suppose it would have helped, if my limited experience with this fandom had been anything other than rabbid in nature I suppose.
It is also compounded by an admittedly unfair guilt by association with my rather negative experiences with the more purile of the furry community in its heyday. (I can only take being hounded to draw hyperschlongs for so long, you understand.)
I have no quibbles over people who like to watch cartoons. I myself liked Invader Zim's early episodes due to the cruelly sarcastic portrayal of adult life it extolled, for instance. I don't go around with an invader zim avatar, or scream "I NEED TACOS!" Inappropriately though, nor do I own zim merchandise. In don't fixate on it. I just found the show funny enough to like, despite being (somewhat?) Intended for children.
The cited charity, however, has been created by a group of people who's like for the show exceeds mere enjoyment, and has entered philosphical grounds. This is well into "minority" territory.
(Angering english nazis, a personal past time of mine. Always enjoyable. It amuses me that the most important things they have to say is that a word was misspelled, and that this has made them crazy. Such fun times.)
No, the irony of that situation is not lost on me.
But again, you are welcome, and even encouraged to examine the clinical definition of "mental disorder" yourself.
Considering your line of argument has been to assert the illogical statement "you misspelled "fetish", therefor, wrong.", and my reply was "check for yourself to be sure I misused it", which you have clearly failed to do, and now followed up with a "nobody has chimed in yet to support you, thus wrong" fallacy instead, I seriously wonder about you.
I did not think it needed clarification.
"Bronies", as a group, a people with this fixation. They are distinctly different from people who simply "like" MLP.
One is inclusive of the other, but not vise versa. Associating with the show to a level sufficient enough to ascribe a group identity implies membership in said minority.
Eg, "Bronies" is a subset of the completely harmless "fans of my little pony", in much the same way that "trekkie" is a subset of "people who like watching startrek"
The subject was about "bronies."
People who merey like MLP are not explicitly bronies, and mere accessories to the discussion.
My experiences with "the fandom" are mostly negative.
That said, a furry is basically a person who *really* likes images and media dealing with anthropromorphic animal characters.
It can be harmless appreciation for that kind of depiction, but can also be quite lurid in its manifestation.
There are several subgenres within the fandom that enjoy things like, "hyperschlongs", "enormous breasts", "spooge shots", and yes, sadly, "Guro" imagery. (Save yourself from the nightmare fuel. Guro is japanese for "gruesome". It is pure disgust made real through explicit imagry. Please don't google it.) Sadly, this also does include a fringe set of zoophiliacs, though the fandom itself tries to disown them I hear.
My experiences have left me rather jaded with the furry community in general, but I can tolerate the less extreme forms of the community. I prefer to distance myself from them, however. I can only take "It needs a giant penis!" So many times before my tolerance levels reach zero, which happened many years ago.
In deference to the my little pony following, I have to be subjected to pornographic pinkie pie pics, so I will retisently withhold judgement.
Adhominem man, ladies and gentlemen, let's give him a big round of applause for living up to his name.
(Here's a hint. Your personal foibles about how horrible it is to see a misspelled word are not conserved by everyone, and as much as you would wish for it to be, misspelling a word, even consistently, is not a sign of a lack of intelligence. Conflating the two however, sadly is.)
The one that is still the basic standard by which mental disorders are characterized.
It has had many revisions. The definition of when a subject becomes a disorder is pretty straight forward.
The issue at hand is the stigma associated with mental illness.
True to your character though, you have indeed derailed the conversation exactly as predicted wit a red herring. Congratulations.
The irony here is thick enough to apply to sliced bread, and make into a sandwich.
I said when people's lives revolve around the fixation (the spock ears, et al of your post), *THEN* there is a problem.
Since those people represent a vocal minority, (not all startrek fans are "trekies". Some just think its fun to watch.) The are not the subject of discussion.
More like this AC.
"Anyone who's favored dive is so compulsive that it dominates their emotional lives, at the deficit of other interests and social interactions has a disorder."
In other words, when your devotion to an object of interest (sports, ponies, animated characters, Jesus, whatever) is so intensely overwelming that it overrides all other interests, and dominates your life, it is mentally unhealthy.
This is defined by the DSM.
As an agnostic, why would I exclude religious dogmatism from the category? It fits all the criteria doesn't it?
If doing so causes him trouble in his personal life, or causes him emotional harm, yes.
All I can say with certainty about the furry fandom, and its predelections for depictions of sexual gratification, and other things commonly associated with being "perverted", is that during that particular era, I had numerous requests to illustrate such scenes, which I tacitly declined to do, and when I did make an anthropromorphised character, frequently had lurid demands of giving it a giant dick hurled my way.
My response to these tactics was to produce Guro images involving furries demanding giant penises, getting said penises in ways they clearly did not find favorable.
But it is a false assertion that I am an expert.
I have simply read the DSM. That *is* what it says about when something becomes a disorder.
You are welcome to look it up yourself.
No, it's clinical fixation disorder when they fill their house with plushies, obcessively decorate their correspondence, make public displays of their obcesson, and insist that these are normal, and not obcessive.
In short, you can like my little pony all you want. But when you go so far as to modify your life such that it now revolves around that show, and you feel compelled to convert others to your obcesson, then there is a problem.
There is a difference between intolerance, and refusal to be converted.
Hooray for ad hominem man, who heroically charges into the internet to make the false assertion that because somebody misspells a word, they don't know what it means, and used it incorrectly!
Through his tireless efforts, people everywhere are led to believe that his accomplice, the malignant Grammar Nazi, is actually a force for good in the world (and not the pedantic a-hole he really is!), through diverting attention away from the original topic, and into deadends of nonsequitors and outright logical tautologies, thus ensuring that the topics he finds disfavorable are not actually the ones discussed, but instead the red herrings and other logical fallacies he drops at every turn!
Tune in next week kids, when Adhominem and grammar nazi man join a political discussion about tax reform, and assert that one of the participants is a slobbering idiot for holding a seemingly rational position on a topic, because he misspelled gubernatorial!
Not all fettishisms are sexual.
Bronies suffer from fettishism. It isn't sexual.
It however, is a fettish concerning a subject usually shared almost exclusively by little girls in the ages 6 to 12 category.
Startek nerds are similarly fettishistic, as are starwars nerds. It classifies as a disorder when it causes negative disruptions in your daily life, as defined by the DSM.
People with fettishes aren't evil, just a little odd. That oddity isn't always a bad thing. It's just important that people who have fettishistic obcessions be aware that the objects of those fettishes aren't always shared by the majority of other people, and the intensity of their devotion is often off putting.
I understand completely. This gives me a brain destroying case of cognitative dissonance.
On one hand, we have people who are clearly suffering from a clinical fixation disorder, complete with fettishistic compulsiveness...
And yet that compulsiveness causes them to attempt to improve the conditions of other people's lives, in a truly philanthropic fashion, and are deadpan serious about it.
Its like seeing bowel parasites that confer immortality.
Or honest politicians, honestly campaigning for real public good.
The usual stint from groups like this is "our fettishism is perfectly normal even though it imposes upon our daily lives in cleary deleterious ways! You simply HAVE to accept our brand of living as normal, when by the numbers, it clearly isn't!". We see this from furries, who dress up in costumes and do...(redacted).. and (redacted), and and generally make their presence as annoying pervasive as possible, frequently overwhelming message boards and game communities under cearly unsolicited image spam and flamewars.
But in this case? Nope. Not the outcome.
So, with trepidation, I approve of this tactic. Just don't activate the orbital friendship cannon, and please avoid the use of "everypony" in sentences.
Not everyone shares the... uniqueness... of that particular obcession.
And I agree.
Where I disagree, is in giving the lesser one carte blanc as they transform legitimate journalism into a 3 ring circus, and incite controversy where there is none, and yes, incite violence and death, and get away with it.
They BOTH need to be watched. The press functions best when the protections intended for the press are extended to anyone doing journalism, and not just their circlejerk buddies and friends. By preventing a "thin press line" (play on "thin blue line found in police depts) by allowing every blogger and camera wielding citizen the power of the press, we service that goal far better than the AP and its insular "legitimate press" nonsense does.
This probe couldn't happen to a more deserving group.
No. I did not.
Nice strawman though.
How silly you must be to believe that because I ask for accountability from people who wield power over the public (both explicit and implicit), that I must have been brainwashed by the "chicken in every pot! Oh, and free gas and heathcare too! With unprecidented government transparency, and rainbows, and unicorns!" Bullshit.
Centrist: left of the conservatives, right of the liberals.
The solution is to dissolve *all* of the executive branch orgs created via the executive order process, then plug the executive order hole.
Then, retract all of the legislation that has enabled these overreaches of authority over the past 50 years.
But that won't happen. Tyrants *never* tie their own hands.
"The pen is mightier than the sword."
Reflect long and hard on the many meanings and implications of this statement, and how it relates to the power that the press wields.
(Don't forget about how words galvanized very recent and dramatic events, like the arab spring, and the power that freely exchanged words had there, and how people indeed did die from it.)
The glib assertion that the press is a poor defenceless puppy that at most can only make you irritable when it piddles on the carpet is very much in the wrong. It's called the 4th estate for a reason, and people galvanized by it, are called the 5th column for similar reasons.
It is because the press holds such power that they too need to be accountable in some fashion, for their actions.
Except when the press flagrantly violates those laws, and illegally accesses phone systems, installs malware, and deletes voicemail on dead people's phones, to get their scoops, like murdoch's newscorp scandal.
Or, when they scolicit libeleous commentary for high profile criminal investigations, and diminish the defendent's right to a fair trial.
Because the public has a right, somehow, to know things they aren't entitled to, and to ruin the lives of people involved in a high exposure court case with their opinions.
You don't really understand me here. I don't want to neuter the press. I want the press to act with integrity. As long as dirty laundry sells eyeballs, the press will NOT act with integrity unless there are real consequences for them not to.