this post was submitted on 04 Oct 2024
953 points (95.9% liked)
memes
9948 readers
3216 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to [email protected]
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.
Sister communities
- [email protected] : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- [email protected] : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- [email protected] : Linux themed memes
- [email protected] : for those who love comic stories.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
No see again, where porn is acceptable is at someone's house, not in public. The people on the train do not need to see you watching porn whether you're cranking it or not, and whether it's furry porn or not. Again if I go to a furry porn website (or even if I scroll by a thumbnail on a regular porn site) I'm not gonna be saying "oh shit what are furries doing here," I'm saying if I see furries at like, the park, or the train, or Best Buy or some shit, then it's a problem. I can just not go to furry cons or sites and block the masto instances and stuff, that's not a big deal. And maybe I should note I'm talking about them being like suited up in public, not just out in regular clothes. I think that should be obvious based on what I've said (and because how would I know without the suit) but it may be worth noting.
It really feels like some people replying stopped reading before "in a McDonalds." At least that's better than the people trying to justify doing their kinks in public, the fact that a bunch of people in full costume can't respect consent as much as the BDSM community can isn't really comforting.
Interesting to note about the possible overlap or lack thereof, and possible correlation but not causation, thanks for your insight on that!
nobody is arguing for this? Public obscenity laws exist for a reason.
are you comparing fur suits to literal porn? If so, then i may argue we ban all public display of sports attire because i find it distinctly related to sex.
If you see a furry in a mcdonalds, they're probably buying food because their hungry lmao. It's not like it's some weird BDSM psyop.
that's what im here for, np
I am relating fursuits to BDSM leather, gimp suits, pup play gear, latex, etc, yes. Sports attire clearly doesn't fit this category, save maybe the cheerleaders of course I suppose. I was talking about fursuits in public from the get go, in the quote you quoted me in fact. You brought up porn, that's why I responded about porn in public. Seems maybe you're one of those people who don't bother reading what they're responding to?
How eat with suit on? Why not just not wear the suit in public? At least the gimp while being similarly inappropriate in public despite your protests can unzip the mouth, that just seems like added difficulty to me.
Fursuits are not revealing or sexy and the people in them are not putting them on only in cases they want to have sex. It's not connected like that.
that's like relating halloween costumes to BDSM gear. Or like i said, sports jerseys.
That was literally the point lmao.
yes. for an irrelevant reason
fursuits are not porn, public indecency is not porn, and fursuits are not public indecency.
take off the head.
they don't? Like most of the time? Whenever you see a furry in public chances are, there's a fur con, if not, they're probably not causing problems.
you have to be trolling
I've never seen a furry having sex in public or acting in any obscene way.