buzzfeed.com
My initial reaction to BuzzFeed’s ‘intimate look’ at fur culture was a fifteen-item bullet point list of my problems with the article, posted in a seething “rantpage” on a friend’s repost of the original piece. Once I regained my ability to speak in complete sentences, I posted the following comment on the article itself:
“Okay are there no other furs reading this article and getting upset at how misrepresented we are? I appreciate that the author went and found some folks to interview, A for effort, but to then (however unintentionally) use the wrong language ANYWAY and feed into stereotypes and misrepresentations ANYWAY is a bit obnoxious or at best irresponsible, no? “The CSI episode is wrong—here’s some photos from it though!” “Furries have been involved in sexual scandals—here’s a list of sexual scandals that have literally nothing to do with being a furry, but that just so happen to include people who identify as furries or who met the people involved through this mutual interest so that totally makes it relevant!”
The writing becomes more educated as the piece wears on which is fine for a first draft you write WHILE YOU’RE LEARNING, but did you read/edit this before posting? We don’t “need fuzzy animal suits to socialize,” it is not a “bizarre hobby,” and including your fursona in your sexual relationships isn’t about zoophilia OR a fetish, it’s about allowing your partner to connect with ALL of you, including your soul/spiritual core/WHATEVER you want to call it, which just so happens to be expressed in the form of an anthropomorphic character. Porn and sex are not the “dark side” to the furry fandom any more than they’re the “dark side” to human life. Sexuality is a part of existing for about 98% of humans; you can’t expect all furries to be asexual.”
I really do give BuzzFeed reporter Ryan Broderick props for finding and interviewing people in the fandom. Many people decide that they know everything and run around spouting garbage without so much as a single interview. Broderick goes out of his way to speak to MULTIPLE self-identifying furries about what furry culture means TO THEM. For this, I and I’m sure the other furries who read this are sincerely grateful; as the article notes, we are rarely treated like people by ANY media.
THAT being said, this article is problematic in that although it claims to be out to dispel myths about the fandom, it in fact reinforces many of them. The article negates the validity of furry identities even in the title: “Furries Say They Aren’t a Fetish, They’re a Community, and They’re Ready to be Taken Seriously.” Right up front the article presents the idea that the identity is not inherently sexual as a CLAIM rather than a fact. This flippant attitude seems to pervade the entire article, which also states that furries “believe” they were the target of the now-infamous chemical attack on the Hyatt the Midwest Furfest took place at (as if people routinely attack hotels for using brands of toilet paper they find disagreeable). From using quotation marks around the word furry as if it’s not a valid identity, to referring to fur suiting as “role playing” (for most of us our fursonas are a part of our personalities) or fursuits as “large furry animal suits”, the article misses the mark when trying to give non-furs an “intimate look” at what furries are (HINT: We do NOT “need fuzzy animal suits to socialize” as this article literally claims).
Unfortunately, this is not even the only way this pro-furry piece affirms the very misconceptions it tries to challenge. Here are a few things I’d like to clear up after reading this article:
Item one—the furry fandom is much older than this article states. The fandom gained popularity and mainstream visibility in the eighties, largely through the scifi genre doing the same, but furries have probably literally been around as long as humans have been around. Scifi did not birth us, and neither did Disney or other animal cartoons; the fact is, people—in every culture, of every race, etc etc—have always felt strong connections to the other creatures on the planet, and have been expressing that connection for just as long.
Item two— sexuality is not evil, and furry sexuality is not the ‘dark side’ of our culture any more than YOUR sexuality is the ‘dark side’ of YOUR personality. Furry porn is NOT “graphic fan art that borders on zoophilia”; it’s porn. It is harmless, in fact far more harmless than much of the human porn many people devour, because it is a CARTOON: there are zero complications involved. Many furries don’t even appreciate erotic furry art (the folks interviewed in this article seem to fall into that category), but some (not a minority) do; on the other hand, many people who DO appreciate furry porn ARE NOT FURRIES. This identity is fetishized by NON FURS the same way other identities—especially, for example, transgender people—are fetishized by people who do not belong to the community. It is not fair to demonize furries based on what non-furries think of them, but it is also not fair to demonize furries who DO appreciate furry porn. This is not an “alarming” trend OR a “taboo sexual experience” if you stop and think about what you’re seeing. People can’t get past the animalistic presentation of our fursonas long enough to get to the POINT: furry porn is eroticizing our TRUE SELVES. Fursonas embody certain traits and characteristics we admire in ourselves and others; to see those traits represented in erotic art, which focuses on those traits instead of on a very narrow, often unattainable standard of beauty, is very freeing and affirming. Please note that these traits, personified in CARTOON CHARACTERS, have ABSOLUTELY. NOTHING. TO. DO. WITH. ZOOPHILIA.
Item three—we aren’t inherently sexual deviants in other ways either!! The fandom has suffered no more and no fewer “sexual scandals” in real life than any other fandom; they are just more widely discussed because people love trash talking furry sexuality. The examples the article lists could be true—I don’t know these people—but none of these situations happened BECAUSE the people involved were furries. I can GUARANTEE you that most cases of statutory rapes, child porn, etc, are committed by NON FURS. After all, there are simply more of you.
Item four—yes, you do know a furry. I have no idea where the “five thousand furries in America” figure actually came from, and I don’t care; it’s underestimated, possibly very much so. We DO joke about ‘making the internets run’ and we DO keep our identities secret. You’ll notice that we don’t just hide our involvement from our ‘real life’ friends; we hide our ‘real life’ identity FROM PEOPLE IN THE FANDOM. As the article states, there is a huge stigma around furry culture, and in many cases it is even DANGEROUS to be ‘outed.’ I personally don’t care who knows anymore, but most of us do not have that kind of privilege.
As I said before, I appreciate the attempt at opening up furry culture to non-furs BY A NON FUR. That’s actually a big deal, as it’s rarely seen, and even MORE rarely is it done well (one of the best examples I’ve seen is actually ALSO by a BuzzFeed staff member, but it’s much less in-depth). The author obviously put effort and research into this piece, and I do not believe there was any malice involved in the misrepresentations or microaggressions inherent in the article. It was brave to tackle this project from an outsider’s standpoint; to do so risked the lashback of furries who feel misrepresented as well as the furry haters that troll the internet. I, and I’m sure other furries, are thankful for the allyship; I simply hope it’s a bit more sensitive in the future.