Tag Archives: furry

Historical revision fetish

 On several adult fantasy fiction sites, I’ve read a number of fiction works which feature "re-writes" to history as either a core part of the storyline or a side-benefit to the storyline. 

Essentially, be it through anthropogenic or unintentional means, the characters are affected in some way by a gradual series of revisions of their pasts, usually without noticing the effects and believing that they have always been their transformed selves.

A subset of this trend, the "suggestion", incorporates the main characters trading suggestions which project their desires into a revision of each other’s pasts, again without the affected character being knowledgeable about the prior state of their lives or bodies. 

Within transformation fiction and the related transformation fetish, the idea that one of many "pasts" can be grafted into the individual character as a fact of the individual’s existence is enthralling for, if I assume, many readers, while it may give others pause or a sense of dread which parallels the post-Korean War paranoia concerning mind control and brainwashing by government intelligence services.

One could call it, in the truest sense, a "historical revision fetish".

From a furry perspective: DADT

Today, I sent a PM on FA to WhiteDingo, who commissioned this famous piece – "I Leave at 5" (NSFW) – back in summer 2007, to thank him for having commissioned the piece from Fluke, given today’s events. 

I felt that Fluke’s piece really captured both the fear of impending separation and, if intended, the "illegal" nature of gay relationships for U.S. servicemembers. I can imagine the soldier dog who is forced to treat his mate as an "othertime", "undercover" lover rather than a legitimate, open spouse, and that he must savor these last few minutes of restless, tearful parting at his lover’s indiscreet apartment before he leaves in the wee hours for the post to deploy to wherever the brass may order him and his battalion. Other members of his battalion will be able to receive their well-wishes from their opposite-sex spouses and kids on post before walking the long walk to the Lockheed C-5 Galaxy on the tarmac. 

Of course, many in the battalion may not come back alive, or may come back with nothing more than the breath in their body left intact. Our soldier dog may lose a limb and get a Purple Heart, but then come back and find out that someone has outed him to the brass and he is on his way out of rank and into veteran-style poverty, with nary a support line for himself or his mate after he has been so unceremoniously dumped from service. 

Amazing, in a sad and horrifying way, how this policy stayed in force for so long.

My sincere hope is that the love shared between a servicemember and a spouse, no matter the sexual orientation of the relationship, will no longer be an obstruction to the servicemember’s career. 

Privatization of the family: a furry example

Among many libertarians and a few progressivists, the concept of marriage privatization – where the state does not involve itself in the definition of marriage – has gained increasing worth as the debate over LGBT rights continues to intensify in the United States. Of course, a main fear over the concept is the possibility that religious groups could run amok with their own definitions and performances of family relationships which would clash with other religious groups’ definitions and performances, particularly as those who advocate for marriage privatization have not as forcefully argued for a secularization of the institution (in which religious groups’ performances are not recognized by the state, which only recognizes privately-composed contracts).

More on furries, marriage privatization, and the Internet…

Freemasonry, religion and Furry fandom, race and culture

Reading Lewis Lofkin’s writings on American Deism, I thought over the night about how English (or "Regular") Freemasonry maintains a ban on religious or spiritual discussion – save for (upon initiation) whether an initiate believes in any Supreme Being – inside a lodge. I think that this ban on religious elaboration places a mask on possible religious expressions, intrigues and possible bigotry.

Maybe it is a good idea, and perhaps this is comparable to how the furry fandom has placed such a heavy and long-standing emphasis on disguising one’s own ethnocultural or ethnoracial identity under a fursona (be it manifested on a furry media archive via an avatar or in the average real-life furry meetup/convention via a fursuit). By hiding such distinctions under the furry equivalents of tribal initiation masks and nomens mysticums, the more divisive flareups around race and ethnicity are, theoretically, avoided or subsided.

A foray into FA flack

This, and the reactions. (NSFW)

I hypothesize that the kerfuffle over humbuged’s eliciting of payment for an SWF file arises out of a combination of the following factors (and the unacknowledgement of such factors):

  • The comparison with a normal still-art commission is flawed in the traditional sense since such commissions tend to be privately requested and transacted, with the requestor typically posting the commissioned piece to his/her account gallery.
  • To my knowledge, there are very few active FA users who own paid-access galleries of their own, as such individuals, such as Jeremy Bernal, tend to be very restrictive and litigious about their works being posted to publicly-accessible archives like FA and VCL (even imageboards such as fchan and furpiled maintain a DNP, or "do not post", list in order to steer clear of legal threats from such individuals).

Thus, humbuged may be going against the grain or trend of such archives by advertising previews of his already-created for-pay works through his FA account, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that his still-art works or still flash previews can’t stand alone as being "good enough for freeview". As noted in the comments, animation requires a bit more – or a bit different – expertise compared to the creation of still art, and thus entitles the creators of these works to the levying of additional financial barriers to access until easier, less personally-intensive means of animation can be delivered to the public.

I wonder, however, if FA has a policy regarding pay-based archive sites and the proper means of promotion through user accounts? It may clarify what would be in good taste of financial gain through such a business model, especially for something like user-created animation.

More on furry and copyleft

I think I may have previously asked 

 about how WikiFur relates to copylefted media, but I don’t think that the topic of how the furry fandom makes use of copyleft/copycenter licenses hasn’t been fully explored yet.

I mean, sure, you already have the following freely-licensed media:

And also, the vast majority of text on WikiFur is licensed under the GNU FDL (which is also used by Wikipedia).

However, I wonder about other forms of furry media expression, such as sound and video. While the former hasn’t historically possessed an overbearing influence within the furry fandom (visual content reigns supreme), video and 2D/3D animation (via YouTube and other Flash video hosting services) is fast becoming an apparent, accessible and useful means for furry media expression.

The problems which I see with this rise of Internet-based furry video and animation are the following:

  • User licensing for the content uploaded to YouTube (currently the majority repository for furry video), say, if the user wants to license it under cc-by-sa-3.0, isn’t as explicit or standardized as on Flickr.
  • The user who makes the video may use clippings or samples from non-free, proprietary-licensed media (furry or non-), such as images, video, 3D models or sound, thus putting them into legal jeopardy.
  • The Flash video formats (FLV and SWF) are proprietary and legally restricted (until only recently) to the Adobe Flash player, while the Ogg Theora/Vorbis and SVG formats, which are open and freely-licensed formats, are in a very tiny minority in comparison to the usage frequency of FLV/SWF, Windows Media, DivX and QuickTime. Theora doesn’t even make a blip on the furry radar (not even on WikiFur, hence why almost all videos on WikiFur are either embedded or linked from elsewhere), AFAIK.

Thus, for Internet video posting, sharing and editing, the furry fandom is already in a deep, three-layer heap of legal shite.

(PS: For the record, I currently follow the “GNU school” in that I don’t consider any license that restricts Derivative or Commercial usage to be a copyleft license, hence the no-show of cc-by-nc and cc-by-nd in the above list of licenses).

BTW,

, Has WikiFur considered the idea of a “FurryMedia Commons” akin to the WikiMedia Commons as a repository for freely-licensed furry media that anybody can use in their own videos? This, of course, should probably only happen when WikiFur moves off to its own servers, whenever that may occur.

Furry balkanization

Also known as: “The stuff you can find via WikiFur”

OK, long time since I’ve written something furry-related. But I wanted to ask about how the furry fandom and its associates (otherkin, ASFR, etc.) has tended to separate from the more mainstream websites and other services to create services of a similar purpose, but only catering to the furry fandom exclusively.

Of course, it started with the conventions, the text-based TELNET roleplaying kingdoms, and the IRC networks. Then you’ve had a myriad of furry specific art and story galleries (dating from the 90s), some of which have been created in the 2000s as reactions to what is often known as “fursecution” on more mainstream multimedia galleries, such as DeviantART, SheezyArt and y!Gallery. But it hasn’t stopped here.

Now, instead of just LiveJournal and MySpace, you have furry social networking sites. Instead of just Second Life and IMVU, you have furry graphical chat systems and virtual worlds. Also, furry news websites, furry image boards (in the style of 4chan and 2ch), furry auction sites, furry blog hosts, and other furry-specific manifestations of mainstream website types.

Now, IMO, furry communication does manage to attract a wider (and often, seemingly more “base”) audience and produce a potentially greater variety and amount of content when it is “forked” into its own communities. They also tend to attract and make contact with other interests that, previously, wouldn’t have had much to do with the furry fandom/genre/fetish/whatever except that they, also, have been informally classified as deviant, voyeuristic or simply strange and otherworldly.

It’s somewhat like trying to burrow into the earth to find gold, and then departing from your original party to seek out what other else may lie underneath, such as the mole men or something like that. Then the mole men hitch along in your auger vehicle to find other places and drill a hole that others can follow you through to the center of the Earth.

But what is to come of this furry forking that tends to occur mostly on the Internet? What if the ever-migratory furry fandom on the Internet ends up alot like, say, the Mormons who gradually inched further and further away from the solidly Protestant East Coast and Midwest of the United States to settle in that partly-desert area called Utah where they finally became the majority population (and became known for the Mormon Tabernacle choir’s Christmas singing on television)? Notably, along the way, the Latter-Day Saints left off a few communities that were led off the currently-dominant Brigham Young wing, some of which settled in other, more isolated areas of the Western United States; these particular, tiny church-centered communities, having secluded themselves in plain sight from the view of Protestant neighbors for years, have become infamous for the frequency of (“Bible-sanctioned”) polygamy that is found among the resident families, even though the Brigham Young wing of the CJCLDS had long ago abandoned the practice.

The furry fandom, long ago, crossed the threshold from general “art fandom” to “fetish fandom”, but has not yet finished that jump and probably will retain that dual nature for some time to come. But the furry fandom continues to accrue other fetishes, while maintaining a clear distinction between “mature” and “clean” (and sometimes “adult”).

So as it migrates further out “West” on the Internet, how will the furry fandom evolve? And where/when on the Internet will it become established as the de-facto subculture, with its own trends and mores and local sub-subcultures?

And how will the furry fandom’s Internet denizens, who are often stereotyped as thin-skinned and easily shaken in the face of criticism from non-furries (hence the creation of the separate, furry-optimized websites and networks), find settlement within it and with other furries? Will it happen once every fur’s interest and fetish is covered and addressed within a furry context? Will it happen once a distinct category of “furry personality/character”, or a personality that can successfully address any personal or social issue within an intra-furry context, is realized?

And why a “furry personality”, of all things? Stereotypically, when someone who is raised within a religious, political or ethnic group wants to give a personal view on a particular issue of a social, personal or environmental issue, the way that the person addresses that issue will be influenced in some form or fashion by his previous life experiences, a good deal of which took place within the social group and conditions in which he was raised. A Mormon will give his view of an issue in as far as what his life as a Mormon has dictated and impressed upon him, an Israeli will give his view from his experience as an Israeli, an African-American will give his view within his African-American experience, and so on.

Plus, any such social groups tend to congregate separately within their own geographical placements. This further generates the development of personal-social interactive features that are often only found within that group. Hence, the “personality” and the types of personality that are enjoyed and exhulted within that social group, while being either damned or not heard of in others.

So has the furry subculture gotten to that point where it has its own personalities, ideals and traditions that are distinct to it?

Apart from the “furry/anthropomorphic” part, I’d have to say No. From the beginning, the furry subculture has only been unique in its position as a metasubculture that draws from the strength of other subcultures and traditions: furry conventions were forked from the older comics/games/animation fandoms, furry online art galleries were forked from the general art galleries, furry roleplaying kingdoms were forked from the original MUDs, and so on. Furthermore, the furry fandom’s “mature” exhibitions tend to draw from other fetish subcultures, including BDSM, Bear, Hypnosis, etc. Even the cleaner depictions of furry multimedia have been based on older traditions, except that the “furry” part tends to be much more persistent and sticky for the individual than, say, the stereotypical Star Wars fan in the Imperial Stormtroopers uniform or the roaming children’s puppeteer troupes.

The balkanization of the furry fandom from the mainstream Internet has given visibility to this status as a persistent and multifaceted metasubculture that increasingly transcends boundaries of all sorts and purposes.

Probably the purpose of this balkanization of the furry fandom is to provide a “furry mirror” to the world, all that may dwell in it, and all the interests that they may possess and exhibit.

But is there more beyond the “furry Looking Glass”? Is there anything within the furry subculture that is only available within it and it alone?

Maybe we won’t find that out until the next decade comes.

Liberalization of domain naming

So today, ICANN unanimously approved a set of measures that are meant to liberalize the naming and ownership of domain names, such as .com and .org.

However, there have been quite a few previous initiatives which aimed for a liberalization of domain naming since the late 90’s. OpenNIC was one initiative, and it is cited on a WikiFur article because of the .fur domain name which never took off as a major alternative domain name due to the lack of recognition of OpenNIC domain names by major ISPs.

Does this mean that the alternative domain names pushed by OpenNIC and New.net can gain recognition if enough financial promotion comes their way?

On “moving beyond LGBT”

OK, someone posted an earlier post that I had made on future rights movements to the Aspies for Freedom forum, and the response was interesting. After a few holes in my post were identified, I was going to make a few addendi to the bottom of the post, but it got a bit too long.

So anyway, the reason why I mentioned the stereotyping of the Autism rights movement is possibly because of a portion of the relevant Wikipedia article that had once contained a(n opnionated) mention of the anti-psychiatry movement. Consequently, it may have since been edited from the article for either neutrality or lack of citations (particularly since, from the view of the public, anti-psychiatry is a very contentious issue to take on; I would understand if the autism rights movement organizations would readily dispute any ties with it). Sorry to the Aspies for Freedom forum if the post made any inaccurate insinuations concerning the aims of it or any other autism rights organizations.

Also, I would like to know if the Aspies for Freedom organization is more pro-acceptance or anti-cure. Not that either stance would invalidate the importance of the other or make the organization anti-psychiatry, of course.

Finally, in response to the questions from the AfF forum, I think that it would take another post to expound on the idea of fetish and furry rights. The links that I had provided for such topics may not even cover the basics: since “civil rights” as a political concept has historically involved two major (and evolving) components – prevention of historical abuses against, and inclusion into the political process of a group and similar groups – it is, indeed, very complex to encapsulate what could be considered as a “right” for those who identify with their fetishes, be they sexual, spiritual or physical.

Maybe civil rights, as it evolves, will expand out of the political arena into the social, sexual, religiospiritual and other concerns that involve disenfranchized or unrecognized minorities who would otherwise contribute (directly or no) to society.