this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2025
465 points (82.8% liked)
Microblog Memes
8743 readers
2235 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
https://www.addictionhelp.com/porn/statistics/
Other people view porn too. Do you now find everyone disgusting? Also, what's the source of you claim that over 70% of furries view furry porn? And how does it matter? They're individuals, and can make choices on their own.
The only way it's only 69% of men is if 31% of them have no Internet access, lol.
I remember a decade or so ago reading about an attempt to do a study on porn consumption for men, but they literally were unable to cobble together a control group because they all watch porn.
No. I don't find porn in general disgusting. I find furry porn disgusting because it borders on bestiality. You obviously know that's what I meant. Don't be obtuse.
https://furscience.com/research-findings/sex-relationships-pornography/5-4-frequency-of-porn-use/
They are individuals and can make choices on their own. However, I have already expressed why I think it matters. I personally believe the furry community is harmful toward the LGBT movement. Regardless, it matters simply because it's the truth and there is a major misconception that being a furry isn't a kink because it isn't inherently sexual, despite the fact that it is a kink for the majority of furries.
The only reason bestiality is really a problem in the real world is because of the intelligence/sapience difference between humans and animals.
That doesn't exist in the fantasy worlds of furries, where the human-animal hybrids all have human-level intelligence.
You're using the same logic that made Australian authorities ban women with A-cup breasts from being porn actresses: 'female children don't have large breasts either, therefore porn of a flat-chested woman 'borders on pedophilia'.
Ridiculous.
No. It's clearly not the same logic. I have no problem with anyone's body shape. If an actress were to act out the role of a child in an adult film, then I would have a problem. Since you want to take it there, then I'll point out that you are using the same logic as the people who claim certain art is not pedophilic because the child's body is canonically inhabited by a thousand year old soul. Is that context readily apparent? Is that context entirely relevant? I would argue it is not.
Yes.
Visible human emotions, walks on two legs, exhibits clear intelligence (talks, reasons, makes jokes, etc.)
They are called anthropomorphic for a reason. Nobody wants to fuck a real wolf.
This just opens more questions than it answers. Like, I know this is from a children's movie, but since we are discussing furry sexuality, suppose it was furry porn. How could a bunny realistically consent to a fox? Is that not a problematic power dynamic? It sounds like a stupid question, but I shouldn't even have to evaluate these sorts of questions. It shows that I don't need to understand the intricacies of pornographic material to be able to decide if it's gross or not. (And before you ask, I don't like power in balances in human porn either.)
I'd also like to emphasize that I am not drawing a moral comparison between furries and pedophiles. I don't care if furries want to do their thing behind closed doors. I personally find it gross, and think that the way the furry community suppresses this side of their fandom is unhealthy and potentially a public health risk, but I do not have a moral qualm with furries in principle. I'm not advocating for making furries illegal or anything. I simply think they need to collectively admit that the sexual side of their fandom exists and is prevalent.
The same logic is used by transmedicalists to call non-binary people harmful to LGBT because they are "weird". The rest was perfectly explained by @damnedfurry@lemmy.world.
That's categorically incorrect. First of all, I never said the harm towards the LGBT community is caused by the fact that furries are weird. Being a furry is independent of sexual and gender identity. The implication that they are the same is the very thing that is harmful to the LGBT movement. The fact that furries are weird just amplifies the issue.