Category Archives: Media

Furball at Huntington Beach

Posted on by
Reply

Altercation leads to hype and biased and inaccurate reporting.

Once again furries in the news for the wrong reason. At a meet up in a “private area” of Huntington beach a group of furries were having fun until a person started filming them. The furries attend demanded the person filming to stop; the person refused and a fursuiter with a megaphone escalated things by blasting the person were recording the went further by hitting the person videoing the event over the head with the megaphone.

The altercation became The Whack Heard Around the World.

The media, both professional and amateur click bait hacks went out of their mind with taglines like “Furries beat up and hit neo-Nazi and pedophile with megaphone on the beach’, “

Voyeur mauled by FURRIES after he is caught filming their fetish group in Huntington Beach”.

Even Dogpatch press jumped in the fray hears a little snippet:

“Those are archive links to deny traffic for stories of conjecture and regurgitated, third-hand info. They do not care about accuracy because they have agendas. It’s implied that there was an “attack” on a random man for simply recording the group (but in fact, there were years of provocation by inside members causing a problem). Some of them wedge in malicious bias by mocking pronouns, using “fetish” innuendo, and for no sane reason, comparing furries to “street thugs” who do retail looting. There have even been beware in furry groups about right-wing news trying to get inside. To help debunk the fake news, Dogpatch Press can provide direct info with cooperation from people involved.”

Continue reading →

Washington Examiner Hypes RBCC Comment and Gets it Wrong

Posted on by
Reply

The Washington Examiner turned a molehill into a mountain based on a single word in a RNCC Tweet.  One can ask was necessary for the NRCC to throw out the furry word.  Still this much ado about nothing. I find the Washington Examiner more at fault by twisting the RNCC post. Second the Examiner  paints a distorted and inaccurate  overused media statement that  Furries area subculture that dress up in animal costumes and  for twisting  of the Fur Science 2011 data out of context.

“A number of studies have demonstrated that some of those interested in furry fandom view the subculture as a sexual fetish as well. According to a 2011 study by the Anthropomorphic Research Project, one-third of furries interviewed said that “sexual attraction to the content in the fandom is an important part of their furry participation.” The author of the story  gave a poor  attempt of a apology on Twitter.

Better would be the 2018 statement on sexuality

“This is in line with several other findings from past studies suggesting that, despite the perception by many of furry as a fetish, for most furries this is not the case, though furries may themselves be prone to erroneously believing this stereotype about other furries. It should also be noted that this is not to say that there are not furries for whom the fandom is a fetish – prior research suggests that this is likely the case for about 5-10% of the furry fandom. Nor is there anything wrong with furry being a fetish for these folks. Instead, we are simply pointing out that it would be inaccurate to categorize furries as a group as being fetish-based, as it would be describing the group as a whole based on a minority within the group.” 1.

If anything good, the mainstream press has ignored this story.

I still find fault with RNCC. There are very good reasons to oppose Beto O Rouke, why bring up furry and twist him wearing a mask as part of a band.

 

Now let say for the record, I became a Furry during the peak of my involvement with the Republican Party (i.e. before Trump). My Fursona is a more conservative than I am, and a Republican Black Bear.    I often joke around wanting to be the highest ranking elected Furry Republican and my favorite comic strip is Mallard Fillmore a comic about an anthropomorphic conservative Duck.  I see this as just silliness to bring up furry as something negative.

  1. Anthrocon 2018 study

CNN does fury

Posted on by
Reply

Let me preference what I going to post with a quote and a statement:

Some time ago, Commentator Dennis Prager said about TV news is the news is not reporting the facts but commentary with pictures. Second, I always thought about the modern news media is that the narrative is already written, the media is just looking for the actors.

With above in mind, this is Life with Lisa Ling “Furry Nation”, billed as inside a misunderstood culture. The story is a touching human-interest story that falls short of its main goal because of CNN’s bias reporting by injecting old stereotypes of furries are people who dress up in animal costumes and have mental health issues.  Not all have fursuits or struggle with mental health issues and only about 20% of furries own fursuits.  For many the fandom is not a crutch but a means of expressing creativity.

Continue reading →

Dogpatch Press Casting Vision

Posted on by
Reply

There  once was a joke  within Republican circles,  that defines  a hatemonger as a conservative who is arguing with a liberal and the conservative is winning.

Patch at  Dogpatch press made another vision casting proclamation:

“Over the last 2 years with the demise of Vine, many Furries have started to migrate over to YouTube. Many have amassed groups of followers, hold regular livestreams on Twitch, or have Patreons. And some have used this platform as a guise to get away with borderline toxic or outright hateful behavior.”

So what is this toxic or outright hateful behavior? He list Trump Supporters, JonTron, and 2 the Ranting Gryphon as examples. The problem is I cannot I find anything hateful about them. I disagree with Jon Tron and Trump, but that does not make them hateful.  Patches’ standard is anything I disagree with is hate speech.

It is not the Fury Youtubers of different  political persuasion are toxic  but  vision casting tyrants like  the members of Anthrocon board towards  2, Patch, Deo, and Cultrally F’d. They that feel the need to cast vision for the fandom and  drum out any who disagree with their vision. We do not need a leader in the fandom. We not your community to toy with. I do not need a community to be furry. The furry fandom is about the love and interest in anthropomorphic animals in art , literature, and fursuiting.

One can express ideas from Right or Left, sexual orientation, and religion in the fandom. We may disagree and create alternative (i.e LGBT or Christian fur groups).  What we must not do is to make one politics standard for the entire fandom. My view borrowed for my view of Christian liberty, is one can speak for themselves but cannot make their scruples the rule for the entire furry fandom. Politics is irrelevant in the Furry fandom. The fandom should be a place and time where a Christian conservative and  a Transgendered leftist, who disagree on 90% of anything, can come to  at a con and have civilized discussion what they have in common, the love of anthropomorphic characters. If  you do not like that  then the exit door is to the right. please leave quietly.