I'm quoted on SomethingAwful.com!
Sep. 2nd, 2004 10:19 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
pyesetzThere's a thread
on SomethingAwful.com where they make fun of furries who have
offspring. Many of their posts quote from my Sozont story.
I'd like to reply to them, but I refuse to pay $9.95 for the right to
post at their website, so I'll just put the comments here.
> [A quoted paragraph from my![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-community.gif)
furryparents post]
WTF?
Seriously. WTF? [A quoted sentence from episode
#1]
Please try harder, aliensex. I understand that this story doesn't match your cardboard-cutout mental picture of Furries, but if you ever intend to get anywhere in your life, you need to try harder to understand how your fellow humans think--yes, even the Furry ones.
> [Same post quote] Fun for the whole family.
Well, no, Shii. Sozont is rated NC-17. We're talking about "furry parents" here, not "furry families". But your confusion is understandable, since it seems your mental age is still at the level of "dead baby" jokes and you cannot wrap your head around the idea of ever becoming a parent yourself.
> [The story has other objectionable elements as well: M/M, M/F...] If you look away from the fact that it's a furry story we're talking about here: When did old fasioned male/female sex become objectionable? Or am I just misinterpreting the acronyms here?
In this case, ymgve, you can't look away from the fact that it's furry. Many furs are gay and might object to a story about straight furs.
> The acronyms are advertisements more than they are warnings.
Correct, IMJack! While some would object to M/F, furry parents would be expected to like that sort of thing.
> According to this guy, lesbian sex is the only non-obectionable form of sex.
No, it's just the only kind of sex that doesn't appear in the story yet, although Marth admits to being an active lesbian in #22.
> [#5 quoted in entirety, no comment]
Yeah, that's a good episode for trolls! Too bad it's the last funny episode in the story (why does Sozont have to eat *Bambi*?). I had hoped to continue the humor further, but the story acquired a mind of its own and went in a different direction.
> [holodeck-style Furry World] Is this the missing link between trekkies and furries?
Gee, nerdfish, you think maybe so? Is the lightbulb in your head starting to glow just a little? BTW, the holodeck stuff doesn't show up until episode #7. It doesn't seem that any goon was able to read that far.
> what the fuck does he meain by intrusive politics?
How nice of you to ask! See #18, #20, and #23. Just some RL politics I felt like throwing in, which intrudes on the furry story.
Okay, now for the really bad stuff:
> furries wish they were born as animals with knotted dicks
All SA'ers wish they were throwaway characters on Beavis & Butthead.
> I understand that you're a monsterously depressed individual unable to interact without a social, mental, and often physical mask to hide behind; you need professional help, now
Yes indeeed, IRQ, it's clear that you understand what your problem really is. So when will you start counseling?
> "Hi kids...daddy has a special need to put on an animal suit and have random sex with strangers. Of course, this may sound strange to you/your friends/the known world but I do it to express my individuality/sexuality/weirdness. If any of your friends make fun of you, tell them that you don't need friends that make fun of your parents."
So, Sventek, what exactly is wrong with this scenario? And why do you mention it? It isn't *my* secret desire--is it yours?
> I mean they're actually, truly, undoubtedly doing harm to children.
Not as much as you, Exilechamp. SA is an "attractive nuisance", corrupting unsuspecting nerdy youths who accidentally come across it on the web.
> I wonder if there is a license to hunt furries.... I'm not trying to be funny, I really want these sick fucks OFF my planet
So, Golobulus, would it make you proud to grow up to be a murderer? Killing people is immoral, even if they're wearing fursuits.
> I think now is the time we implement the final solution to the furry problem.
All SA'ers are Nazis and should be placed in concentration camps.
> someone put this fur-hole in a fur-nace like a bunch of unwanted Jewish kittens at the SPCA.
You are going straight to hell, Nazi scum. And you already know that, don't you? It's interesting that all mass murderers begin by torturing kittens.
Okay, six days later and the goons are still at it, adding more posts to their thread. What a bunch of obsessos! Tobu was my tool and mentioned this journal entry there, so some goons stopped by to post comments here. It seems that the goons who are still interested in this topic are very shy; most of them posted anonymously and most of their comments were of no redeeming social value, so I deleted them and disabled anonymous comments for now. If you've got something to say here, put your name on it or hold it in until next week.
> Oh no, replying with immature generalisations? Pot, kettle, black, grease stain in a fursuit...
Perhaps NMR understands what I was trying to say in this post. I merely substituted "goon" for "furry" in the same generalizations that SA'ers were making. If that hurts, you're just as hypersensitive as the ones you're making fun of.
> [All SA'ers wish they were throwaway characters on Beavis & Butthead] Awesome!
If NMR is admitting here that that he really *would* like to be a throwaway B&B char, he is exempt from my "Nazi scum" generalization because he is willing to look at himself.
> that is on a whole new level of furry dumbfuckery
I guess I'll take that as a compliment. I have invented a whole new level of something? Go me!
> Animals dont get off on sex
Um, what planet are you from, Serious Spam? Do you have any idea how many times a day a male chicken has sex with female chickens? Do you think he feels like a robot while he's "doing it"?
> Now stop being so damn funny, I have to get some work done today!
Oh, all right. Sheesh! What a killjoy.
> [A quoted paragraph from my
furryparents post]
WTF?
Seriously. WTF? [A quoted sentence from episode
#1]Please try harder, aliensex. I understand that this story doesn't match your cardboard-cutout mental picture of Furries, but if you ever intend to get anywhere in your life, you need to try harder to understand how your fellow humans think--yes, even the Furry ones.
> [Same post quote] Fun for the whole family.
Well, no, Shii. Sozont is rated NC-17. We're talking about "furry parents" here, not "furry families". But your confusion is understandable, since it seems your mental age is still at the level of "dead baby" jokes and you cannot wrap your head around the idea of ever becoming a parent yourself.
> [The story has other objectionable elements as well: M/M, M/F...] If you look away from the fact that it's a furry story we're talking about here: When did old fasioned male/female sex become objectionable? Or am I just misinterpreting the acronyms here?
In this case, ymgve, you can't look away from the fact that it's furry. Many furs are gay and might object to a story about straight furs.
> The acronyms are advertisements more than they are warnings.
Correct, IMJack! While some would object to M/F, furry parents would be expected to like that sort of thing.
> According to this guy, lesbian sex is the only non-obectionable form of sex.
No, it's just the only kind of sex that doesn't appear in the story yet, although Marth admits to being an active lesbian in #22.
> [#5 quoted in entirety, no comment]
Yeah, that's a good episode for trolls! Too bad it's the last funny episode in the story (why does Sozont have to eat *Bambi*?). I had hoped to continue the humor further, but the story acquired a mind of its own and went in a different direction.
> [holodeck-style Furry World] Is this the missing link between trekkies and furries?
Gee, nerdfish, you think maybe so? Is the lightbulb in your head starting to glow just a little? BTW, the holodeck stuff doesn't show up until episode #7. It doesn't seem that any goon was able to read that far.
> what the fuck does he meain by intrusive politics?
How nice of you to ask! See #18, #20, and #23. Just some RL politics I felt like throwing in, which intrudes on the furry story.
Okay, now for the really bad stuff:
> furries wish they were born as animals with knotted dicks
All SA'ers wish they were throwaway characters on Beavis & Butthead.
> I understand that you're a monsterously depressed individual unable to interact without a social, mental, and often physical mask to hide behind; you need professional help, now
Yes indeeed, IRQ, it's clear that you understand what your problem really is. So when will you start counseling?
> "Hi kids...daddy has a special need to put on an animal suit and have random sex with strangers. Of course, this may sound strange to you/your friends/the known world but I do it to express my individuality/sexuality/weirdness. If any of your friends make fun of you, tell them that you don't need friends that make fun of your parents."
So, Sventek, what exactly is wrong with this scenario? And why do you mention it? It isn't *my* secret desire--is it yours?
> I mean they're actually, truly, undoubtedly doing harm to children.
Not as much as you, Exilechamp. SA is an "attractive nuisance", corrupting unsuspecting nerdy youths who accidentally come across it on the web.
> I wonder if there is a license to hunt furries.... I'm not trying to be funny, I really want these sick fucks OFF my planet
So, Golobulus, would it make you proud to grow up to be a murderer? Killing people is immoral, even if they're wearing fursuits.
> I think now is the time we implement the final solution to the furry problem.
All SA'ers are Nazis and should be placed in concentration camps.
> someone put this fur-hole in a fur-nace like a bunch of unwanted Jewish kittens at the SPCA.
You are going straight to hell, Nazi scum. And you already know that, don't you? It's interesting that all mass murderers begin by torturing kittens.
Okay, six days later and the goons are still at it, adding more posts to their thread. What a bunch of obsessos! Tobu was my tool and mentioned this journal entry there, so some goons stopped by to post comments here. It seems that the goons who are still interested in this topic are very shy; most of them posted anonymously and most of their comments were of no redeeming social value, so I deleted them and disabled anonymous comments for now. If you've got something to say here, put your name on it or hold it in until next week.
> Oh no, replying with immature generalisations? Pot, kettle, black, grease stain in a fursuit...
Perhaps NMR understands what I was trying to say in this post. I merely substituted "goon" for "furry" in the same generalizations that SA'ers were making. If that hurts, you're just as hypersensitive as the ones you're making fun of.
> [All SA'ers wish they were throwaway characters on Beavis & Butthead] Awesome!
If NMR is admitting here that that he really *would* like to be a throwaway B&B char, he is exempt from my "Nazi scum" generalization because he is willing to look at himself.
> that is on a whole new level of furry dumbfuckery
I guess I'll take that as a compliment. I have invented a whole new level of something? Go me!
> Animals dont get off on sex
Um, what planet are you from, Serious Spam? Do you have any idea how many times a day a male chicken has sex with female chickens? Do you think he feels like a robot while he's "doing it"?
> Now stop being so damn funny, I have to get some work done today!
Oh, all right. Sheesh! What a killjoy.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-09-11 11:32 pm (UTC)Doesn't hold true for the ones I've been to. Not remotely. Many of the other statements you made are also either attempts at "spin" or simply based in ignorance.
I don't think Shaun takes his furriness very seriously (e.g., he says the Rat Within is not really a rat at all, but just a metaphor for an objectionable aspect of his personality).
Objectionable? You're making things up again. I'd rather you not make things up, at least about me, and I'd rather you not use my real name.
no subject
Date: 2004-09-12 07:50 am (UTC)[convention... 2500 furs... zero pedophiles] Doesn't hold true for the ones I've been to.
What is your estimate? In this context, the appropriate definition for "pedophile" is "someone who would rape a child found wandering alone at a Furry convention". Children do wander alone at AnthroCon; have any been molested?
attempts at "spin"
All con-trip reports are politicized--the requirement that such reports must promote hygienic showering is merely the most obvious indicator of this.
Objectionable? You're making things up again.
My adjective stands. In the current context of "What Goons think of Furries", your rat is the personalification of disgustingness--just look at that icon! I also think many Christians would object to your rat's attitude towards religion.
I'd rather you not make things up, at least about me
Yes, I'm getting bored with using you as an example of how Zi's generalizations about Furries fail to match one specific Furry whom he knows, but I'm not aware that he knows any others.
I'd rather you not use my real name.
Your opinion on this matter is irrelevant if you wish to not be my friend. As I understand the current "personal trademark" law, you do not have the right to insist that people not talk about you, and only limited rights to insist that the word "Claviarm" not be used except when talking about you. This journal is not a broadcast medium (under the law, anyway) and so you have no right to insist on retractions for inaccurate statements made about you, although I'll consider such requests if presented in proper form with citations. The Claviarm=Shaun equation is public knowledge since you posted it to ALF.
no subject
Date: 2004-09-12 09:00 am (UTC)I was making known my preference. Your insistance that anything you have the legal right to do is just fine, regardless of the desires of those involved, suggests that you have no morals or common social decency. In standard terms, it means you're a jerk--even moreso since you seem so self-righteous about it. Why you'd want to be that, I don't know.
no subject
Date: 2004-09-12 09:34 pm (UTC)This seems to be your preferred explanation for why our viewpoints clash.
I was making known my preference.
Yes, after previously describing me using words like "spin", "ignorance" and "making things up" that are more properly applied to the Fascist Republican party. Surely you were not expecting a positive response to your polite request after such negative preparatory remarks?
you're a jerk
You're projecting.
no subject
Date: 2004-09-13 08:13 am (UTC)You make false statements. Based on what you've said on this page, you seem to think that's perfectly alright, even when it's intentional. The phrase "making things up" fully and properly applies. If you don't like it, perhaps you should stop doing it.
"Spin" and "ignorance" are better than "out-and-out lying," which is the only other possibility when you make a false statement. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt.
As for the last part, my previous explanation hasn't been met with anything but a grade-school response of "No, /you're/ a jerk," so I don't think I need to make a further argument there.
no subject
Date: 2004-09-12 09:17 am (UTC)I was content before to think of you just as a very strange person who I was mostly indifferent towards. But acting like this makes me feel quite negatively towards you.
no subject
Date: 2004-09-12 09:14 pm (UTC)