(no subject)
Wow, is it just me, or are news sources really not liking furries lately?
Esther forwarded us an article about a guy that got in trouble for having sex with his dogs and how the guy can't own dogs anymore. Okay, he broke the law and they reported it, that makes sense, but they also had to point out "This guy was a furry, even though this isn't typical behavior of furries." It just sounds retarded because anyone with half a brain is going to know that writing that will make people link furries with bestiality. Although I'm sure that's probably part of their intention anyways.
Just a few days ago I saw an article about some 30-something year old dude that got in trouble for propositioning some 14 year old kid, or something like that. Once again, they had to mention that this guy was a furry when there was really no need, which leads to people believing furries are also pedophiles. Great.
I just think it's stupid to mention things like that unless they're related to the story. "Some Catholic priest was found molesting little boys in his church" makes sense, but "Some guy was found in a local park, playing with little boys behind the bushes. Oh, and by the way, he's Catholic. You know what that means" is retarded.
I don't even know why it bothers me at all though because I honestly don't like furries much. I just think it's stupid to give out information, linking a person to a certain group, when it isn't needed. "A local man was found guilty today after setting fire to a local bakery. He likes long walks on the beach, enjoys watching Star Trek wearing women's underpants, and has a certain taste for asparagus covered in peanut butter and nacho cheese."
Esther forwarded us an article about a guy that got in trouble for having sex with his dogs and how the guy can't own dogs anymore. Okay, he broke the law and they reported it, that makes sense, but they also had to point out "This guy was a furry, even though this isn't typical behavior of furries." It just sounds retarded because anyone with half a brain is going to know that writing that will make people link furries with bestiality. Although I'm sure that's probably part of their intention anyways.
Just a few days ago I saw an article about some 30-something year old dude that got in trouble for propositioning some 14 year old kid, or something like that. Once again, they had to mention that this guy was a furry when there was really no need, which leads to people believing furries are also pedophiles. Great.
I just think it's stupid to mention things like that unless they're related to the story. "Some Catholic priest was found molesting little boys in his church" makes sense, but "Some guy was found in a local park, playing with little boys behind the bushes. Oh, and by the way, he's Catholic. You know what that means" is retarded.
I don't even know why it bothers me at all though because I honestly don't like furries much. I just think it's stupid to give out information, linking a person to a certain group, when it isn't needed. "A local man was found guilty today after setting fire to a local bakery. He likes long walks on the beach, enjoys watching Star Trek wearing women's underpants, and has a certain taste for asparagus covered in peanut butter and nacho cheese."