Belonging to a fandom or other special interest community is typically something that is done through self-identification, which is different than identities that are not chosen, but still part of a broader idea of identity. There are plenty of examples of these self-chosen identities: Trekkies, Potterheads, Bronies, Cumberbitches, etc. Simply watching Star Trek doesn’t make you a Trekkie though, it’s a label people apply to themselves when they feel invested in that thing and want to be part of a community of people who feel the same. That’s all. I also hate to tell you that there are themed sex parties at Star Trek conventions too, so does that make being a Trekkie a kink? Is doing the Vulkan salute and telling someone to “live long and prosper” in public forcing that kink on others?
“Furry” is just yet another accepting group that is easy to get into for people who feel like they don’t belong anywhere and others. It’s quite simple and the same as many other things.
The answer to your “argument” is by the definition of identity it definitely could be, but this doesn’t matter much does it? The reason I called you unreasonable is because you seem like you’ve very clearly made up your mind and as such there’s no point talking to you especially with your seemingly bad intentions.
Did they say “in the same way being trans is?” A person’s identity encompasses far more than just their gender and sexual orientation, things like hobbies or career or group affiliations are absolutely part of who a person is, so being a band member would fit. Not in the same way or for the same reason, but they didn’t say that it was.
Ah well I guess I assumed the bill was written to remove people wearing fur suits to class. In general yeah, you shouldn’t remove someone from class because they’re a furry.
A bill prohibiting fursuits in class, beyond how rare it would be for a student to have one in the first place, would be redundant anyway, because I’m pretty sure such things wouldn’t fit most schools dress code anyway
Imagine working for the state and being ordered to engage in a random citizen’s kink.
Yes, I know being a furry isn’t just a kink.
That’s called oppression. Also furry is an identity, believe it or not.
I’m not buying the “furry isn’t just a kink” thing at all, but please enlighten me. How does it qualify as an identity?
Belonging to a fandom or other special interest community is typically something that is done through self-identification, which is different than identities that are not chosen, but still part of a broader idea of identity. There are plenty of examples of these self-chosen identities: Trekkies, Potterheads, Bronies, Cumberbitches, etc. Simply watching Star Trek doesn’t make you a Trekkie though, it’s a label people apply to themselves when they feel invested in that thing and want to be part of a community of people who feel the same. That’s all. I also hate to tell you that there are themed sex parties at Star Trek conventions too, so does that make being a Trekkie a kink? Is doing the Vulkan salute and telling someone to “live long and prosper” in public forcing that kink on others?
“Furry” is just yet another accepting group that is easy to get into for people who feel like they don’t belong anywhere and others. It’s quite simple and the same as many other things.
Removed by mod
life is not this complicated dude, you’re unreasonable.
I didn’t stop reasoning. You did, as you have no answer to my ad absurdum argument lol.
The answer to your “argument” is by the definition of identity it definitely could be, but this doesn’t matter much does it? The reason I called you unreasonable is because you seem like you’ve very clearly made up your mind and as such there’s no point talking to you especially with your seemingly bad intentions.
Did they say “in the same way being trans is?” A person’s identity encompasses far more than just their gender and sexual orientation, things like hobbies or career or group affiliations are absolutely part of who a person is, so being a band member would fit. Not in the same way or for the same reason, but they didn’t say that it was.
Be a furry. But do you really think fur suits belong in a classroom?
There aren’t fursuits in class and the bill is worded so broadly that saying “meow” would violate it.
Ah well I guess I assumed the bill was written to remove people wearing fur suits to class. In general yeah, you shouldn’t remove someone from class because they’re a furry.
A bill prohibiting fursuits in class, beyond how rare it would be for a student to have one in the first place, would be redundant anyway, because I’m pretty sure such things wouldn’t fit most schools dress code anyway
Who cares though. It’s a fur suit. It’s basically identical to a mascot costume.
Yeah I totally wear my mascot costume in class.