There’s a lot of weird hippie cults, including Charles Manson’s. If your hippieism leans towards the aesthetic then it’s perfectly compatible with fascism. Not to mention the weird Californian ideology that isn’t straight fascism but sure is authoritarian in its anti-authoritarianism.

Fascism is by definition syncretic. It eats whatever it finds and makes more of itself, with rigid power structures and might makes right logic. Every large enough movement can have a fascist version of itself.

actually have their fascist versions but hippies? Forget it. Incompatible in principle.

♪ Now it is 1984 ♪

♪ Knock-knock at your front door ♪

♪It’s the suede denim secret police ♪

♪ They have come for your uncool niece! ♪

You dont have to look far. Literally just this thread

The lolocaust was specifically about furries that liked to spam furry porn and be obnoxious. They deserved what they got. https://en.wikifur.com/wiki/Something_Awful

so just to recap, you gained a newfound appreciation for animal fetishists, and you… think that’s a sign of maturity and growth?

okay then. I’ll just leave you to it then, champ, you have fun with that <3

one word answer

Nah that’s not how the world works buddy. Only children think in binaries.

okay, just one question: do furries/does furry porn sexualize animals, yes or no? No mental gymnastics allowed, one word answer.

You asked two questions and tell me to give you one answer. Nice try senator.

Also a majority of things require answers more complex than a simple “yes” or “no”, because the world isn’t the simple land that it seems to be in your head. However, luckily for you, these questions do have relatively simple yes-or-no answers.

To your first question: No, furries don’t by default sexualize animals. It’s weird that you even come to the conclusion that they do.

To your second question: Also no. You can argue that furry art is usually depictions of animals, and that furry porn sexualizes those depictions, but even that’s pretty shaky because anthropromorphized beings that have a vague resemblance to animals are hard to argue as being similar enough to the real thing that it’s “sexualizing (a depiction of) [animal]”. I wouldn’t call you out on saying that furry drawings are depictions of animals, even though I think that’s flawed logic, but it’s not even remotely similar to “sexualizing animals” (e.g. zoophilia)

also this

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=loF8Q15b2-I

Unluckily for you, my friend, I took a screenshot when you posted that since I had a feeling you would edit your mistake out. You may be playing chess in 4 dimensions, but I’m playing chess in 7 dimensions. Get pranked lol

do furries/does furry porn sexualize animals, yes or no?

pretty sure animals aren’t asexual