/sp/ - Football

>>22339
Are you high?

>>22339
>Look up manufactured consensus. Thats literally what drives this site.
Hitted the nail in the head. Good thing anyone with a three finger forehead can atleast participate with some success. Can you finally guess what I meant?

>>22355
God took unicorns away as punishment for eating the funny fruit.

>>22356
Did you read the above post? Not above mine, above yours?
https://youtube.com/shorts/5xU7JSN8cVc?si=QXZ0qtzDESWqE4YU

>>22358
Neigh. In the heart of God they roam in reverence. So enter God's heart once more in purity.

>>22355
But anon, the great hope is to go join your waifu in Equestria

>>22362
Equestria is in the new creation of all things. Without pain or death.

>>22360
5 seconds after an unequivocabme lapse
Clearly not a bot, mods wouldnt use such things

Hasbro did not advertise to furries, they advertised to girls to sell cute things doing cute stuff.
Lauren Faust did not advertise to furries, she wanted a series that had meaning and depth.
Adults found what was lacking in clown world, it wasn't furries. It's the longing people desire for a plethora in a living breathing story.
People love the characters.

>>22366
This.

>>22366
Lauren also said he regretted it at some point lol.

>>22368
She*

>>22368
Being kicked out with many people desperately wanting more and the whole vision turned to dust sucks.
Hasbro did her dirty. So to did some fanatics.
Her gift to help dashed by Hasbro as they went their way.
What else could be expected.

>>22368
Does it matter? She's still a loonie feminist. Her endorsement of bronies is to be expected, after all, emasculating men is at least one of the prime goals of feminism.

>>22366
This.
I love it.

>>22372
>Her endorsement of bronies is to be expected, after all, emasculating men is at least one of the prime goals of feminism
You are a fully manipulative piece of work.
She endorsed the audience, the fans, and after all, the customers. You attempt to smear bronies, and horsefuckers is kaput.

>>22372
>after all, emasculating men is at least one of the prime goals of feminism.
Feels batman
Who can say she didn't do a good job? From the looks of it I mean.

>>22371
>>22372
She wanted a series for girls that had some backbone and meat.
It happened that people on average enjoy something with higher qualities.
Does her political and social beliefs detract from the story? Luckily no.
Because a girl show that had depth and would be useful in someway is the purpose.
It wasn't a furry show about furries doing furry things bragging about being furry.
The show was itself. Furries happen to also be a subset of people who do/did happen to come across the show.
>>22375
A symptom of clown world manifesting.
The show itself on its own seemed to show an alternative to clown world.
That upholding godly values do matter. Personally, communally, nationally and further beyond.

>>22377
Hunh it got late fast going down memory lane.
Good morning, good evening and good night!

>>22377
Whatever helps you sleep at night I guess.

>>22374
If fax and logic is the same as "smearing" to you. Maybe you should work at the ADL. You fit the profile quite nicely.

Whatever happened to the (you)Tube spammer? Did the furfag bit your tongue?

>>22381
Hi there
https://youtu.be/EhFMt3a6Kec?feature=shared

>>22382
Da fuck.

Obedient like a puppy, how cute. Goodnight ladies.

>>22145
>Tell me about how your refusal to accept being a furry is different from their refusal to accept biology
This argument is extremely silly. Biological sex is something that exists and can be proven. A person is either male or female, and it can easily be proven which one a given individual is. “Furries” and “bronies” don’t exist objectively, they are concepts that were created in the human imagination and have no existence beyond whatever definition humans give those terms. One is only a “furry” or a “brony” if they self-identify as such.

>>22226
>This completely sublimates objective reality
Again, we are dealing with abstract concepts, not objective reality. I can’t tell if you’re a troll or just an absolute retard.

>>22201
>Furfaggotry existed before MLP
This does not prove a connection between the two.

>>22255
> Only when you refute my points scholastically.
You’re essentially arguing that one arbitrarily defined fandom is equal to another arbitrarily defined fandom because of some arbitrary definition you’ve settled on as fact. There is no way to refute your points scholastically because we are dealing with purely subjective concepts and you won’t accept any definition for these concepts other than the one you’ve arbitrarily settled on. You are an extremely silly person.

>Furry = Person interested in anthropomorphic animals OR a genre that includes anthropomorphic animals
Again, this is a purely arbitrary definition that you have settled on. “Furry” is an abstract, amorphous term. You present no arguments as to why this definition should be accepted over any others.

>>22303
This, ffs.

>>22222
CHECK

>>22387
I can't stress this point enough. To say that Mareschizos are furry "by definition" is absurd because the definition is not set in stone. OP did not present any authoritative source for this definition; the most he came up with was a screenshot from the first results on "Google".
Because there is no actual formal definition to the Internet-slang term that is the "furry fandom", the only real qualifying factor is self-identification. A significant portion of mareschizos do not self-identify as furries: this should be enough evidence alone that they are not furries.

>>22392
>cant comprehend timestamps
You guys are batting 1000. You were more compelling when pretending that Lotus stealing a gets has any meaning. Remember the waifu thief days?

>>22393
furscience.com

>>22395
............................................................................................................................................yeeeeeeeeah. Everything about this looks legit, all right.

>>22395
No bias here, lol.

>>22395
>>22396

Actually, I take that back. There's actually some useful info here.

https://furscience.com/whats-a-furry/

>The term furry describes a diverse community of fans, artists, writers, gamers, and role players.
>Most furries create for themselves an anthropomorphized animal character (fursona) with whom they identify and can function as an avatar within the community.
>Furry fandom is an inclusive term that describes the community of furries that span online, local, and international settings.
>Some furries wear elaborate costumes (called fursuits) or paraphernalia such as animal ears or tails, or represent themselves as anthropomorphic animals in online communities such as Second Life.
>Most furries represent themselves and interact with the fandom using fursonas that represent idealized versions of themselves—usually more outgoing, sociable, extraverted and confident than themselves.
Emphasis mine. This description actually illustrates the differences between bronies and furries pretty clearly.

The furry "fandom" is not really a fandom in the traditional sense, ie a group of fans focused on a particular media property or fictional universe. Being a furry is more like a second identity: the person creates an alternate animal persona that represents an idealized version of themselves. The "fandom" is the broader community of people doing the same thing, and the act of engaging with each other while assuming these character roles. It's basically an elaborate role-play involving animal personas.

The MLP fandom has nothing the fuck to do with any of that. MLP is a conventional fandom, ie a group of fans that focus on the MLP media franchise (specifically the G4 franchise), and the fictional universe of that media. The MLP fandom has more in common with other conventional fandoms (Star Wars, LOTR, Harry Potter, etc) than it does with the furry "fandom."

The furry fandom is inwardly focused: "I have this animal identity, and this is who I am, and I like to interact with other people who have similar identities."

The MLP fandom is outwardly focused: "I like this cartoon series, its characters, and the fictional setting of its universe."

There is definitely some overlap: there are bronies who like to role-play and whatnot, some have their own self-insert OCs, and some seem to take it pretty seriously, ie "I identify as a pony." There are also furries who enjoy MLP and have pony-fursonas the same way that there are furries who like old Disney movies and draw their fursonas from those.

However, overlap does not equal dependency. The overwhelming majority of bronies, at least based on my (at this point extensive) experience, do not have pony personas or consider themselves to be ponies irl. Some do, but it's hardly a requirement for joining the fandom. Meanwhile, the furry fandom is centered around the personas that the individual participants create for themselves. These can be drawn from any number of different media properties/universes, or they can be products of the creator's imagination. Some furries like MLP, but it's not a requirement.

Thus, my original Venn diagram >>22099 was correct. There are furries, there are bronies, and there are furries who are also bronies. Separate concepts, separate categories.

Does anybody have that "Anons vs Bronies vs Furries" triangular chart meme that distinguishes three separate but coexisting factions of the MLP fandom? It was posted to this site years ago.

Even furries don't agree on what the definition of a furry is, but by the most conventional puridt understanding, pony fans are still not furry. Pony fans are furry-adjacent, with some overlap.

>>22401
Yeah, "pony is furry-adjacent" I think I could accept, but not "pony is a subset of furry" as OP seems to be arguing.

Incidentally I feel like there's a political-quadrant meme in there somewhere.

>>22398
>Most furries create for themselves an anthropomorphized animal character (fursona) with whom they identify and can function as an avatar within the community.
Most, with a notable exception amongst many of the individual factions, including (but not limited to) My Little Pony.
Literally, you're effectively trying to argue that Star wars ISN'T science fiction, because Star Wars fans behave differently than Star Trek fans.
If you cant see the fallacy in that, theres really no hope for you. Having a fursona (whether pony or not) is its self a subset of the "fandom" (which you accurately depict as not a fandom in the traditional sense, but more of an umbrella classification), just as people who exclusivrly center around MLP are a subset of the greater umbrella.
Dont cry to me, blame the internet for deciding these are the terms.
>but muh feels! People don't decide things like that
Uh, yeah, they really do. When the aggregate decides something is called 'something', that becomes objective. A penguin is still a bird, even if they dont behave like most birds.

>>22403
>Most, with a notable exception amongst many of the individual factions, including (but not limited to) My Little Pony.
Give me another major fandom example besides ponies.
>Literally, you're effectively trying to argue that Star wars ISN'T science fiction, because Star Wars fans behave differently than Star Trek fans.
Science Fiction is a genre, not a fandom.
Also, if you look at the world-building for Star Wars, and the literary archetypes, Star Wars is much closer to a fantasy franchise than it is science fiction (supernatural magic/faith system, balance between good and evil, sword fights, all the planets breath the same air for some reason). It merely uses science fiction aesthetics on a story that could effectively be told in medieval times. It speaks very little of the scientific meta-concepts and technologies presented in the field and instead simply borrows futuristic spaceman aesthetics to depict a fantastic world with little basis in science or even speculative science.
A lot of Star Wars fans actually say this.
>greater umbrella
Furry is no more of a "greater umbrella" than Egyptian animism is. There isn't even a dictionary definition of "furry", but a lot of the traits attributes to furries, even those described in the site you linked, do not apply to most pony fans.
>When the aggregate decides something is called 'something', that becomes objective.
Who is this "aggregate" you speak of? Is it the furry fandom hell-bent on assimilating pony fans? Or is it uninformed normies who have barely any background knowledge of what it means to have built this fandom for the past decade? Was there a poll involved?
Also, that's bullshit. Just be because 60% of the Western world validates troons as "real women" doesn't make them women.
>Penguin is still a bird
Bird is a scientific term, not a loosely-defined internet-slang term.
What you're saying is that a penguin is a reptile; and even though the most of conventional biology prefers to refer to birds as "avian reptiles", that doesn't mean that birds are not a separate and distinct class of animals than reptiles are.

By now y'all have prolly wondered:
Whats the point of all this insistance?
Ill quote furscience:
>Despite a history of bullying and significant social stigma, our research shows that furries benefit from fandom participation and interaction with like-minded others in a recreational environment, which is associated with greater self-esteem and greater life satisfaction. Despite negative stereotypes that pathologize or seek to “explain” furries in clinical terms, furries do not significantly differ from a control group (general population) with regard to their self-esteem, psychological well-being, or relationship satisfaction and, in fact, furries were more likely than the control group to have a better-developed, more coherent and stable identity.
This wont mean anything to those of you who were /mlp/ prior to /mlpol/, but for those who were JUST /pol/,....
Theres a wealth of more or less like-minded people you have allowed yourself to remain ignorant of because of stigma based on the undeserved reputation created by a few bad actors. Theres no question that there are notorious furries, as I referenced previously; pedos, faggots, degenerates, etc. I wont ever say that there arent furries who are observably degenerate. I assert that degeneracy is a result of probability when analyzing a large population; there is inevitable deviation (read: deviants) from what is conventional.
I dont expect most to be willing to admit or explore it; I'm a particular case and I split no hairs about that, in that my fursona is also a tulpa (with all the associate considerations, spanning from mind-virus to habitual proclivity). You do you, just try to be honest and objective about it.

>>22404
Yes, and by way of a team of actual researchers, years of study and analysis, and even government funding, Furry is now a specific (though also generalized, just as bird is when factoring for the multitude of varieties of) term.

>>22405
Pony fans do not benefit from being conflated with furries.
Furries poach our content creators.
Furries show up to our conventions and shit up the place with mountains of non-pony furshit.
Ponies flood our booru sites with anthroshit and furry versions of pony OCs (or, more often, furry OCs with a handful of pony sites) with barely any relation to ponies.
Furries demand furry content in pony spaces, eventually disenfranchising and replacing ponies in those spaces.
Furries try to oust Anons from sites, forums and conventions that we ourselves created, and then seethe and dilate when we make our own purist ones.
Furries switch their pony PfPs to furshit as soon as ponies stop being popular.
Furries relentlessly conflate us with themselves and try to annex us into their stupid fandom.
Furries tell us what we are and how we should behave, without taking the time to understand the nuances and differences that distinguish us.
Furries want us to be furries instead of Anons/bronies/mareschizos, just so that they can have more faggots and content in their own fandom, not for the benefit of pony content.
Furries are the biggest menace to the pony fandom and the greatest perpetrators of active decline and erasure of what we've built (as opposed to passive apathy and natural decline in popularity), and proactively try to cause collapse of the pony fandom on Twitter/boorus/boards so that the fandom will die, thinking after it's dead that we'll have no choice but to join them.

We are not furries. We don't want to be furries. We had no hard feelings for furries UNTIL furries started insisting that we are the same as them.

>>22406
According to a handful of furries.
Also, as Anon pointed out >>22398 there are many factors that distinguish pony fans from furries.

And that doesn't even count the biggest one: the general absence of therianthrope figures (beast-headed men), as the pony fandom is almost entirely centered around ponies with sapient minds and otherwise equine bodies.

>>22406
>by way of a team of actual researchers, years of study and analysis, and even government funding
The same people say that boys who pick up dolls once in their childhood should be put on HRT and cut their penises off.

>>22409
Citation?
>>22407
Pedantic I'll admit, but while your points are clear and concise, there's a sense of entitlement to your prose that suggests ownership and mandate. No one owns content creators, and if they decide to branch in non-pony directions, should they not be entitled to do so?
Has it occurred to you that a decline in Pony content might be related to the the idea that MLP is a subset of furries, in that content creators want to reach a larger audience? Not to mention the greater fiduciary incentive to producing content for a fandom that has a reputation for being "oddly well financed"? You almost had me going with the appeals to emotion ngl, but while you are entitled to have hard feelings about how random hypothetical boogieman-furries shat in your cereal, the fact that you're mad about it is only a result of your own refusal to acknowledge that as I have outlined: ponies are under the furry umbrella.

>>22408
How can you have not seen the movie?

>>22411
We are not fans of Capper.

>>22410
I can see I'm wasting my time here. You have repeatedly failed to refute or even acknowledge over a dozen arguments in this thread that have showed key distinctions between the factions and challenged to your obtusely vague definitions. You keep repeating yourself and talking past us instead of addressing the arguments. I'm done here.