Jakkal (jakkal) wrote,
Jakkal
jakkal

  • Mood:

Enter the drama

You know, this whole week I tried, so very hard, to be tolerant of furries while another 'therians vs furries' thread pops up on TO. Naturally people still take it the wrong way because they refuse to read what I write and would rather assume the worst. I guess trainwrecks are more exciting if you can toss blood all over them.

In any case, I was just checking out the wiki entries on that furry wiki thing about me, my comic, and therianthropy in general.



•Here's what they said in the 'discussion' part for me:

Talk:Jakkal
From WikiFur, the furry encyclopedia.
Furry vs were

I don't see the distinction, but one is made by the subject of this article. -- Siege 08:41, 14 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Well, note that that is her distinction alone, and go on. Move it from the opening sentence (both here and on Black Tapestries); there are better ways to introduce an artist and webcomic than to say it is anthropomorphic, but she (or in the case of the comic, the creator) is rabidly anti-fur. Almafeta 12:55, 14 Nov 2005 (UTC)


I replied to that with my own entry:
"-Actually there is a BIG difference between Furries and "weres", unfortunately "were" has started to become a mainstream word in the furry community for more bestial or native type furries. That is why we have started to use the term "Therian" to describe ourselves. We don't do this as a sense of elitism like many furries claim, but as a further differentiation. Furries and therians are exclusive communities.

In addition, I am not "rabidly antifur", I have a great many furry friends and I do hang out with a lot of furries on a daily basis. I do not like the general furry attitude, nor do I like having labels slapped on me - and then furthermore have furries vehemently attack me because I refuse to be labelled as such.

I have noticed that Furries attempting to define something they do not understand on this wiki. Just because one doesn't see the difference between Furries and Therians does not mean there isn't one, and also does not mean one should assume they are one in the same.

I see -no- reason to include whether or not I am a furry or a therian in the description. I am an artist of a comic that furry *might* enjoy reading. That is all one should be concerned with. - Jakkal "

I love how they call me "Rabidly antifur". How about you people grow some fucking self esteem. I'm rabidly ANTILABEL. I can't STAND being labelled. And I can't STAND having people tell me that I HAVE to be under a label. HOW IS THAT ANTIFURRY YOU IDIOTS?! Just because I DO NOT want to be labelled a furry DOES NOT MAKE ME ANTIFURRY! WHY oh WHY can't you people actually grow those nuts to the size you have people draw them on your stupid pictures?!

•Black Tapestries:
Talk:Black Tapestries
From WikiFur, the furry encyclopedia.

I still don't see how it's not furry. -- Siege 05:10, 17 Nov 2005 (UTC)


To which I replied with:
"It's something furries might enjoy. The comic isn't about furries. Furries are people who participate in the Furry Fandom or label themselves as such. There are no furries in the comic. There are anthropomorphic animals."

To which they replied with:
Considering that the very definition of a furry, in simplified terms, is "anthropomorphic animal"... I don't see how Kaetif aren't. -- Siege 01:44, 18 Nov 2005 (UTC)

So I replied again:
"I am not interested in simplified terms, I am also not interested in slang. I believe the creator of a comic has the right to label it as they see fit. Is it a horse comic because it has a horse? Is it a bar comic because it has a bar in it? Is it a human comic because it has humans in it? Is it a sword comic because it has a sword in it? It's a fantasy comic, that is all. No more, and no less. But what I consider "furry" and what others consider furry is obviously two different things.

And as such, I still say it's a comic that furries might enjoy. It is not a comic about furries. It is not a furry comic.

And again, I don't know WHY this has to be such a BIG deal. I don't know WHY it must be labeled at all."

HERE WE GO AGAIN FOLKS!!! Why can't they just leave me alone!? They wonder why so many "great artists" are always 'leaving the fandom" and why "so many great comics stop updating". Do you know I've had other comic writers and artists email me and thanking me for taking a stand against the furries that constantly TREAD ALL OVER ME about this stupid issue. WHY do they care so much? WHY is it so important that it must be labelled a furry comic?? WHY can't they just leave me alone about it.

The irony and the joke is that some furries get UBER pissed at me when I reject the label, (As if rejection of the label is some kind of sin, or extreme insult), but when you slap that pervert label on furries, they go apeshit.

If my comic has some anthros in it, and that makes it a furry comic ... and the furry community has some perverts in it...

I think you see where I'm going here...

I swear to god, I want to make it so that no Kaetif, no shifting, no anything like that is shown for quite some time. Maybe that'll make them shut up when they find out that anthros aren't center stage in my comic. I swear it's not worth the effort, but I'm tenacious. I'd rather stop making BT altogether than have slap me with their labels.

That's right furries, keep pissing off your precious comic creators and artists. See how long it takes them to snap and deny you all the stuff you love so much in your fucking fandom.

Okay, moving on.

•Here's what they said about Therianthropy:
The following paragraph was removed from the main article, under the reason of being "very bias[sic]":

In many ways, therians could be called were-lifestylers, except most therians are aggressivly against the idea of conciously assuming animal traits, a trait they feel is a hallmark of wannabes and lifestylers. Instead, they prefer to believe that the therian state is something people cannot assume.

Instead of keeping the entire pragraph out, could someone rewrite it, if possible, to just be a lot less biased and then reinsert it? Thanks, --Dmuth 19:21, 2 Nov 2005 (UTC)


And my reply:
That's not, in any way, an accurate representation of therians. It -should- be removed outright.

And that is all for now.

Let's see how long the retarded drama goes on. And let's see how much drama we can attract to this journal entry. I'm feeling particularly vicious tonight.
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 17 comments