Views: 10719
Submissions: 5
Favs: 27
~Dolphanatic
I'm Dolphanatic. l've been drawing animals since I was a kid and am happy to be part of a community that shares that interest. While I'm admittedly pretty slow to upload, I'm planning on changing that for my followers' sake. When I'm not drawing a certain dolphin superhero of my childhood imagination (which, I guess, counts as my fursona), I'm most likely geeking out over roller coasters or photographing the world around me. What can I say? I'm a bit of an oddball! Also, I worked at a movie theater not long after Zootopia came out and even have an official poster framed in my room, so there's a fun fact.
I've attended the following furry-related conventions:
Las Pegasus Unicon (yes, that disaster in 2013)
Arizona Fur Con 2017
Painted Desert Fur Con 2019
Painted Desert Fur Con 2020
Painted Desert Fur Con 2021/2022
╔═╦╗╔╦═╦═╦╗╔╗ Put this on
║═╣║║║╔╣╔╣╚╝║ your channel if
║╔╣╚╝║║║║╚╗╔╝ you are a furry or
╚╝╚══╩╝╚╝ ♥╚╝ support furries.
I've attended the following furry-related conventions:
Las Pegasus Unicon (yes, that disaster in 2013)
Arizona Fur Con 2017
Painted Desert Fur Con 2019
Painted Desert Fur Con 2020
Painted Desert Fur Con 2021/2022
----Furry Fandom-Related----
----Political Mumbo Jumbo----
----About Me----
╔═╦╗╔╦═╦═╦╗╔╗ Put this on
║═╣║║║╔╣╔╣╚╝║ your channel if
║╔╣╚╝║║║║╚╗╔╝ you are a furry or
╚╝╚══╩╝╚╝ ♥╚╝ support furries.
Stats
Comments Earned: 510
Comments Made: 948
Journals: 17
Comments Made: 948
Journals: 17
Featured Journal
The Stigmatization of Ferals
9 months ago
Has anyone noticed the increasing hostility toward feral artists over the past few years? Granted, there's always been the usual anti-furry outrage which encompasses ferals, but up until a few years ago, I had never seen hate directed toward ferals from other furries. From what I've seen, like most of the worst things on the Internet, it originated from social media, specifically Twitter. Obviously, people over there tend to look for the pettiest excuses to gin up drama in order to get attention, but up until now, that manufactured outrage has been safely quarantined away from the rest of society, allowing the rest of us furries outside of that toxic echo chamber of radicalization to live out our lives in relative peace. While the hateful tweets were frustrating to come across whenever I'd be searching for stuff over there, at least there was always the option to simply go to another website. However, I can't help but notice how it's now starting to spread and infect other online furry communities. At this point, you'd have to be living under a rock to not notice the growing trend of hostility toward the feral side of the furry fandom.
For example, just last week over on Reddit, r/RealFurryHours, a subreddit created specifically for furry-related discussion regarding topics considered too controversial for the more mainstream furry subreddits, recently appointed new moderators who immediately did away with any feral-related discussion and threatened to ban any users who disagree with their new announcement about it being "pro-zoophilia" in a stickied post. This happened despite me and most of the other users there protesting against the change. Just like on Twitter, there's a certain group of people who believe themselves to be above everyone else and therefore entitled to push for rules that better suit their own personal tastes.
We're even starting to see it here on FurAffinity. The most obvious example of this would be the infamous "cub ban" that kickstarted one of the worst witch hunts in furry history, a problem that's still ongoing as of right now, but let's not pretend ferals aren't going to be next on the chopping block. Remember, we're talking about a website run by the same people who openly belittle victims of gatekeeping if it means earning brownie points on Twitter. If they've already gone after cub artists and succeeded, it shouldn't surprise you to know that feral artists are starting to experience the same unfair treatment.
The double standard isn't lost on me either. Why must a completely non-suggestive image like this be forced to have a "mature" rating slapped on it by this site's administration when humanoid anthros get a free pass to be as suggestive as they want, showing obvious bulges and cameltoes with "general" rating? Drawing the basic outline of a sheath on a feral character is no more revealing than drawing a humanoid anthro wearing tight clothing that reveals the outline of the anatomy underneath. Most of the time, it's simply done for the sake of realism, meaning that unless there's some sort of extra detail or suggestive emphasis put on that aspect of an image, there's no reason for it to be given a higher rating. What makes it even more frustrating is that this hypocritical rule change against sheaths being allowed in SFW images was only enacted after e621 forced the same change onto its userbase without any justification. Seriously, what's the logic here? "Drawing anthros wearing skimpy outfits is perfectly acceptable, but adding the slightest hint of extra mass between a male quadruped's hind legs? Unacceptable! Think of the children, you pervert! Next thing you know, those kids will start drawing pictures of... Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron! Oh the horror!" Get real. These new rules are just being made up to give the people in charge more excuses to unfairly crack down on feral artists because they've become a popular target.
The only reason this double standard exists is because, as I mentioned earlier, there's a growing movement on social media being pushed by people who think our fandom needs to be sanitized of any politically incorrect elements in order to appeal more to outsiders. This is especially applicable for those who seek to rebrand our community as a leftist movement. It's a well-known fact that furries with more conservative political leanings tend to have fursonas with more conservative designs, as they generally prefer detailed realism over abstract escapism. That's also the reason behind why so many stereotypes involving "sparkledogs" with "socialist teeth" exist, as leftist furries, especially those who spend most of their time chasing the same trends on social media, tend to look homogeneous as a result, and unsurprisingly, their ideal vision of the furry fandom, despite claiming to support diversity, is just as mundane. Every fursona must look like theirs, act like theirs, and endorse the same ideology as they do. If you don't fit in, you're looked down upon with disgust and lumped in with a variety of undesirable outsiders (namely pedophiles, zoophiles, fascists, and any other monsters of the week). Again, these people are the ones spearheading this pro-censorship trend, pushing it onto every major furry website, hence why these unwarranted rule changes keep happening with increasing intensity.
Since then, things have only gotten even more strict, and there's no sign of it stopping any time soon. FurAffinity is going all gas and no brakes on ramping up the censorship, especially if it makes those of us with unpopular opinions (whether aesthetic or political) feel less welcome. I think it goes without saying that this is all by design. Updage 2.7, the most recent update to this site's rules, has already had the side effect of forcing feral and semi-anthro artists such as TaniDaReal and Ruki to self-censor over accusations of their characters looking "too childish" due to their less humanoid character designs having smaller bodies. If we're already at that point, who's to say it'll end there?
One of the most overused analogies is that of the frog in boiling water. In most cases, it's just used by people attempting to rationalize a slippery slope fallacy, but in this case, it's actually applicable. For the longest time, we've been told that FurAffinity is meant to be a safe haven for furries to post whatever pieces of artwork they make as long as they're given the proper rating, but that's quickly changing. Now, we're dealing with a website that's run by people who act as judge, jury, and executioner, having the final say in whether or not the art you make even qualifies under their ever-changing rules, and those rules are getting stricter and stricter. How much longer are people going to tolerate these new rule changes no one outside of Twitter asked for before more people speak up about the obvious censorship on display? Ferals are a cornerstone in the furry fandom and have been around since the very beginning, and you'll quickly find that not a lot of artists will be left if ferals were to disappear from this site, so let this be my message to the people running FurAffinity: I don't care what your personal tastes are as long as you tolerate mine, and my preference for feral characters should not disqualify me from being a member of this community. Whether you like it or not, ferals have always been a part of the furry fandom, and no amount of rule changes in service of double standards will change that. We were here first, and you better believe we'll still be here when this all blows over.
For example, just last week over on Reddit, r/RealFurryHours, a subreddit created specifically for furry-related discussion regarding topics considered too controversial for the more mainstream furry subreddits, recently appointed new moderators who immediately did away with any feral-related discussion and threatened to ban any users who disagree with their new announcement about it being "pro-zoophilia" in a stickied post. This happened despite me and most of the other users there protesting against the change. Just like on Twitter, there's a certain group of people who believe themselves to be above everyone else and therefore entitled to push for rules that better suit their own personal tastes.
We're even starting to see it here on FurAffinity. The most obvious example of this would be the infamous "cub ban" that kickstarted one of the worst witch hunts in furry history, a problem that's still ongoing as of right now, but let's not pretend ferals aren't going to be next on the chopping block. Remember, we're talking about a website run by the same people who openly belittle victims of gatekeeping if it means earning brownie points on Twitter. If they've already gone after cub artists and succeeded, it shouldn't surprise you to know that feral artists are starting to experience the same unfair treatment.
The double standard isn't lost on me either. Why must a completely non-suggestive image like this be forced to have a "mature" rating slapped on it by this site's administration when humanoid anthros get a free pass to be as suggestive as they want, showing obvious bulges and cameltoes with "general" rating? Drawing the basic outline of a sheath on a feral character is no more revealing than drawing a humanoid anthro wearing tight clothing that reveals the outline of the anatomy underneath. Most of the time, it's simply done for the sake of realism, meaning that unless there's some sort of extra detail or suggestive emphasis put on that aspect of an image, there's no reason for it to be given a higher rating. What makes it even more frustrating is that this hypocritical rule change against sheaths being allowed in SFW images was only enacted after e621 forced the same change onto its userbase without any justification. Seriously, what's the logic here? "Drawing anthros wearing skimpy outfits is perfectly acceptable, but adding the slightest hint of extra mass between a male quadruped's hind legs? Unacceptable! Think of the children, you pervert! Next thing you know, those kids will start drawing pictures of... Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron! Oh the horror!" Get real. These new rules are just being made up to give the people in charge more excuses to unfairly crack down on feral artists because they've become a popular target.
The only reason this double standard exists is because, as I mentioned earlier, there's a growing movement on social media being pushed by people who think our fandom needs to be sanitized of any politically incorrect elements in order to appeal more to outsiders. This is especially applicable for those who seek to rebrand our community as a leftist movement. It's a well-known fact that furries with more conservative political leanings tend to have fursonas with more conservative designs, as they generally prefer detailed realism over abstract escapism. That's also the reason behind why so many stereotypes involving "sparkledogs" with "socialist teeth" exist, as leftist furries, especially those who spend most of their time chasing the same trends on social media, tend to look homogeneous as a result, and unsurprisingly, their ideal vision of the furry fandom, despite claiming to support diversity, is just as mundane. Every fursona must look like theirs, act like theirs, and endorse the same ideology as they do. If you don't fit in, you're looked down upon with disgust and lumped in with a variety of undesirable outsiders (namely pedophiles, zoophiles, fascists, and any other monsters of the week). Again, these people are the ones spearheading this pro-censorship trend, pushing it onto every major furry website, hence why these unwarranted rule changes keep happening with increasing intensity.
Since then, things have only gotten even more strict, and there's no sign of it stopping any time soon. FurAffinity is going all gas and no brakes on ramping up the censorship, especially if it makes those of us with unpopular opinions (whether aesthetic or political) feel less welcome. I think it goes without saying that this is all by design. Updage 2.7, the most recent update to this site's rules, has already had the side effect of forcing feral and semi-anthro artists such as TaniDaReal and Ruki to self-censor over accusations of their characters looking "too childish" due to their less humanoid character designs having smaller bodies. If we're already at that point, who's to say it'll end there?
One of the most overused analogies is that of the frog in boiling water. In most cases, it's just used by people attempting to rationalize a slippery slope fallacy, but in this case, it's actually applicable. For the longest time, we've been told that FurAffinity is meant to be a safe haven for furries to post whatever pieces of artwork they make as long as they're given the proper rating, but that's quickly changing. Now, we're dealing with a website that's run by people who act as judge, jury, and executioner, having the final say in whether or not the art you make even qualifies under their ever-changing rules, and those rules are getting stricter and stricter. How much longer are people going to tolerate these new rule changes no one outside of Twitter asked for before more people speak up about the obvious censorship on display? Ferals are a cornerstone in the furry fandom and have been around since the very beginning, and you'll quickly find that not a lot of artists will be left if ferals were to disappear from this site, so let this be my message to the people running FurAffinity: I don't care what your personal tastes are as long as you tolerate mine, and my preference for feral characters should not disqualify me from being a member of this community. Whether you like it or not, ferals have always been a part of the furry fandom, and no amount of rule changes in service of double standards will change that. We were here first, and you better believe we'll still be here when this all blows over.
User Profile
Accepting Trades
No Accepting Commissions
No Character Species
Bottlenose Dolphin (Well, I'm a human in real life, but you know...)
Favorite Music
Anything goes, especially electronic and orchestrated music
Favorite TV Shows & Movies
Zootopia
Favorite Games
RollerCoaster Tycoon and Minecraft are a couple of my longtime favorites
Favorite Gaming Platforms
Wii
Favorite Animals
Dolphin
Favorite Site
YouTube, Reddit, and MLP Forums, to name a few (I'm active on those sites as well)
Favorite Quote
"Don't let people control what you hold dear in life. Fight for what you love."
Contact Information
In shor...
Thank you!
WhaleNerd