crusader

No I'm not

You are

I'm not

You defended yiff. Which means you defend pedos too!!!

Wtf does yiff have anything to do with pedophilia? I'm against pedophilia, zoophilia, and necrophilia

"Am against zoophilia"
Bruh you defended yiff. Yiff is zoophilia

It's actually not the same

It is

Is pornography voyeurism? Because being a pornstar is certainly exhibitionism, but the person viewing it is not a voyeur. And about yiff being zoophilia, we do not sexualize animals. We sexualize FICTIONAL, ANTHROPOMORPHIC animals. FICTIONAL. There are certain fictional things that.. are problems, but consult Rule 34. There's nothing you can do about that one. And most of us don't even sexualize it.
But, right, you're not against furries in general, you're just insulting Retro specifically for defending yiff. Hey, sex sells! And, let's deconstruct your argument!
YOU: Yiff = Pedophilia
No, no. Not all yiff is pedophilia. There is probably loli-yiff out there, and that, screw that. Shoot that down, I'll help you.
YOU: Yiff = Zoophilia
Again, the animals we sexualize are computerized or intelligent beings with capabilities of speech, also they are fictional. To add to this, they are anthropomorphic.
YOU: Furries are heretics!
Explain what exactly they are heretics to?
YOU: They're cringe, horny, and toxic!
I'll have to agree with you on 'cringe' and 'horny', but the 'toxic' one only applies to a few. Furries can be cringy. So are you. And you get horny, stop pretending you don't. Unless you haven't hit puberty yet, in which case, what are you doing here discussing porn with us?
YOU: They can't handle criticism!
Think we're all snowflakes, huh? That's called being biased, not being correct.
YOU: They post furry porn!
Mhm, and?
YOU: They bully people for having different opinions!
BIGOTRY IS NOT AN OPINION.
YOU: They're SJWs!
This isn't the politics stream, stop bringing politics into this.
YOU: They're zoophiles!
No, we are not zoophiles. Gustlololol is. He sexualizes animals like young cats, making him a pedophile and zoophile at once. Oh, now I see where you're coming from. You make a lot more sense. You're still very, very wrong, but now I see the slight amount of sense.
YOU: They can't be crusaders!
You mean we can't find a worthy cause to fight for? That's what I'm doing right now, and what YOU are FAILING to do.
YOU: Murrsuit sex is objectophilia!
Explain how attraction and sex with another person simply wearing a complicated garment with conveniently placed holes is objectophilia.
YOU: That trusted source is biased!
And? It's the same thing with homophobes vs the LGBTQIA+ community, neither one being able to translate the Bible, because they're both intensely biased against one another and would not believe the other side.
Thread below!

YOU: If bestiality is four-legged animals, kangaroos have two legs, CHECKMATE!
No, bestiality is not four-legged animals, it is animals without the intelligence or understanding to consent.
YOU: Furries are still animals.
Fictional animals that have intelligence, speech capabilities, and are bipedal in most cases. What is the problem here?
YOU: Lolis are still children, so..
You can't link these two things. Loli is a sexualization of underaged characters, a form of pedophilia that is, terrifyingly, legal, and yiff is a sexualization of fictional characters. Would you insult sexualization of aliens? Because, if so, I'm genuinely interested to hera why.
YOU: Fursonas are animals.
That's not even yiff. 'Fursona' is a play on the word 'Persona' to describe a furry persona. While fursonas are still sometimes used for pornography, you're trying to blanket sweep and take down the entire fandom, which was not your original goal, you see?

And, to catch myself at the loli point, yes, the children are fictional, but the characters in yiff are NOT CHILDREN.

It's not

No u

Furry porn is not the same as beastiality dumbass. So what, furries are anthropomorphic animals, they're not real f**king animals, they're half-human and half-animal due to their traits that us humans have and don't say "tHeY aRe StIlL aNiMaLs AnD tHaT iS bEaStIaLiTy" because furries are humanoid animals and not real animals, you can't deny that or change my mind about that because it's true.

"Anti-furries are just immature jerks who just like to bully furries for their hobbies, it's rude. If people want to bully me for being a furry and be mad at you for being friends with me, it's pathetic smh"

For starters we do not bully furries, we make them oay for their heresy. Second, we hate furries because many are cringe horny and toxic.

First of all, how are furries toxic?
Second of all, not all furries are horny (as asexual furries exist, plus there are furries that are crusaders just to let you know)

Furries cannot be crusaders.
Second, furries are toxic because they cannot handle criticism, post furry porn, bully people for having different opinions, are SJWs and many are zoophiles

Furries can be crusaders actually (take Beany for instance), and you're talking about the bad part of the community. Not all furries are bad

Idk who is beany. Also no they cannot. Also the bad side is quite large. Also you defend furry porn which is bestiality.

Dude yes they can, and furry porn is not beastiality

They cannot also furry porn is zoophilia

I'm a furry and a crusader just like Beany, cry about it. Also furry porn ain't exactly zoophilia. This just shows you can't take criticism or ignore people

Furries cannot be crusaders. Also furry porn is zoophilia

Here's what I found on a trusted source:

"Furry porn and bestiality are not the same things. Furry porn depicts actual (or drawn) images of sexually erotic or explicit acts between two people (at least one of whom is in a fursuit).

Bestiality means a sex act between a person and an animal. When such acts are photographed or filmed, the images are referred to as animal pornography or bestiality pornography.

All that said, there is some indication that about 5% of individuals in the furry fandom also have a sexual interest in animals, so … the depiction of a sexually explicit act between an animal and person in a fursuit would constitute both animal (generally illegal) and furry (not typically illegal) porn"

So that being said, furry porn is different from beastiality and yiff is not zoophilic

Furry porn sexualizes animal. Also that source is biased. And with fur suits is objectophilia.

It's from a trusted source how's that biased, also beastiality is real four-legged animals, yiff is nothing like that and is mainly harmless. If you don't like my argument then stop commenting, it's not gonna change anything. All it'll show is that you can't take criticism yourself

That source IS biased. Also Kangaroos walk on two kegs just sayin. Also furries are still animals. Also morality is more than not hurting others

Furries are still animals

SO F**KING WHAT
THEY'RE NOT REAL F**KING ANIMALS

But their still animals just as how lolis are still children.

Two different things

No

It is
Don't change the topic

Its not. Their the same

No, it's not

Yes

So are humans

Humans are not furries nor pigs

Technically furries are humans because they don't actually have fur and just make characters to represent themselves like most artists do

Am talking about the fursonas silly.

It's still not beastiality though

It is

How did this go from Pedo to Furries??

how do i post here?

I wish I knew.