Afraid To Ask Andy

some are, some aren't. it depends on a case by case basis. for example, starberry dream, as far as i can tell, she's good, but someone like kero the wolf isn't.

the cringe ones are the worst- (i personally like furrys though)

Itd clesrly obviosu that your digging in down the rabid hole, which is filled wirh a darl history of controversies and degeneracy. I suggest yous top asling this questions and stay away from it. Just keep yourself to the SFW side and youl be fine.

Oh boy you shoudnt ask. This fandom has a dark history.

ye

hmm depends on the way they act

thats fair

Don't listen to him; he thinks the image here is furry p**n. 8dyt51.jpg (click to show)

In reality, yes, the fandom DOES have a dark history, and because of that, most furries are viewed as zoophiles, disabled, etc. These people simply 1, have a narrow view of the world, 2, are dumbasses, or 3, both.

89.7％ of all furries watch NSFW. 10.3% of the furries who don’t watch NSFW, 1/5.6 (I’m going to simplify as 1/6.). For the pedos 1/9.4 (simplified: 1/9). I couldn’t find one for therians so I’ll leave it here.

When I devide 10.3 by 6 it will become 1.71%. by 9, 1.14%.

By adding up the numbers, it becomes 92.55%.

100-92.55= only 7.45% are “good furries”

a community with 92.55% being either porn addicts and zoos (as well as pedos) will definitely have a negative history (dark history) and will continue existing(?) with a dark history.

that statistically is not true but ok.

Alright then. How much are “good furries”? Also, show your work 🤓🤓🤓

https://medium.com/@justwhie/addressing-stereotypes-of-fetishism-a-review-of-furscience-conclusions-c634dc20a0ce this site shows it's 5% to 20% are sexual.

https://www.highlevelgames.ca/blog/5-common-misconceptions-people-have-about-furries the 3 area of this provides an argument about how not all furries are sexual, supporting the first link

https://www.womenshealthmag.com/sex-and-love/a30611961/what-is-a-furry/ this site shows it is 15% to 25%

It’s very hard to believe this. Especially when “FurScience” team doesn’t even exist

Atleast I back mine up with a source. Plus that is one of the 3 sites mentioned

“High level game blog”
This sites talking about video games .-.

Welp out of the 3 “Sources” you gave me, 2 looks insanely fake and made up so y’all can avoid math and logic-

Aight take that back the last one is also talking about this “FurScience” team or whatever abomination they like to refer as.

Well, I think I can say all of these are misleading statements. Here’s my points:
First site: “FurScience” <- I tried to search this up but it wouldn’t show any results (which I’ll consider as fake)
Second site: for f**k sake this is a game blog im pretty sure all of the “scientists” wouldn’t post there statements on a go***mn game blog. Like seriously what the actual f**k dawg
Last site: same issue as the first one

To sum this up: your 3 sites are misleading/fake.

Those results seem biased.

So does his. Atleast I back mine up with a source

A source that seems rather biased

Well I have 2 other sources that actually back it up.

rather biased indeed

I think I can say all of these are misleading statements. Here’s my points:
First site: “FurScience” <- I tried to search this up but it wouldn’t show any results (which I’ll consider as fake)
Second site: for f**k sake this is a game blog im pretty sure all of the “scientists” wouldn’t post there statements on a go***mn game blog. Like seriously what the actual f**k dawg
Last site: same issue as the first one

To sum this up: your 3 sites are misleading/fake.

ok, i am just gonna say, zoophiles are horrible.

ye

Pedos too

beeeeeeeeet