|
To understand the main issue here, let's look at something else.
You have anime/manga versus hentai. There's a particular style of art, and then there's porn done in that particular style. There's stuff for the wider public and popular appeal, and then there's the adult stuff, and that's fine. Hentai is what it says on the label, so you know what you're getting into. Where one crosses into the other can be fuzzy at times, but there is a separation and a difference. Manga can be erotic, but tentacle porn is clearly hentai.
Furry is kinda trying to be both and everything at the same time - because the kinky people are constantly crossing the line and making ALL that exists in furry be about super kinky porn and fetishes, then complaining that you can't have any fun because of the "anti-NSFW" people "encroaching" in their space. Well, who made it their space?
In this scheme of things, being "normal" is seen as the enemy and being "inclusive" means that other people have to take your shit, and you shouldn't have to make any compromises for their opinions and sensibilities. People are acting anti-normative and shameless. Meanwhile, shame is a normal social phenomenon that occurs because feeling shame is a mechanism by which groups of people maintain rules and norms that allow the society to function with less conflict. The society can tolerate deviations from the norm as long as the deviants acknowledge the norms through displaying shame - be it by separating the kinky fetish stuff from the everyday content in category and place.
It's not the kind of shame that says "I'm a terrible person", but the kind of shame that says you understand your preferences are not universally appreciated and you're not going to be a dick about it. Shameless all-inclusiveness on the other hand allows harmful things like actual dogfuckers to persist in a group of people who simply enjoy the aesthetics of feral characters, because there are no standards to apply. The "normies" observe this lack of standards as a lack of morals: they're not faulting you for having differing opinions, since that's debatable - they're faulting you for not even caring, and covering for those who actually are bad. Where the lines are actually drawn is secondary to the point. Complaining about hypocritical standards, while having no standards yourself, is an argument in bad faith because you wouldn't care about the outcome yourself - pointing to an inconsistency in standards is not an argument against having standards. Demanding that we turn a blind eye on issues by default is a tactic shared by people who want to fly under the radar, because they fear that if standards were applied, they would fall on the wrong side of them, which is exactly the kind of immorality that other people want to avoid. You want to cheat rules by saying there are no rules that apply. Mutual discussion could widen the window of acceptable behavior, or it might get narrower, so the cheater wants to bust out the window and its frame entirely rather than bother dealing with other people in debate.
Shame is a sanity check, so the rest of the society or community can say "Oh, this guy's weird but he's alright.", thereby reducing conflict. In other words, people who are shameless are effectively acting anti-social and selfish, and that's the root of the conflict that OP is observing.
Edited at 2024/12/11 17:08:17
|
