/fur/ - Furry★

>>37354 (OP)

I don't want to throw stones from a glass house, but it's kind of inevitable since you're in geek culture. Geek culture is very idealistic, so it's expected that there's going to be more people who care more about fiction and social media than about the real world. The main appeal behind it is that is that folks can control nearly everything in geek culture, whereas you don't get that flexibility IRL. Perhaps they have a ton of IRL issues to the point where they just give up.

You can try calling them out, but it probably won't work. Not only because there's more to their sitaution, but because their environment is not grounded or serious. It works in places like the military or stage acting, since participants are forced to work within their limitations in order to be recognized.

What you can do is probably give them new outdoor hobbies like firearms or parkour.

>>37371

I guess your right about the environment. I still feel though that many people have never been exposed to real character building experiences and resort to living in a comfortable bubble which is concerning.

I'd personally argue that fur is degenerate in general.

>>37354 (OP)

If someone is going to change they have be willing to change in the first place, or else you'll just be wasting your time. Same thing goes for people are self-aware they need to clean up their act and talk about it all the time, but never actually do anything about it. Those types don't want to change either, but aren't willing to admit it. If you're going to help someone then make sure they're already making a bit of progress on their own so you know they're actually serious.

>>37376

I think OP means a declining state of well being when he refers to degeneracy here, not wandering outside some pre-approved list of interests or preferences.

You can only set an example for others by not acting as degenerate as they do. It's lonely at the top.

I propose a "short bus" convention that furs like those pictured in the OP attend, alongside a normal convention that everyone else attends. The problem is separating the wheat from the chaff.

In the meantime can we at least somehow find a way to cut back on the embarrassing shit that happens at conventions?

>>37390

Convention that's fur suit owners only. That should narrow the number down significantly, plus hide most physical/appearance-based issues. Have one or two people to vet and keep out any of the really shitty/cringy fursuits

>>37394

also instate a dress code. No "I want to give your dog a bone IF U KNOW WHAT I MEAN LOL" t-shirts allowed.

Yes, let's all dictate the standards we expect people to have to enter our community. This community has been a laughing stock and completely ostracized for years now.

I love furry content, ever since watching The Lion King as a kid, and it's such a massive problem to see these garbage people holding back the fandom. We need to hold them accountable to their actions and ensure that they start showing some basic standards in their personal conduct.

This can't just be limited to how they live their lives, it has to go on to how they enjoy the media. Did you know that right now that there are hundreds of oversexualized female furry characters online for anyone to just go out and objectify? Do you really expect mainstream culture to accept us if we continue to support a culture that assists in the objectification of feminine features? If we want to save furry we need to ensure that it's seen as a healthy activity and that starts with giving up this toxic representation of the female form. We need to become allies for women everywhere and promote realistic depictions of women's 230 pound 5'4" bodies.

If you're willing to make a stand for the future of the furry community then why not at least start by donating to my patreon? You won't believe the amount of harassment I get from these shitlords that think I have no right to tell them how to live and think its extremely presumptuous that I dictate what they find attractive and that money helps me not have to acknowledge them.

>>37404

>You can't expect people to have basic decency in public because muh feels so I'm going to throw a massive strawman at you waaah

>besides some normalfags already know about the furverts in our fandom so why bother trying to keep a clean face? let's just let diaperfags wander around where people can see them

Go to >>>/hell/

The furry fandom buried itself into the deepest niche it could find and now the only people who are willing to consume it in-depth are autistic fucknuts. If you ask me what we badly need are content creators who want to produce quality furry art and literature that actually has some depth and thought put into it rather than "OH MY GOD IT HAS WALKING ANIMALS IN IT THAT TALK WOOOOOW" sparklegasms. I feel sick for even typing that.

I mean, what separates /fur/ from /tg/? /tg/ gives a shit about its medium. They produce content that they would want to run with other people who might not be super into it. With furry stuff it's generally made by furries and intended only for furries, and if you're not into it well too bad you're not in our target demographic. Why is it that the best furry content is being made by people who aren't in the fandom? It would be awesome if writers from the science fiction community who actually knew what they were doing would come in here and actually challenge us to improve our fandom with serious art like what happened with the video game community.

We can't make the autists go away but we can make the fandom grow so they're a smaller part of it.

>>37426

You hit the nail on the head as far as I'm concerned.

It's my aspiration to make such content

>>37372

Who knows? Maybe plenty of these people have experienced "character building" experiences, but those only pushed them deeper into that bubble for whatever reasons? Bad childhoods & tragedies always have a chance of pushing people over the edge, or I guess in furries case, making them kind of give up.

>>37426

I too would really enjoy more art that was ART first, then maybe porn afterwards. Too much shit is just porn first, anything else later, and it gets stale even when you're the target audience. Let alone anyone who isn't in the niche, who would be completely put off.

Furry raiders/alt-furry pls go.

>>37354 (OP)

Avoid IRL shit like the plague, and you'll likely not have so much as a quarter the issue.

As for how to fix this stuff, I have a few ideas.

Encourage criticism and discussion free of bullshit 'muh feelins' trash, is probably the biggest one. The hugbox nature of the 'fandom' has brought in quite a few complete autists, and worse, enabled them.

Get rid of the "lifestyle" mentality, as well as the "community" lot. People shouldn't "be" furries. They should like and consume furry media. People sure as hell shouldn't be "furries" just because they want to be part of the 'community'.

Stop paying so fucking much for art holy shit what's wrong with you people. This is as much on the artists, to be fair. Stop letting complete shitters with neon green tri-penis futa demi-dragon-fox OCs buy art from you. I know that hundred bucks is nice, but you're only fueling absolute terror.

Get rid of the anti-human fags. Look, I know furstuff is nicer than human women, and I've got no problem with folk saying that. But there are far, far too many furries who actually hate humanity. Who actively shit on humanity, who decry their every action as evil, and actually wish for its destruction. This is not a healthy mentality, and yet it is for some reason left alone far too often.

>>37449

I disagree that furry art is expensive. In fact, it's pretty cheap in comparison to other mediums like videogames, anime, film, hentai, and porn as they get millions behind it. You're probably going to retort, "YOU want millions for dog dicks? You're stupid!"

That's not the point, the point is that higher values are correlated with better art as they enforce standards to avoid losing profit. The green neon dicks wouldn't happen at all if it were expensive.

>>37354 (OP)

For starters, the furry fandom has and will always be accepting of the lowest of the low, so you're fighting a losing battle here. Second, while​ I agree with all of your other complaints, I feel like you are completely ignorant as to why people even become neets in the first place. This is not something you can fix with a stern talking or motivation. A lot of people have a deeply rooted belief that they aren't fit for society. Jobs are hard to come by, college is expensive, and people are increasingly more self absorbed. So they feel alienated and cheated, they just wanna escape from the chaotic machinations of society, it feels like the payoff of "getting ahead in life" isn't worth the effort it would take to get there. And while I myself am not a neet, I can empathize a lot with their struggle. Sometimes I just wanna drop out of college and kill myself.

>>37456

The difference, anon, is with those you are not commissioning single pieces.

Frankly I would've assumed this was a blatantly obvious difference.

Video games get bought up by thousands. The artist gets payed for creating assets that will help the quality of the game, which in turn should help get the game bought, which means more money for the guys who sell it.

Same deal with film, hentai, porn, whatever.

You aren't stupid because you "want millions for dog dicks". You're stupid because you equate drawing a single piece containing dog dicks for some guy on commission of a few hundred dollars, to selling an entire piece of media to thousands, or otherwise selling the art to someone who will sell the end-result media to thousands.

Anyway, my issue was to both the artists and the buyers.

On one hand, the buyers make artists who think they're hot shit for drawing mediocre run-of-the-mill furry stuff that all ends up looking the same for hundreds of dollars, and on the other hand, artists accept absolute shit characters and people because mo' money.

Honestly, if the system was like the one you're equating it to retardedly, it'd actually be pretty good, and otherwise solve the issues I find with it.

See, a video game has to please a lot of people in order to make money. It ain't about just giving one whale what they want. Likewise, a single gamer doesn't keep afloat a shitty game developer. The power is more spread to the masses.

Unfortunately, the masses aren't always great when it comes to quality control, but I would argue they work a hell of a lot better than single whales, and besides that, it should be fine so long as you keep the hobby small and keep normal fags clear.

>>37462

I'm comparing fields, not a product and a field. Particularly, "concept artist" and "commision artist". -_-

Art is still commissioned by a single individual, even in the industry. One is meant to be inclusive and the other is personalized, but fundamentally money is being exchanged for art that will be used by that individual.

>>37469

>but fundamentally money is being exchanged for art that will be used by that individual

You're glossing over how it's used. One is a personal piece, and the other is an asset for a larger piece of content to be sold by another content creator.

You equated the quality of the work to the price charged and used industries as reference. Problem is the professional sphere essentially has its own market distinct from a consumer level. As that anon indicated, professional prices are exacerbated for various reasons. (See workstation graphics cards for a really clear example).

You shouldn't be looking there to measure value of consumer items and services.

>>37456

>>37462

>>37469

>>37472

And yet, there are still furfags who get literal millions for dog dicks. Several times more than actual professionals with actual skills make.

And furfags with skills close to professionals who are mostly unknown and would be on the verge of starving if furry stuff was their only income.

So this argument is moot.

>>37462

> a video game has to please a lot of people in order to make money

And as a result, they're all total fucking garbage, because big business created a mathematical model for how to create video games, that is guaranteed to safely maximize profit.

>>37474

>actual professionals with actual skills

Art is nearly 100% subjective, so skills are largely irrelevant, especially nowadays when computers do almost everything.

>>37479

>Art is nearly 100% subjective, so skills are largely irrelevant.

No.

Even if the "subjective" portion of art made up the 99.99%, that meager 0.01% is what separates Autistic Jim's gallery of MS Paint Sonic diaper fetish drawings from Null-Ghost's work or whoever other skilled artist. So I think skill accounts for more than a measly 0.01%, don't you think?

>>37480

Meanwhile people with truly brilliant art skills go unknown while people who draw literal lines on a canvas are millionaires. I think the subjective factor is significant.

>>37481

>modern "art"

Do you think the video game and movie industries hire modern "artists"?

Are you seriously telling me the furry fandom is to be equated to the modern art business jewery?

Fine, then don't get involved in arguments about "artists, skills, commissions and prices" since, according to you, there's always the chance of a drunken furry's brainfart becoming the next groundbreaking piece of "art" shown at MoMA.

>>37469

Yes, I know, that's why I said it was fucking retarded.

They're very, very different fields.

And no, it isn't most the time. I've already explained this in my prior post, but you clearly didn't even bother to read that.

>>37479

I already addressed this.

>>37462

>Unfortunately, the masses aren't always great when it comes to quality control, but I would argue they work a hell of a lot better than single whales, and besides that, it should be fine so long as you keep the hobby small and keep normal fags clear.

When vidya was a fairly small hobby? Totally fine.

Now a days? Terrible. Why? Normies with shit tastes.

>>37481

That's due to pretentiousness and projecting.

People take a piece of trash, they talk it up a storm, have their friends talk it up, and make it out to be something deeper than it is. Then they have their friends buy it for millions, because they live in a bubble and actually believe what everyone in said bubble is saying.

This isn't about subjectivity or skill. This is about connections, and knowing how to talk to these types.

Also, these people were almost never poor before they started doing that shit, anyway. They didn't become millionares because they knew how to draw, it was because mommy paid for some snobby high-end art school and paid for whatever meals and meetups happened.

Modern "art" is not done by anyone outside of the rich "intellectual" types. 'Least not the literal-shit-on-a-canvas types we're talking.

>>37444

>Older media like film and literature are better than geek material.

Well, it depends. When films were brand spanking new it could be argued that everything that made it to the printer was a masterpiece, and for decades after that it can certainly be said that we saw a lot of great films came out, but nowadays with the film industry where it's at now we see a lot of crap get put out that appeals to idiots who just want to sit in front of a screen and watch the same boring shit day after day while they eat their ice cream. The same thing happened to books, video games, and pretty much any medium that achieved mainstream success.

The problem is you need these crappy dime-a-dozen pieces of shit to get pumped out like this because when an industry gets to a certain size it needs to be able to sustain itself by generating revenue constantly, otherwise we wouldn't be able to afford big productions. You can certainly do a lot on a low budget (Star Wars) but not as much as you can on a large budget (Star Wars again).

If you're going to dispense of video games and traditional games entirely because of the bad apples, you're throwing the baby out with the bath water, that's all I'm saying.

Now to be fair the furry fandom isn't really an industry, it's more like a sophisticated network of independent creators that have very strong ties in certain cases and very very loose ones in others, but in practice that just makes us more adaptable. I see no reason why skilled and talented artists with a vision couldn't turn the fandom around. It just seems like for now the only ones capable of this are doing so from outside the fandom, presumably to keep the weird fucks we've been talking about at arm's length. Although even then some of them are pretty weird fucks. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: I've seen some weird shit come out of the science fiction community.

OP here

>>37379

> If you're going to help someone then make sure they're already making a bit of progress on their own so you know they're actually serious.

I agree, no point trying to help those who don't do the bare minimum to improve their situation.

>>37380

>I think OP means a declining state of well being when he refers to degeneracy here

This, the degradation of the self, not fascism.

>>37390

>In the meantime can we at least somehow find a way to cut back on the embarrassing shit that happens at conventions?

Unfortunately conventions in general are public events, meaning your going to have the unwashed masses mixing with everyone else.

>>37389

If people are going to avoid conversation cause of my choice of words (which is accurate in this case), they likely didn't have much to add to it in the first place. Sorry.

>>37441

>I'm going to label anything that doesn't align with my views as 'Alt Right' instead of discussing it.

How about no.

>>37449

>Encourage criticism and discussion free of bullshit 'muh feelins' trash, is probably the biggest one. The hugbox nature of the 'fandom' has brought in quite a few complete autists, and worse, enabled them.

>Get rid of the "lifestyle" mentality, as well as the "community" lot. People shouldn't "be" furries. They should like and consume furry media. People sure as hell shouldn't be "furries" just because they want to be part of the 'community'.

This represents my view on things. I put my real self and my career first and only bring up my trash when it's part of the conversation.

>Stop paying so fucking much for art holy shit what's wrong with you people.

Sorry but no, if one feels art is worth that much so be it. Their call.

OP here

>>37530

I love this post holy shit. In terms of business, the community is practically a cottage industry and shallow content is still relevant irregardless of personal taste.

This point you make is particularly great :

>If you're going to dispense of video games and traditional games entirely because of the bad apples, you're throwing the baby out with the bath water, that's all I'm saying.

I like many people like video games, albeit very few these days. I'm not interested in the AAA space as a consumer, but that wont stop me from playing the few games I do like. And if push comes to shove, I'll just play what already exists that I enjoy. To dismiss a whole industry/community cause of whats popular is foolish.

In my opinion there's always fresh talent in the community and I'm actually proud of those who actually move out of drawing trashy fetish art (even the stuff I actually enjoy) and moving up in the industry. Yes that does happen.

>>37530

Fundamentally, they're time consuming and expensive hobbies that don't bring much at the end. Which is why I quit them. I got tired of dumping >$500 on PC parts, consoles, console games, dlc, microtransactions, etc. Not to mention that they're getting politicized leftward too where they actively prevent other types.

You can point out that film and literature are also like that, but they already have politics of all types. H.P. Lovecraft would never be hired by geek industries if he existed today.

>>37543

Op, buddy, cut the fucking reddit spacing holy shit.

I swear, you're worse than ND. Look at this. Please tell me you don't think this is good.

"stop being ugly dammit! you make ME look bad!": the thread

physical appearance and skin defects are pretty much down to genetics, you can't change your genes.

In a world where people who win at the genetic lottery have their lifes served to them while those who don't are pretty much screwed, "improving yourself" does very little to help the losers, because when you say "improving yourself", you're talking about getting /fit/ and getting plastic surgery as an end goal, which won't change your genes, it wont' fix mental illness, it won't fix 20+ years of isolation, and many more things.

not gonna say "don't try", just remember that how much you can improve yourself is limited by your genetics. get as /fit/ as you want, but you won't grow 5 inches on willpower

>>37620

But short people can be cute; they don't need to grow 5 inches m

>>37620

Not really, it actually has to do with the lifestyle that you're in. If you have an unhealthy lifestyle, then you won't get good looks.

Maybe height, but not physical appearance.

>>37623

>it actually has to do with the lifestyle that you're in.

thats a lie and you know it.

yeah, you won't look good if you have an extremely unhealthy lifestyle, but you won't look good just because you exercise a ton and eat your veggies either, it certainly helps, but you can't change the base that is your genes. and this is just speaking of physical appearances.

>>37621

>But short people can be cute

they won't be getting any pussy though

>>37557

Fair criticism but how should I respond to multiple posts without spamming?

>>37620

>>37631

As >>37698 points out, it's not about genetics you cant control. I'm focusing on things you CAN control. Not being able to get fit cause of the 'genetic lottery' is complete bullshit and you know it, and that along with everything else I described are the result of deliberate choices or laziness.

>yeah, you won't look good if you have an extremely unhealthy lifestyle, but you won't look good just because you exercise a ton and eat your veggies either, it certainly helps, but you can't change the base that is your genes. and this is just speaking of physical appearances.

Sure you cant change your genes, but that doesn't mean you cant make yourself approachable and respectful. College professors likely aren't very attractive physically (including genetically speaking) but they are approachable by their job description and professionalism.

Now granted your might say that furry meet/convention isn't a professional work space, but that doesn't excuse you from being decent and respectful and by proxy being approachable and likeable.

>>37712

Like you just did, only without the trash formatting.

The reddit spacing is a separate issue, though, mate. That's a problem regardless of how many folk you're replying to.

Reddit spacing is when you

Space out

Every

Sentance

And

Odd

Line

It's a pain in the ass to read, and it looks like shit. It also outs you as someone not used to the writing system of chans.

How it appears on the quick reply is how it will appear when you post it. Keep that in mind.

Also, while I'm complaining, you post a little bit too much greentext. Feel free to ad lib, shorten, and otherwise manipulate the post to get the meaning, rather than the full scope. Greentext is a loose quote, typically. That is to say, if Joe says "Lusting after women is homosexuality", you can't use quote marks to say Joe said "Girls are for fags", but, you can use greentext and that is completely valid. It also allows, as you've done, pointing to a specific line you are replying to.

It's a rather robust gramatical mark. I do hope it becomes mainstream some day.

Anyway, point being, stop going full quote when putting down someone's reply. Just take the stuff you're wanting to reply to. Also keep in mind that each >>37543 link actually points to the individual post. You'll notice, for instance, I am not using greentext to reply to you. That's because your post was short and it is easy enough to simply hover over to see what was said. In long posts, of course, green text is always best.

>>37721

Thanks. I'll keep that in mind.

>>37698

>If you're a hard worker and you do good things success comes to you

I can't laugh at you hard enough.

Why don't you look into the average height of businessmen and CEOs and movie stars and the like, compared to the average height overall, and then come back to me. There's a reason every single President since the advent of television has been over 5' 10", and nearly half overall 6'+.

>>37741

>I'm not a movie star or a billionaire, so everyone must be discriminating against me because of my height!

Go back to Tumblr.

>>37741

So success is determined

by your height? Nigga please

>>37698

>If you're a hard worker and you do good things success comes to you and people care about you

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

This very fandom is 100%, undeniable proof that that is complete, utter bullshit.

It might be true somewhere else and it might even be the norm in most places, but hearing this from a furry is fucking precious. We're part of a community where the complete opposite is true 100% of the time. You can't be serious.

>>37741

Nigger, that's the average fucking height in the united states.

Besides, I'm 6'6" and I ain't getting life handed to me on a silver platter. I'm still having to struggle for what I've got, as had my family, who're all tall as fuck, and also not well off.

Maybe your shitty life is more to do with your mentality, than your height.

>>37713

as usual, the reactionary "holier than thou" "everything is effort" crowd reads whatever the fuck they want to read.

i didn't say you can't get fit, i said its pointless to get fit if you don't have the right set of genes to win at life. getting fit isn't a victory (unless you're morbidly obese and that IS your goal), fitness is a tool out of many to get to a bigger goal, i could go get fit right now and it wouldn't change shit other than me being able to lift heavier stuff. i don't care about lifting heavy stuff and im not obese in the slightest.

again, do whatever you want, just remember when you put your effort into something and get nothing in return that i told you so. i don't care if you 'win' or lose, it makes no difference to me.

all im saying is that you're asking physical impossibilities out of these people, mostly because they are already old and the older you are the less chances to change and "go back". their only salvation is killing themselves and i doubt they'll happily walk to the slaughterhouse out of their own volition, they'd rather keep spending their money in fandom items, porn comissions, and living out their degenerate fetishes.

>>37784

People bend over backwards for tall people in the USA. They literally look up to them, and treat them preferentially in every situation; it's proven psychology so your anecdotes can't overturn that fact. If your family are all tall as shit and still poor, you're just a bunch of retards. Not my problem.

Of course, considering you don't understand the concept of average, that's not very surprising.

>>37803

>If your family are all tall as shit and still poor, you're just a bunch of retards. Not my problem.

But if your family are tall and rich then it must be because they're tall and people just give money to tall people, yes? You can understand the concept of a tall person who is poor, and even one who is homeless, but you completely fucking discard that when you're talking about rich people so that you can do the "muh short people are discriminated against" act.

Like honestly if you were going to talk about the genetic lottery then you might have chosen the niggling little problem that women make up only 10% of the homeless, have a special class of law specifically devoted to their protection against violent crime, and are given scholarships for STEM degrees basically for free, almost like women have some special privileges, but of all things you chose height to go on this fucking rant about. Fuck women, it's the tall people who are disproportionately advantaged in this country.

Height is not the chief determining factor in success, it is merely a small bonus. IQ is the best possible metric we have for predicting a person's success, and even that isn't 100% certain. You talking as if a total slob and an idiot who happens to be seven foot tall will get everything they ever wanted in life is completely fucking insane. You are an idiot.

>>37449

>Get rid of the "lifestyle" mentality, as well as the "community" lot. People shouldn't "be" furries. They should like and consume furry media. People sure as hell shouldn't be "furries" just because they want to be part of the 'community'.

So much this.

>>37803

Two words:

Silvio Berlusconi.

>>37827

Silvio Berlusconi was a literally who who became big thanks to mafia support. Try again.

>>37813

>IQ is the best possible metric we have for predicting a person's success

Go listen to a few of (((current President's) speeches, and then come back to me with that. Go check how many times Bill Gates graduated college, and then come back to me on that.

>>37813

He or they've been digging a deeper hole with each post, but this is steering away from furry stuff so let's let them chill down there.

OP kind of set it up for that, but posts like >>37426 and >>37449 are in the right direction.

Speaking of >>37449

>Get rid of the "lifestyle" mentality, as well as the "community" lot. People shouldn't "be" furries. They should like and consume furry media. People sure as hell shouldn't be "furries" just because they want to be part of the 'community'.

I agree, but to clarify there's naturally a community around something lots of people gather to talk about and enjoy together. The problem is not naturally becoming a part of that inherent community because you like and consume furry media, but because you want to be in the community for the sake of it and for a sense of identity.

That's most likely what you were getting at with all the quotations, but I just wanted to put it out there.

>>37631

>>37621

They could be getting dick though

>>37862

>he thinks people become big only via legal and morally impeccable means

Oh, you naive child.

Furry in and of its self is degenerate, the only way to combat degeneracy within a fetish is to not partake in the fetish.

>>37864

It's mostly on what I was meaning, yeah. I'd be a little harsher towards any kind of unified 'community' myself, though. I don't really care for a "furry community", any more than I would care for a firearms community.

Any hobby you hold has a community, typically. But most the time, they aren't organized or otherwise connected very heavily. In the case of firearms, pretty much anyone who shoots is part of the 'community' but you don't have community events by large, unless aimed towards more solidified communities, say, /k/ meetups being more about meeting up from /k/, or shooting competitions being about the actual sport.

Essentially what I am getting at is, anywhere that focuses on the community too much tends to quickly devolve into cancer. When I say we shouldn't "be" furries, I mean that more in the way of that I think it's a shit identifier in the first place. I'd rather we all just like furry media, and happen to talk about it together.

>>37863

It's clear you have no clue how intelligence works.

Here's a clue, it has nothing to do with privilege or memorizing shit some cunt told you in a building you paid out the ass to sit in, or how tall you are (you insane retard I can't get over how fucking stupid that claim is) it has to do with how you apply the knowledge you obtain throughout your life. Both the current president and Bill Gates are incredibly successful through their own intelligence despite how much you hate or like them.

Or how tall they are, fuck you're dumb for even saying that shit, there have been loads of tremendously smart and successful manlets as well as loads of successful tall faggots throughout history.

You seriously need to kill yourself for being one of the very same retards that you look down upon, you pretentious turd.

>>37941

>Both the current president and Bill Gates are incredibly successful through their own intelligence

We live in a world where stealing other people's ideas or being giving million-dollar loans and an entire business network qualifies as "your own intelligence", and there are hoards of people willing to step up and defend the ones who are standing on their back and slowly drowning them in garbage and excrement. What a time to be alive.

>>37952

Gotta agree. Capitalism has perpetuated the myth of the self-made man for years to sustain it's own existence by compliance from the majority that they too may one day be rich. In reality it's very rare any one such man could truly make it himself, all these "self-made" millionaires just had the virtue of collecting money and resources and then hiring other people to do all the shit they did while taking all the credit. If we removed the CEO, the employees would still be able to accomplish their tasks, It's not as if people need their boss, their boss needs THEM.

>>37956

Not entirely true. Without someone hiring them, the workers would not be organized into a specific job, or for that matter be spending the capital required to do said job.

All you'll net by banning bosses is a far more inefficient system that produces tiny amounts of sub-par quality products at a slow rate. Yes, people can get together and organize as equals, but those in trade fields what actually make things rarely do so on their own. Most the peopel working for someone do so for stability's sake, and the lack of stress or complexity. After all, it's quite simple working 9 to 5 making one product for a set amount of pay for your hours worked, when compared to working whenever is needed for any number of products for a indeterminate pay that'll also cost you money to start up.

See, the "myth" of a self-made man, in capitalism, assumes you start your own business. They assume you'll hire people. Because capitalism considers the organization of people to be a part of the 'self-made' lot.

If we remove government influence in business that forces monopolies and actively shits on any little guy trying to start up, though, that might accomplish something

We need to encourage more small companies. Less megacorps, more little guys.

>>37941

Nigga take a look at the very community you are part of, for fuck's sake.

Literally nobody who has "reached success" in this fandom has done so thanks to their wits nor love or passion for what they do. NOBODY.

They managed only by casting away all shreds of integrity and moral fibers and taking advantage of furries' unending autistic stupidity and lust for dog dicks.

So don't try selling me the narrative of the "skilled intelligent guy achieving success for his merits" narrative, because it's fucking bullshit.

>>37976

>success is unobtainable without sacrificing integrity

My point is that that is the exception, not the rule.

The furry fandom is a blatant example of this being the case.

>JewTubers

My oh my, what respectable careers built on pretending to be experts on topics appealing to ignorant teenagers incapable of thinking for themselves, while being nothing more than loud, mouthbreathing opinionists.

They threw away their integrity when they listened to their egos telling them their uneducated opinions are worth recording extensive v-logs about.

They are worthless people whose "success" only relies on the stupidity of their own viewers, so thanks for proving me right.

What happened to this thread?

>>37997

Some autistic fucknut decided to get offended by the implication that some people aren't physically attractive and decided to spout his conspiracy theories about how tall people are automatically successful and have life handed to them on a silver platter.

>>37783

Learn to read before you throw buzzwords.

>>37863

Where do I even start? First off, stop listening to the views of journalists for their views about intelligence. They're dumber than businessmen because they cannot think in a holistic context. They call fire when there's smoke while fearing for their lives over edited GIFs, mspaint frogs, and mean tweets.

Second, simplistic and repetitive speech is an effective way of having your message heard to everyone. It's perfectly okay in politics as you're representing each and every background instead of metropolitan uni kids who don't break out of their bubble

>>37958

>Without someone hiring them, the workers would not be organized into a specific job, or for that matter be spending the capital required to do said job

That's pretty much the fault of capitalism itself

>All you'll net by banning bosses is a far more inefficient system that produces tiny amounts of sub-par quality products at a slow rate

Again it's the fault of capitalism that encourages a system of cutting costs so the most amount of money goes to the CEO

>If we remove government influence in business that forces monopolies and actively shits on any little guy trying to start up, though, that might accomplish something

Won't fix capitalism inherent contradictions though (NAIRU, falling rate of profit, destruction of environment, automation displacing employment causing products to become cheaper but now people can't afford them, etc.)

Would you consider this derail?

>>37977

With your attitude and holier than thou mentality you can write off anyone who has attained success as having 'sacrificed their integrity' simply by simply nitpicking as you have just done.

>They threw away their integrity when they listened to their egos telling them their uneducated opinions are worth recording extensive v-logs about.

First of all, whether or not their opinions are 'worth recording' is entirely subjective. My point still stands they made educated career choices that landed them success; whether you like them or not is not up for discussion and quite frankly no one should care.

>They are worthless people whose "success" only relies on the stupidity of their own viewers, so thanks for proving me right.

Says you stroking your neckbeard being all high and mighty and obsessed with being right. Believe what you want but there isnt much you can actually do to downplay actual success as I just described.

>>38092

I think focusing on people's general lifestyles sets up the thread to go all over the place. The posts that discussed problems more specifically related to furry communities hold better topics for an OP or existing threads.

I suppose at the end of the day furries will never be completely drama-free given that they've always been accepting of the lowest of the low.

However, I stand by what I said: If you improve the content, if you advance the medium, you will get a better audience. If you're ashamed to look at other furry fans then you need to consume content of a higher quality, something that people can discuss in-depth.

The /v/ community, much like the /fur/ community, has always been very accepting of social outcasts. The difference is that /v/, as a fundamental property of its medium, challenges its members to achieve rather than simply to exist. I think that this is a parallel that furry content creators really need to keep in mind when they do their thing.

>>38099

There is a huge difference between nitpicking, IE dissecting a case for flaws just to prove a point (what you did), and giving an example in it's entirety to illustrate a point.

Op, next time instead of starting a thread ranting about your experience and looking down on others make a thread that'll invoke what you want to see. Focusing on complaints about people's poor lifestyles sets a bitter atmosphere, deters potential posters who know the thread is heading down the toilet, and makes many of those who do post sour. Focusing on something like self improvement ideally in a context related to this board and you'd not only get good conversations going but encourage the change you desire.

The right angle can take you and your thread a long way.

I'm beginning to think that "reductio ad Trumpem" is the new rule for arguments. Every single argument eventually turns to politics, but instead of then eventually turning into discussing Hitler, it turns into discussing Trump.

Whether or not you equate the two of them (and whether or not you even consider it a bad thing), you have to admit it's fucking hilarious.

>>38127

It's annoying more than anything.

>>38120

Not bad advise actually. Thanks

>>38113

>dissecting a case for flaws just to prove a point (what you did)

It's called arguing.

They'll teach you that once you graduate kindergarten.

>>37893

This applies to those for whom furry is a fetish, not an interest. Not all of us are pornfags

My boyfriend has that shirt.

>combating degeneracy

>at furry conventions

Re "bad teeth" is OP volunteering to pay dental bills for the people he is criticizing.

Re posture/fitness is OP vunteering to buy them an inversion table?

Re BO are you volunteering to pay their water bill?

As for no passion to go places: they left their home to go to a convention, so you are mistaken.

>>37721

The hero we need, but not the one we deserve.