Fascinating

[vakkotaur]

Evidently pointing out an error by some within within a group is "selling out"[1] that group. This sort of silly accusation is why I don't have much use for blind group loyalty and prefer to do something unusual: think for myself.

[1] Link masked by poster.

Comments

[kiwihunter8.livejournal.com]

Is there an online transcript of that show? I Google'd, but nothing.

[yakko.livejournal.com]

I'll second your "think for myself" mantra. It's something I do every day. Otherwise, I might be inclined to think that 99.9% of all IRC usage is illegal as opposed to the truth that 99.9% of all IRC traffic on the top 6 channels of the top 10 IRC networks MAY be illegal, for example.

As for this particular situation, I'm operating on what I'm hearing from my friends here and on IRC. It's good that I can get both sides of the story, because I tend to think Rush's comparison was accurate. Had I had only the "Oh no, Rush is BASHING furry!" side and not bothered to realize he was comparing canceling a private party to canceling another private party, I may well have been misled.

Independent of what I personally think of him, this whole thing has been blown out of proportion by those with an axe to grind.

[jmaynard.livejournal.com]

Personally, I think it's just the left-wing end of the furry community looking for, and finding, yet another reason to bas a favorite bogeyman of the Left.

Once upon a time, I objected to a Motel 6 commercial that compared staying there to staying on the fold-out couch bed in one's aunt's "knotty pine living room full of ham radios" as slamming ham radio. I've mellowed since then.

I don't suppose anyone actually might believe that Rush was chuckling at the absurdity of the whole "why is anyone partying when people are suffering" thing, would they? Nawwwwwwwww.

"Perverted" may have gone over the line. Even granting that it did, however, it all was a humorous jab at the Left, something Rush does very well, and something the Left never takes appropriately.

[shelbystripes.livejournal.com]

I don't suppose anyone actually might believe that Rush was chuckling at the absurdity of the whole "why is anyone partying when people are suffering" thing, would they? Nawwwwwwwww.

That is what he was doing, but at furries' expense. And it wasn't just "perverted", it was the whole thing. If you listen to it, he's laughing at the whole concept of furry, and making clear to his listeners that furry itself is merely something to be laughed at. But that's okay, right? I mean, since his intended target was those evil liberals, we should just let the furry-bashing slide?

My LJ post that Vakko was complaining about wasn't about him. It was about people like you.

[jmaynard.livejournal.com]

You'd argue if Rush Limbaugh said the sky was blue.

I hadn't said a word about the Limbaugh quote until you made a big deal out of it. I just plain hadn't known about it. Unlike Paul, I don't listen to Rush regularly. You (and the others in the furry community who suffer from offensensitivity) are doing a great job of publicizing him.

[shelbystripes.livejournal.com]

You'd argue if Rush Limbaugh said the sky was blue.

This is your typical bullshit. The fact that it's Rush Limbaugh is to me mostly irrelevant--I mean, yeah, I see it as the typical Rush Limbaugh arrogance and righteousness, but if the Washington Post said something needlessly disparaging about furries, I'd bitch about that too.

It's my LJ. I write about what I want to. If I want to bitch about it, I'm free to. It's funny, because at first, all I said about it was one sentence. I'm not writing about it to publicize it or not; I just want to complain when someone says something so bigoted and uninformed about something I care about. (Rush does this fairly often.)

And my point, by saying my LJ post was about people like you, wasn't that you'd already said anything about it; it's that when you did choose to comment, you'd rather defend Rush because he shares your general right-wing leanings than actually call him on it when he starts furry-bashing. That's what makes you a sell-out (assuming you do even consider yourself a furry; that one, I'm not even sure of).

[jmaynard.livejournal.com]

No, I don't consider myself furry. I do consider myself a friend of the furry community (there's a statement I'm certain you'll argue with), and sympathetic to its desire to be considered a normal part of the population.

Rush was a lot easier on the furry community than, say, the infamous CSI episode or the equally infamous Jimmy Kimmel episode. He didn't say or imply that all furs want to do is have sex in fursuits. He didn't say or imply that furs think they're animals. He poked no more fun at the furry community than he does lots of other groups.

On the whole, he went easy on the community. You and I have both heard a whole lot worse, often right here on LJ. Some of it has even been directed at me.

When Rush is wrong, I'll say so. Loudly. The simple fact is that he's right a whole lot more than his detractors would like to admit.

[shelbystripes.livejournal.com]

You and I have both heard a whole lot worse, often right here on LJ.

Yes. I've heard worse. This does not make Rush right.

When Rush is wrong, I'll say so.

Then say so, because he was wrong there with his depiction of furries. It was generalizing and mocking. It didn't go so far as to go into fursuit sex (thank God), but being a lot less wrong doesn't mean you're not wrong.

[shelbystripes.livejournal.com]

The fact that you say you'll say when he's wrong, and then defend him because even though he's wrong he "went easy" relative to other people (who I also ripped on when they did their thing) is, well, pathetic. You won't say he's wrong, and you even tried to make a left-right issue out of it. It's not. It's a furry-vs.-furry-bashers issue, and as far as I know, there are furries on both the left and right and neither side has really become the side "for" furries yet (though Rush has the power to change that if he starts making such comments on a regular basis, which is a good reason to oppose him now on such comments). And he didn't just mock the, as you called them, "left-wing end" of the furries; he didn't say "By the way, there are conservative furries, and they're decent, America-loving, Bush-supporting citizens who happen to like animals, and unlike these liberal sickos, they're okay."

It doesn't matter how often Rush is right, if he's wrong here. And you try to excuse it based on what worse people have done. When people mock gays and laugh at their very existence and label them perverts, do you just sit back and say, "Well, at least he didn't call them pedophiles like some people would?"

Your moral relativism disgusts me.

See also...

[vakkotaur.livejournal.com]

higginsdragon has a good perspective on this as a sign of Furry's Rise (http://www.livejournal.com/users/higginsdragon/85640.html).

Jumping around and barking like a crazed terrier about it not being angelically perfect is self-defeating. It makes one look foolish and paranoid - and makes things all that much easier for one's detractors. It's like furry just trolled itself and lost.