DreamTheaterForums.org Dream Theater Fan Site
General => General Discussion => Topic started by: emtee on April 21, 2022, 07:42:46 AM
-
This will probably a topic everyone else knows about but me.
My wife's best friend is an executive assistant for the superintendent of a large school district in central Michigan. She brought this up in a recent conversation.
Three times in the last 6 months, parents have gone ballistic with the school system and board because their child identifies as a furry. The parents want special treatment such as litter boxes. When I heard this I thought my wife's friend was pulling our leg so I Googled it. Crazy.
So many questions arise about parenting and what kind of damage this does, if any, in the development of a child...BTW, these kids were in 8th grade. She said these parents were on the verge of violence if the school didn't recognize their kids as furries and make the requested provisions.
Sorry if there are typos...this was on my phone.
-
So…teacher’s pet?
-
Three times in the last 6 months, parents have gone ballistic with the school system and board because their child identifies as a furry. The parents want special treatment such as litter boxes. When I heard this I thought my wife's friend was pulling our leg so I Googled it. Crazy.
Can you share what you've found on Google? Any mention of this I've seen in the last month seems rooted in a state lawmaker's backtracked comments. Any chance your wife's best friend is just trying to stir up shit/flat out lying?
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/mar/29/nebraska-lawmaker-litter-boxes-claim-debunked
The claim was debunked by the district’s superintendent, who issued a statement that said there had “never been litter boxes within MPS schools”.
Still, the baseless rumor has spread across the country, and become fuel for political candidates, amid the culture wars and legislative action involving gender identification in schools.
Hours after his remarks, Bostelman backtracked and acknowledged that the story wasn’t true. He said he checked into the claims with state senator Lynne Walz, a Democrat who leads the legislature’s education committee, and confirmed there were no such incidents.
-
So…teacher’s pet?
:rollin
-
DEBUNKED
-
Yeah the logic doesn't really flow for me... wife's friend who's the assistant of the superintendent?
Already like 4 degrees of separation there.
I mean, the US is a huge country, I'm sure there are crazy things going on. Maybe, somewhere, there are some students acting out in this way. It's not out of the realm of the believable. But even if it's happening, does that mean it's a trend or are we just talking clickbait?
-
Three times in the last 6 months, parents have gone ballistic with the school system and board because their child identifies as a furry. The parents want special treatment such as litter boxes. When I heard this I thought my wife's friend was pulling our leg so I Googled it. Crazy.
Can you share what you've found on Google? Any mention of this I've seen in the last month seems rooted in a state lawmaker's backtracked comments. Any chance your wife's best friend is just trying to stir up shit/flat out lying?
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/mar/29/nebraska-lawmaker-litter-boxes-claim-debunked
The claim was debunked by the district’s superintendent, who issued a statement that said there had “never been litter boxes within MPS schools”.
Still, the baseless rumor has spread across the country, and become fuel for political candidates, amid the culture wars and legislative action involving gender identification in schools.
Hours after his remarks, Bostelman backtracked and acknowledged that the story wasn’t true. He said he checked into the claims with state senator Lynne Walz, a Democrat who leads the legislature’s education committee, and confirmed there were no such incidents.
No specific details, just that it's a thing. A real thing. I'd never heard of it.
-
Yeah the logic doesn't really flow for me... wife's friend who's the assistant of the superintendent?
Already like 4 degrees of separation there.
I mean, the US is a huge country, I'm sure there are crazy things going on. Maybe, somewhere, there are some students acting out in this way. It's not out of the realm of the believable. But even if it's happening, does that mean it's a trend or are we just talking clickbait?
Four degrees of separation? She works directly for the superintendent and runs the board meetings.
She's not a liar. This really happened. She was shaken by it.
-
Three times in the last 6 months, parents have gone ballistic with the school system and board because their child identifies as a furry. The parents want special treatment such as litter boxes. When I heard this I thought my wife's friend was pulling our leg so I Googled it. Crazy.
Can you share what you've found on Google? Any mention of this I've seen in the last month seems rooted in a state lawmaker's backtracked comments. Any chance your wife's best friend is just trying to stir up shit/flat out lying?
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/mar/29/nebraska-lawmaker-litter-boxes-claim-debunked
The claim was debunked by the district’s superintendent, who issued a statement that said there had “never been litter boxes within MPS schools”.
Still, the baseless rumor has spread across the country, and become fuel for political candidates, amid the culture wars and legislative action involving gender identification in schools.
Hours after his remarks, Bostelman backtracked and acknowledged that the story wasn’t true. He said he checked into the claims with state senator Lynne Walz, a Democrat who leads the legislature’s education committee, and confirmed there were no such incidents.
No specific details, just that it's a thing. A real thing. I'd never heard of it.
So it's a real thing with no specifics?
I'd love to see the social media posts from your wife's best friend. I bet I could guess another half dozen or so other things that that individual has tried to warn the public about.
-
So…teacher’s pet?
I just got strange looks from my co-workers after laughing at this! :rollin
-
Yeah the logic doesn't really flow for me... wife's friend who's the assistant of the superintendent?
Already like 4 degrees of separation there.
I mean, the US is a huge country, I'm sure there are crazy things going on. Maybe, somewhere, there are some students acting out in this way. It's not out of the realm of the believable. But even if it's happening, does that mean it's a trend or are we just talking clickbait?
Four degrees of separation? She works directly for the superintendent and runs the board meetings.
She's not a liar. This really happened. She was shaken by it.
Did it really happen, or was it some asshat at a board meeting saying "I heard that in Iowa kids want to shit in boxes and call themselves cats, and there are concerns that it is happening or could happen here."? Did it really happen, or was it some parent projecting their concerns to the board based on some meme they saw on Facebook?
-
Furries are definitely a thing, but not normally as young kids.
-
https://oursaferschools.co.uk/2021/09/24/furries/
There are numerous similar stories that I've found on line. The kids identify as humans with animal characteristics.
And my wife's friend was present at a meeting with the principal, superintendent and the parents.
-
https://oursaferschools.co.uk/2021/09/24/furries/
There are numerous similar stories that I've found on line. The kids identify as humans with animal characteristics.
And my wife's friend was present at a meeting with the principal, superintendent and the parents.
You provided a link to what a furry is. That's nothing new (well, maybe new to you). Nobody is denying furies are a thing.
The arguments I'm making is that your wife's best friend is full of shit, litterboxes are not being put in schools (or even requested), and no parents are actually complaining about their child not getting one. Any argument surrounding the putting of litterboxes is school is stemming from straight up bullshit that all started with one guy's recanted comments. Litterboxes in schools holds as much water as Hillary running a child sex ring in the basement of a pizza joint. It's completely fabricated, and the subject is being introduced at school board meetings by people who are dancing too close to the Q watering hole.
-
Furries are definitely a thing, but not normally as young kids.
I was at a concert, Epica, and chilling outside in the smoking section between sets and some random dude I was chatting with goes "you know, I'm a furry" and I almost spit out my drink laughing. Didn't mean to offend the guy, just thought it was such a random thing to tell someone. I had never met one before then, but yes, furries are definitely a thing.
-
https://oursaferschools.co.uk/2021/09/24/furries/
There are numerous similar stories that I've found on line. The kids identify as humans with animal characteristics.
And my wife's friend was present at a meeting with the principal, superintendent and the parents.
You provided a link to what a furry is. That's nothing new (well, maybe new to you). Nobody is denying furies are a thing.
The arguments I'm making is that your wife's best friend is full of shit, litterboxes are not being put in schools (or even requested), and no parents are actually complaining about their child not getting one. Any argument surrounding the putting of litterboxes is school is stemming from straight up bullshit that all started with one guy's recanted comments. Litterboxes in schools holds as much water as Hillary running a child sex ring in the basement of a pizza joint. It's completely fabricated, and the subject is being introduced at school board meetings by people who are dancing too close to the Q watering hole.
You seem very worked up. Did I say they put a literbox in the school? No? The parents were furious when the request was shot down, along with all the other outlandish requests the parents made.
The point I'm trying to make is that parents are requesting this. This is not rational to me. It seems detached from reality.
Anyhoo...sorry I even brought it up. I thought I might learn something from more informed people on the subject. I guess I was mistaken.
-
https://oursaferschools.co.uk/2021/09/24/furries/
There are numerous similar stories that I've found on line. The kids identify as humans with animal characteristics.
And my wife's friend was present at a meeting with the principal, superintendent and the parents.
You provided a link to what a furry is. That's nothing new (well, maybe new to you). Nobody is denying furies are a thing.
The arguments I'm making is that your wife's best friend is full of shit, litterboxes are not being put in schools (or even requested), and no parents are actually complaining about their child not getting one. Any argument surrounding the putting of litterboxes is school is stemming from straight up bullshit that all started with one guy's recanted comments. Litterboxes in schools holds as much water as Hillary running a child sex ring in the basement of a pizza joint. It's completely fabricated, and the subject is being introduced at school board meetings by people who are dancing too close to the Q watering hole.
Did I say they put a literbox in the school? No? The parents were furious when the request was shot down, along with all the other outlandish requests the parents made.
The point I'm trying to make is that parents are requesting this. This is not rational to me. It seems detached from reality.
And the point I'm making is that parents are not requesting this.
Anyhoo...sorry I even brought it up. I thought I might learn something from more informed people on the subject. I guess I was mistaken.
I guess I'm not understanding what you're trying to learn.
You seem very worked up.
Because I'm sick of seeing time in board meetings that should be spent on bettering the education for children being used to entertain falsehoods like this. There is no teeth to this whatsoever. Schoolboards are being taken over by people who read at a 4th grade level and find people like Madison Cawthorn and Marjorie Taylor Greene as inspirational. Instead of debating in these meetings how we're going to prepare our children to compete in the digital future while country's like China pass us by, we waste our time on this shit. It's an embarrassment.
I don't want to ask too many details because of doxxing an what not, but I'd love to see the transcripts from the meeting in which the superintendent made this claim. School districts are required to keep minutes from all board meetings, and some will even record the audio and/or video of them. I'd love to see who said what. I'd love to know if a parent (3 in 6 months allegedly) of a furry actually got up to the mic and voiced opposition to their child not being given a litterbox. 10:1 says that never happened. And if it did, it was some asshole trolling, like this guy who got up in front of city council to argue that the phrase "boneless chicken wings" should be removed from menus because it's not actually meat from the wing of a chicken: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8abd8WdxO7w
-
Not sure why some seem to be deliberately misreading what emtee wrote and are putting words into his mouth, but you might try reading and addressing what he actually posted rather than projecting something else onto it.
-
Not sure why some seem to be deliberately misreading what emtee wrote and are putting words into his mouth, but you might try reading and addressing what he actually posted rather than projecting something else onto it.
I assume this is directed at me.
emtee said
Three times in the last 6 months, parents have gone ballistic with the school system and board because their child identifies as a furry. The parents want special treatment such as litter boxes. When I heard this I thought my wife's friend was pulling our leg so I Googled it. Crazy.
I asked for the google results that backed up the claim that "parents want special treatment such as litter boxes" and I've yet to see it.
-
The claim is anti-trans and it isn't hard to see that while it is possible that someone called up a school and asked for a litter box for their child - the likelihood this was a pathetic attempt to mock trans-kids in schools having accommodations was the intended goal of such a call. Fear and hatred is just that prevalent out there.
It is easy to do a Google search and see that the Michigan school superintendent has said that this story about litter box requests for school kids is false. And it only takes a few clicks to find if one wants to check it out.
-
Not sure why some seem to be deliberately misreading what emtee wrote and are putting words into his mouth, but you might try reading and addressing what he actually posted rather than projecting something else onto it.
I assume this is directed at me.
emtee said
Three times in the last 6 months, parents have gone ballistic with the school system and board because their child identifies as a furry. The parents want special treatment such as litter boxes. When I heard this I thought my wife's friend was pulling our leg so I Googled it. Crazy.
I asked for the google results that backed up the claim that "parents want special treatment such as litter boxes" and I've yet to see it.
And he clearly said this was NOT something he found online, but was something that someone who was present at the meetings actually witnessed in person, so asking for Internet searches has nothing to do with what he is talking about.
Maybe he actually is mistaken, or the person he talked about is. But you are completely talking past what he said and raising issues that have nothing to do with his post.
-
Anyhoo...sorry I even brought it up. I thought I might learn something from more informed people on the subject. I guess I was mistaken.
The lesson to be learned is that the more outrageous outrage is, the more likely it is to be manufactured for sociopolitical gain.
-
Why would there be anything posted online about private meetings between school leadership and parents?
I'm telling you this happened. You don't have to believe it or care but I think this is going to become a bigger issue moving forward and my discussion intent was: is it harmful for a parent to enable this behavior? And how far will some parents go in an attempt to protect their children at any costs.
-
The claim is anti-trans and it isn't hard to see that while it is possible that someone called up a school and asked for a litter box for their child - the likelihood this was a pathetic attempt to mock trans-kids in schools having accommodations was the intended goal of such a call. Fear and hatred is just that prevalent out there.
It is easy to do a Google search and see that the Michigan school superintendent has said that this story about litter box requests for school kids is false. And it only takes a few clicks to find if one wants to check it out.
This isn't even the same school. You jumped to an incorrect conclusion and in doing so, call into question my integrity as well as that of someone I have known for over 40 years.
-
Do these parents have litter boxes at home for their children and clean them?
-
Do these parents have litter boxes at home for their children and clean them?
Yes. In all three cases. However, I don't believe they are used in place of a toilet. It's more like a total immersive type of behavior. They lick their paws and pretend to eat from bowls on the floor. They hiss and purr and generally adopt the animals behaviors.
-
Not sure why some seem to be deliberately misreading what emtee wrote and are putting words into his mouth, but you might try reading and addressing what he actually posted rather than projecting something else onto it.
I assume this is directed at me.
emtee said
Three times in the last 6 months, parents have gone ballistic with the school system and board because their child identifies as a furry. The parents want special treatment such as litter boxes. When I heard this I thought my wife's friend was pulling our leg so I Googled it. Crazy.
I asked for the google results that backed up the claim that "parents want special treatment such as litter boxes" and I've yet to see it.
And he clearly said this was NOT something he found online, but was something that someone who was present at the meetings actually witnessed in person, so asking for Internet searches has nothing to do with what he is talking about.
Maybe he actually is mistaken, or the person he talked about is. But you are completely talking past what he said and raising issues that have nothing to do with his post.
I respectfully am not seeing it that way.
What are the issues in his post? His wife's friend works for someone who is making claims. Claims that are being propagated by this train of he-said-she-said. We have one person's word to go one here.
The original post said "So many questions arise about parenting and what kind of damage this does, if any, in the development of a child...BTW, these kids were in 8th grade. She said these parents were on the verge of violence if the school didn't recognize their kids as furries and make the requested provisions."
I'm claiming (I could be entirely wrong) there were no such threats of violence, and am merely pointing out that every similar claim to this point has been debunked.
If this is a thread on whether or not letting your kid be a furry is damaging to childhood development, fine. I'll bow out now and shut up. But that's not how the original post read. This thread was started specifically to address "parents were on the verge of violence if the school didn't recognize their kids as furries and make the requested provisions" and "Three times in the last 6 months, parents have gone ballistic with the school system and board because their child identifies as a furry. The parents want special treatment such as litter boxes. When I heard this... .
I'm arguing, based on everything I've found on Google up to this point, nobody is requesting such provisions.
-
Do these parents have litter boxes at home for their children and clean them?
Yes. In all three cases. However, I don't believe they are used in place of a toilet. It's more like a total immersive type of behavior. They lick their paws and pretend to eat from bowls on the floor. They hiss and purr and generally adopt the animals behaviors.
This is sick
-
Why would there be anything posted online about private meetings between school leadership and parents?
Because education is taxpayer funded (I just realized I made the assumption this is a public school) and transparency in such meetings has been deemed important. Schoolboard meetings often go over things like curriculum and budgeting, and tax payers have a right to see that process play out as it impacts the lives of their families and the value of their house.
Waterbury CT has the videos of every DOE meeting dating back to July 2015 on their website.
https://www.waterbury.k12.ct.us/Content2/boevideos
I'm telling you this happened. You don't have to believe it or care but I think this is going to become a bigger issue moving forward and my discussion intent was: is it harmful for a parent to enable this behavior? And how far will some parents go in an attempt to protect their children at any costs.
What's going to be a bigger issue/Is what harmful? Letting your kid be a furry, or fighting for your kid to have a litter box in school? It seems this conversation has split into two different topics unless I'm misreading things.
-
Wow! Don't think I could've lived another minute without seeing this. Looks like the forum is desperate for material these days huh?
*points to sig*
-
Not sure why some seem to be deliberately misreading what emtee wrote and are putting words into his mouth, but you might try reading and addressing what he actually posted rather than projecting something else onto it.
I assume this is directed at me.
emtee said
Three times in the last 6 months, parents have gone ballistic with the school system and board because their child identifies as a furry. The parents want special treatment such as litter boxes. When I heard this I thought my wife's friend was pulling our leg so I Googled it. Crazy.
I asked for the google results that backed up the claim that "parents want special treatment such as litter boxes" and I've yet to see it.
And he clearly said this was NOT something he found online, but was something that someone who was present at the meetings actually witnessed in person, so asking for Internet searches has nothing to do with what he is talking about.
Maybe he actually is mistaken, or the person he talked about is. But you are completely talking past what he said and raising issues that have nothing to do with his post.
I respectfully am not seeing it that way.
What are the issues in his post? His wife's friend works for someone who is making claims. Claims that are being propagated by this train of he-said-she-said. We have one person's word to go one here.
The original post said "So many questions arise about parenting and what kind of damage this does, if any, in the development of a child...BTW, these kids were in 8th grade. She said these parents were on the verge of violence if the school didn't recognize their kids as furries and make the requested provisions."
I'm claiming (I could be entirely wrong) there were no such threats of violence, and am merely pointing out that every similar claim to this point has been debunked.
If this is a thread on whether or not letting your kid be a furry is damaging to childhood development, fine. I'll bow out now and shut up. But that's not how the original post read. This thread was started specifically to address "parents were on the verge of violence if the school didn't recognize their kids as furries and make the requested provisions" and "Three times in the last 6 months, parents have gone ballistic with the school system and board because their child identifies as a furry. The parents want special treatment such as litter boxes. When I heard this... .
I'm arguing, based on everything I've found on Google up to this point, nobody is requesting such provisions.
How can you possibly insist that the claim was somehow "debunked" when you don't know anyone who was present at the meeting and have no sources for anything that was said or done at the meeting? Yes, it is one person's word that we are going off of. But, according to emtee, that one person was present and was an eyewitness. You were not. And you have not talked to or seen posts from anyone who was, correct?
And, again, what does "everything [you]'ve found on Google" have to do with anything? Who ever said anything about this meeting being posted on the Internet? Again, his original post is clear that this was overheard and seen at an in person meeting, and not something posted on the Internet. Why are you making these assumptions that have nothing to do with what he posted?
-
The claim is anti-trans and it isn't hard to see that while it is possible that someone called up a school and asked for a litter box for their child - the likelihood this was a pathetic attempt to mock trans-kids in schools having accommodations was the intended goal of such a call. Fear and hatred is just that prevalent out there.
It is easy to do a Google search and see that the Michigan school superintendent has said that this story about litter box requests for school kids is false. And it only takes a few clicks to find if one wants to check it out.
This isn't even the same school. You jumped to an incorrect conclusion and in doing so, call into question my integrity as well as that of someone I have known for over 40 years.
I did no such thing. I even gave your friend an out by saying people could have called into the school as a way to push their own agenda. Maybe try re-reading what I posted again and refrain from jumping to false conclusions.
If you have any evidence aside from hearsay that this is an issue in ANY school in Michigan I'd be certainly happy to read it.
-
Not sure why some seem to be deliberately misreading what emtee wrote and are putting words into his mouth, but you might try reading and addressing what he actually posted rather than projecting something else onto it.
I assume this is directed at me.
emtee said
Three times in the last 6 months, parents have gone ballistic with the school system and board because their child identifies as a furry. The parents want special treatment such as litter boxes. When I heard this I thought my wife's friend was pulling our leg so I Googled it. Crazy.
I asked for the google results that backed up the claim that "parents want special treatment such as litter boxes" and I've yet to see it.
And he clearly said this was NOT something he found online, but was something that someone who was present at the meetings actually witnessed in person, so asking for Internet searches has nothing to do with what he is talking about.
Maybe he actually is mistaken, or the person he talked about is. But you are completely talking past what he said and raising issues that have nothing to do with his post.
I respectfully am not seeing it that way.
What are the issues in his post? His wife's friend works for someone who is making claims. Claims that are being propagated by this train of he-said-she-said. We have one person's word to go one here.
The original post said "So many questions arise about parenting and what kind of damage this does, if any, in the development of a child...BTW, these kids were in 8th grade. She said these parents were on the verge of violence if the school didn't recognize their kids as furries and make the requested provisions."
I'm claiming (I could be entirely wrong) there were no such threats of violence, and am merely pointing out that every similar claim to this point has been debunked.
If this is a thread on whether or not letting your kid be a furry is damaging to childhood development, fine. I'll bow out now and shut up. But that's not how the original post read. This thread was started specifically to address "parents were on the verge of violence if the school didn't recognize their kids as furries and make the requested provisions" and "Three times in the last 6 months, parents have gone ballistic with the school system and board because their child identifies as a furry. The parents want special treatment such as litter boxes. When I heard this... .
I'm arguing, based on everything I've found on Google up to this point, nobody is requesting such provisions.
How can you possibly insist that the claim was somehow "debunked" when you don't know anyone who was present at the meeting and have no sources for anything that was said or done at the meeting? Yes, it is one person's word that we are going off of. But, according to emtee, that one person was present and was an eyewitness. You were not. And you have not talked to or seen posts from anyone who was, correct?
And, again, what does "everything [you]'ve found on Google" have to do with anything? Who ever said anything about this meeting being posted on the Internet? Again, his original post is clear that this was overheard and seen at an in person meeting, and not something posted on the Internet. Why are you making these assumptions that have nothing to do with what he posted?
Because he said:
"Four degrees of separation? She works directly for the superintendent and runs the board meetings.
She's not a liar. This really happened. She was shaken by it."
I read that as this happening in a board meeting(s). Something there should be a record of. I didn't read this to mean these discussions were had in a private setting.
I wasn't googling for the board meeting specifically, but more the topic of litterboxes in schools in general, and the trend seems to be that every time this pops up somewhere it's immediately debunked.
How can you possibly insist that the claim was somehow "debunked"
I didn't claim this one was debunked. I'm saying every similar claim I've come across so far has been debunked, and one could infer that this one would follow a similar path if it was dug into
-
Well, I was going to talk about what I know about the whole furry thing but seeing as this thread seems to have to devolved into war I will pass. emtee does not deserve the tone being sent his way. Sorry about that, man.
-
I have no ill will toward emptee. I'm saying I think the superintendent is lying and/or there's a lot being lost in translation and this isn't really happening regardless. That's all.
-
Three times in the last 6 months, parents have gone ballistic with the school system and board because their child identifies as a furry. The parents want special treatment such as litter boxes. When I heard this I thought my wife's friend was pulling our leg so I Googled it. Crazy.
I clicked on this thread because of the bizarre subject header.... And I haven't googled anything or read any of the comments, but.... What the actual fuck?
-
Not sure why some seem to be deliberately misreading what emtee wrote and are putting words into his mouth, but you might try reading and addressing what he actually posted rather than projecting something else onto it.
I assume this is directed at me.
emtee said
Three times in the last 6 months, parents have gone ballistic with the school system and board because their child identifies as a furry. The parents want special treatment such as litter boxes. When I heard this I thought my wife's friend was pulling our leg so I Googled it. Crazy.
I asked for the google results that backed up the claim that "parents want special treatment such as litter boxes" and I've yet to see it.
And he clearly said this was NOT something he found online, but was something that someone who was present at the meetings actually witnessed in person, so asking for Internet searches has nothing to do with what he is talking about.
Maybe he actually is mistaken, or the person he talked about is. But you are completely talking past what he said and raising issues that have nothing to do with his post.
I respectfully am not seeing it that way.
What are the issues in his post? His wife's friend works for someone who is making claims. Claims that are being propagated by this train of he-said-she-said. We have one person's word to go one here.
The original post said "So many questions arise about parenting and what kind of damage this does, if any, in the development of a child...BTW, these kids were in 8th grade. She said these parents were on the verge of violence if the school didn't recognize their kids as furries and make the requested provisions."
I'm claiming (I could be entirely wrong) there were no such threats of violence, and am merely pointing out that every similar claim to this point has been debunked.
If this is a thread on whether or not letting your kid be a furry is damaging to childhood development, fine. I'll bow out now and shut up. But that's not how the original post read. This thread was started specifically to address "parents were on the verge of violence if the school didn't recognize their kids as furries and make the requested provisions" and "Three times in the last 6 months, parents have gone ballistic with the school system and board because their child identifies as a furry. The parents want special treatment such as litter boxes. When I heard this... .
I'm arguing, based on everything I've found on Google up to this point, nobody is requesting such provisions.
You are wrong. My wife's friend is making the claim. Directly to my wife and I during a conversation.
-
The claim is anti-trans and it isn't hard to see that while it is possible that someone called up a school and asked for a litter box for their child - the likelihood this was a pathetic attempt to mock trans-kids in schools having accommodations was the intended goal of such a call. Fear and hatred is just that prevalent out there.
It is easy to do a Google search and see that the Michigan school superintendent has said that this story about litter box requests for school kids is false. And it only takes a few clicks to find if one wants to check it out.
This isn't even the same school. You jumped to an incorrect conclusion and in doing so, call into question my integrity as well as that of someone I have known for over 40 years.
I did no such thing. I even gave your friend an out by saying people could have called into the school as a way to push their own agenda. Maybe try re-reading what I posted again and refrain from jumping to false conclusions.
If you have any evidence aside from hearsay that this is an issue in ANY school in Michigan I'd be certainly happy to read it.
You seem very angry and defensive. Have I done something to aggravate you?
Your conclusion, in all caps, "DEBUNKED" is a false statement in regard to this. This was not and is not a public matter. I already explained the circumstances. Private meeting between school leaders, executive secretary and parents. I don't care if you believe it. Your free to your own thoughts and opinions.
-
Three times in the last 6 months, parents have gone ballistic with the school system and board because their child identifies as a furry. The parents want special treatment such as litter boxes. When I heard this I thought my wife's friend was pulling our leg so I Googled it. Crazy.
I clicked on this thread because of the bizarre subject header.... And I haven't googled anything or read any of the comments, but.... What the actual fuck?
Yeah this is what I'm thinking as well....
-
This kind of makes me wonder what James O'Keeffe's latest project is.
Emptee: I think part of the problem is that by posting this you made it seem like it was a real thing happening everywhere that needs to be addressed. While that may not have been your intention, manufactured outrage is all the rage right now, and this is exactly the sort of moral panic I'd expect FOX to be projecting at us on the regular, whether it's legitimate or not. See the "Don't Say Gay" thread for an example of how this all works. Maybe your wife's friend is telling the truth, actually did witness this, and isn't coloring it with her own inherent biases. I think I'd bet against, but what do I know. If this actually is the case, though, I'd call it far more exemplary of you living in a weird-ass neighborhood than some some actual phenomenon that merits any sort of real discussion. Shitty parenting is certainly out there, and in fact it may actually be the norm at this point. This just reeks of a shiny object set out to create outrage to me.
-
Well, that is fascinating.
I don't think a parent should expect the school to accommodate for such a thing. But also, that should be a decision that should be discussed with the School, the parent, and the teachers in a private meeting.
It's the same as a school accomodations for certain needs of a child.
Also, if they make accomodations, how will the classmates go about treating them. Would they make them their pets and walk them around, kick their bowls while they eat and drink, and make fun of them when they're scratching and leaving their mess in a litter-box like setting.
Also, do they clean up their own mess. How far do the children take being an animal?
-
Do these parents have litter boxes at home for their children and clean them?
Yes. In all three cases. However, I don't believe they are used in place of a toilet. It's more like a total immersive type of behavior. They lick their paws and pretend to eat from bowls on the floor. They hiss and purr and generally adopt the animals behaviors.
This is sick
I personally don't think it's sick. It could be like as if the childs mind hasn't grown the mindset that forms the foundation of an adult brain and mindset, and is still continuing to imitate and play out their imagination in "Child's Play". Like how a child plays house, plays horsie, or the scene they imagine when playing with their toys.
It can be harmful when the parents continue to let it play out without any assurance as to the reality of life and what life's reality is.
I personally do not have an issue with it as long as the child or person understands that there is a reality to this world, including being human.
-
Do these parents have litter boxes at home for their children and clean them?
Yes. In all three cases. However, I don't believe they are used in place of a toilet. It's more like a total immersive type of behavior. They lick their paws and pretend to eat from bowls on the floor. They hiss and purr and generally adopt the animals behaviors.
This is sick
I personally don't think it's sick. It could be like as if the childs mind hasn't grown the mindset that forms the foundation of an adult brain and mindset, and is still continuing to imitate and play out their imagination in "Child's Play". Like how a child plays house, plays horsie, or the scene they imagine when playing with their toys.
It can be harmful when the parents continue to let it play out without any assurance as to the reality of life and what life's reality is.
I personally do not have an issue with it as long as the child or person understands that there is a reality to this world, including being human.
Nothing about this sounds like "child's play" to me. When you are requesting a school to adapt, it is no longer viewed as "play" but something serious. Unless of course it's just trolling.
-
Do these parents have litter boxes at home for their children and clean them?
Yes. In all three cases. However, I don't believe they are used in place of a toilet. It's more like a total immersive type of behavior. They lick their paws and pretend to eat from bowls on the floor. They hiss and purr and generally adopt the animals behaviors.
This is sick
I personally don't think it's sick. It could be like as if the childs mind hasn't grown the mindset that forms the foundation of an adult brain and mindset, and is still continuing to imitate and play out their imagination in "Child's Play". Like how a child plays house, plays horsie, or the scene they imagine when playing with their toys.
It can be harmful when the parents continue to let it play out without any assurance as to the reality of life and what life's reality is.
I personally do not have an issue with it as long as the child or person understands that there is a reality to this world, including being human.
Nothing about this sounds like "child's play" to me. When you are requesting a school to adapt, it is no longer viewed as "play" but something serious. Unless of course it's just trolling.
I'd put it in the serious camp too. A four year old acting like an animal is completely different than a twelve year old. I've actually sat down and played board games with furries on two occasions. Nobody said anything about it. They had their tails on and that was that. They weren't acting like animals or anything, at least not out in public. I'm sure there are varying degrees though. The distinction is being able to turn it off, which is what Ben's trying to get at I think. If there's a twelve year old that's so caught up in being an animal that they're requesting to shit in litterboxes instead of toilets, both inside and outside the home, that person needs help. I'm not saying that dickishly. I mean that individual needs professional help for some kind of underlying mental disorder.
-
The claim is anti-trans and it isn't hard to see that while it is possible that someone called up a school and asked for a litter box for their child - the likelihood this was a pathetic attempt to mock trans-kids in schools having accommodations was the intended goal of such a call. Fear and hatred is just that prevalent out there.
It is easy to do a Google search and see that the Michigan school superintendent has said that this story about litter box requests for school kids is false. And it only takes a few clicks to find if one wants to check it out.
This isn't even the same school. You jumped to an incorrect conclusion and in doing so, call into question my integrity as well as that of someone I have known for over 40 years.
I did no such thing. I even gave your friend an out by saying people could have called into the school as a way to push their own agenda. Maybe try re-reading what I posted again and refrain from jumping to false conclusions.
If you have any evidence aside from hearsay that this is an issue in ANY school in Michigan I'd be certainly happy to read it.
You seem very angry and defensive. Have I done something to aggravate you?
Your conclusion, in all caps, "DEBUNKED" is a false statement in regard to this. This was not and is not a public matter. I already explained the circumstances. Private meeting between school leaders, executive secretary and parents. I don't care if you believe it. Your free to your own thoughts and opinions.
LoL - I seem very angry and defensive? Hardly. If anything I actually feel sad that people fall for these kinds of things as being legitimate.
Private meetings aside, in today's "news" climate were that actually true, it would be plastered in news stories from coast to coast. A quick Google search shows anyone who has the desire to look the exact opposite is true.
Conspiracy theories (generally) are easily dismissed BECAUSE of the inability for the level of secrecy needed by your average school board member (in this case) to keep quiet about it. If your friend told you, she undoubtedly told others. That it isn't a huge news story is very telling.
-
I'll own whatever I need to own. I was pecking away on a phone during a 15 minute break and could have laid things out better at home on a PC.
This is a class A district and a wealthy one. I live in Central Florida. My wife's friend lives in Michigan.
One thing I learned from this conversation that I didn't realize (see my first sentence about not knowing what everyone else probably knows) is that this is a highly politicized subject. I was looking at it from a parenting perspective. The whole thing just seems so weird and detached from reality. Like snowflake parents on steroids.
I'll move along now and try to stay in the music forum where discussions are primarily civil.
-
I'll own whatever I need to own. I was pecking away on a phone during a 15 minute break and could have laid things out better at home on a PC.
This is a class A district and a wealthy one. I live in Central Florida. My wife's friend lives in Michigan.
One thing I learned from this conversation that I didn't realize (see my first sentence about not knowing what everyone else probably knows) is that this is a highly politicized subject. I was looking at it from a parenting perspective. The whole thing just seems so weird and detached from reality. Like snowflake parents on steroids.
I'll move along now and try to stay in the music forum where discussions are primarily civil.
I understood your question and am not trying to bring anything other than what you are wanting which is the Parenting Perspective.
This is something that the parents should address with the school, but at the same time, they should not expect the school to go to the lengths they desire to accommodate for their child. The issue is the school can not give one, or several, students special treatment. There are reasons such as physical, mental, accommodations schools should consider for certain children.
Do these parents have litter boxes at home for their children and clean them?
Yes. In all three cases. However, I don't believe they are used in place of a toilet. It's more like a total immersive type of behavior. They lick their paws and pretend to eat from bowls on the floor. They hiss and purr and generally adopt the animals behaviors.
This is sick
I personally don't think it's sick. It could be like as if the childs mind hasn't grown the mindset that forms the foundation of an adult brain and mindset, and is still continuing to imitate and play out their imagination in "Child's Play". Like how a child plays house, plays horsie, or the scene they imagine when playing with their toys.
It can be harmful when the parents continue to let it play out without any assurance as to the reality of life and what life's reality is.
I personally do not have an issue with it as long as the child or person understands that there is a reality to this world, including being human.
Nothing about this sounds like "child's play" to me. When you are requesting a school to adapt, it is no longer viewed as "play" but something serious. Unless of course it's just trolling.
I'd put it in the serious camp too. A four year old acting like an animal is completely different than a twelve year old. I've actually sat down and played board games with furries on two occasions. Nobody said anything about it. They had their tails on and that was that. They weren't acting like animals or anything, at least not out in public. I'm sure there are varying degrees though. The distinction is being able to turn it off, which is what Ben's trying to get at I think. If there's a twelve year old that's so caught up in being an animal that they're requesting to shit in litterboxes instead of toilets, both inside and outside the home, that person needs help. I'm not saying that dickishly. I mean that individual needs professional help for some kind of underlying mental disorder.
Precisely my point. What is considered a fully developed adult brain, the adult should be able to distinguish reality from imaginary play. Cross-Dressers understand this quite well. It's understanding that Nature and Reality does not form into one's imagination, including how one should live life.
This is precisely why South Park made fun of this Identity issue by having Randy turn himself physically into a Dolphin. :lol
-
My dad could be classified as a furry. He’s not into animal-play or anything like that. He’s just a hairy bastard.
-
I have to side with Chino on this one. It's a little hard to believe that a very similar claim was made about a Michigan school which turned out to be fake news but no, it's really happening in another Michigan school. Maybe this thread was just a joke and we all fell for it?
-
I have to side with Chino on this one. It's a little hard to believe that a very similar claim was made about a Michigan school which turned out to be fake news but no, it's really happening in another Michigan school. Maybe this thread was just a joke and we all fell for it?
In Emtee's defense, that's not his style. He took it seriously.
-
Not a joke—just another topic that, sadly, went off the rails.
-
Well, I was going to talk about what I know about the whole furry thing but seeing as this thread seems to have to devolved into war I will pass. emtee does not deserve the tone being sent his way. Sorry about that, man.
I'm with you. I don't know squat about the litter box thing specifically, but the concept of "furry" in our middle and even elementary schools is a VERY real thing. Although it was an oblique reference, I even alluded to this in the thread on the Florida law. I can't say I understand it very well at all, but it's complicated and complex.
And I'll say again: when everyone has a story, NO ONE has a story.
-
A story does not cease to be a story just because it has been told before.
-
I have to side with Chino on this one. It's a little hard to believe that a very similar claim was made about a Michigan school which turned out to be fake news but no, it's really happening in another Michigan school. Maybe this thread was just a joke and we all fell for it?
In Emtee's defense, that's not his style. He took it seriously.
Not a joke—just another topic that, sadly, went off the rails.
I shall take your words for it.
-
What were the rails of this thread? I'm genuinely asking as I'm responsible for this topic taking a dump. I've reread the OP about 15 times, and I'm still not getting it.
Was this supposed to be a thread about furries on the whole, or the specific topic of "Three times in the last 6 months, parents have gone ballistic with the school system and board because their child identifies as a furry. The parents want special treatment such as litter boxes. When I heard this I thought my wife's friend was pulling our leg so I Googled it. Crazy. So many questions arise about parenting and what kind of damage this does, if any, in the development of a child...BTW, these kids were in 8th grade. She said these parents were on the verge of violence if the school didn't recognize their kids as furries and make the requested provisions."?
To me, everything in the opening post indicated that this was a thread about parents becoming irate over schools not putting out litter boxes for students.
If this was supposed to be a thread about furries in general, and not what I bolded above, I apologize.
-
What were the rails of this thread? I'm genuinely asking as I'm responsible for this topic a dump. I've reread the OP about 15 times, and I'm still not getting it.
Was this supposed to be a thread about furries on the whole, or the specific topic of "Three times in the last 6 months, parents have gone ballistic with the school system and board because their child identifies as a furry. The parents want special treatment such as litter boxes. When I heard this I thought my wife's friend was pulling our leg so I Googled it. Crazy. So many questions arise about parenting and what kind of damage this does, if any, in the development of a child...BTW, these kids were in 8th grade. She said these parents were on the verge of violence if the school didn't recognize their kids as furries and make the requested provisions."?
To me, everything in the opening post indicated that this was a thread about parents becoming irate over schools not putting out litter boxes for students.
If this was supposed to be a thread about furries in general, and not what I bolded above, I apologize.
I'm guessing emtee didn't want to debate the veracity of the story.
-
<disclaimer this is not about emtee>
Does anyone remember around the time that gay marriage was being hotly debated in the USA? Remember all the concerned people talking about how if we let gay people marry the next thing you know, someone will want to marry their dog?
This is called a slippery slope fallacy. And the 'parents are demanding litter boxes for their 8th graders' is pretty much the same thing. If we start allowing transgender students to use different pronouns and bathrooms and otherwise make accommodations for them, then the next thing you know parents are going to start demanding litter boxes for their kids.
-
<disclaimer this is not about emtee>
Does anyone remember around the time that gay marriage was being hotly debated in the USA? Remember all the concerned people talking about how if we let gay people marry the next thing you know, someone will want to marry their dog?
This is called a slippery slope fallacy. And the 'parents are demanding litter boxes for their 8th graders' is pretty much the same thing. If we start allowing transgender students to use different pronouns and bathrooms and otherwise make accommodations for them, then the next thing you know parents are going to start demanding litter boxes for their kids.
But it's not ALWAYS a fallacy, and it's not ALWAYS so blatantly about the extremes. The slippery slope doesn't have to be about "A" and "Z", it can be about all the incremental steps in between. Remember when Mick Jagger had to sing "Let's Spend Some Time Together" and Elvis couldn't shake his pelvis on television? That seems so naive today, but it's also a prime example of the slope at work.
-
<disclaimer this is not about emtee>
Does anyone remember around the time that gay marriage was being hotly debated in the USA? Remember all the concerned people talking about how if we let gay people marry the next thing you know, someone will want to marry their dog?
This is called a slippery slope fallacy. And the 'parents are demanding litter boxes for their 8th graders' is pretty much the same thing. If we start allowing transgender students to use different pronouns and bathrooms and otherwise make accommodations for them, then the next thing you know parents are going to start demanding litter boxes for their kids.
But it's not ALWAYS a fallacy, and it's not ALWAYS so blatantly about the extremes. The slippery slope doesn't have to be about "A" and "Z", it can be about all the incremental steps in between. Remember when Mick Jagger had to sing "Let's Spend Some Time Together" and Elvis couldn't shake his pelvis on television? That seems so naive today, but it's also a prime example of the slope at work.
I guess I'm not following. What exactly is the fault of Mick Jagger and Elvis' hips? I mean....I think I understand the point you are trying to make but with those examples I could name about 100 other things happening during those same iconic moments that bring us to today. It isn't a straight line back to them.
-
They are all increments in the inexorable slide to Dennis Franz's ass on television, Dua Lipa and Megan Thee Stallion dancing on a stage that simulates a strip club with everything but the nipples, and some of the language in shows like Archer.
-
They are all increments in the inexorable slide to Dennis Franz's ass on television, Dua Lipa and Megan Thee Stallion dancing on a stage that simulates a strip club with everything but the nipples, and some of the language in shows like Archer.
Well...I think people like to point to Mick and Elvis as increments but I think the slide into Franz's ass would've happened with or without Mick and Elvis. :lol
-
<disclaimer this is not about emtee>
Does anyone remember around the time that gay marriage was being hotly debated in the USA? Remember all the concerned people talking about how if we let gay people marry the next thing you know, someone will want to marry their dog?
This is called a slippery slope fallacy. And the 'parents are demanding litter boxes for their 8th graders' is pretty much the same thing. If we start allowing transgender students to use different pronouns and bathrooms and otherwise make accommodations for them, then the next thing you know parents are going to start demanding litter boxes for their kids.
But it's not ALWAYS a fallacy, and it's not ALWAYS so blatantly about the extremes. The slippery slope doesn't have to be about "A" and "Z", it can be about all the incremental steps in between. Remember when Mick Jagger had to sing "Let's Spend Some Time Together" and Elvis couldn't shake his pelvis on television? That seems so naive today, but it's also a prime example of the slope at work.
Interesting, but I have [what I think to be] a more nuanced take on it. Hip shaking didn't lead to a loosening of standards on television, as the fallacy would suggest. The standards were already in flux, which is why hip shaking was a thing in the first place. I agree with you about it being used in the extreme, but I think the problem comes when we look at it as a cause and effect. They're both effects of the same cause. I suspect that some nutjob actually will try to marry his dog at some point, but it won't be because we legitimized same sex marriage, as some conservatives will gleefully insist. They will both be a reaction to state imposed morality in a changing society.
-
<disclaimer this is not about emtee>
Does anyone remember around the time that gay marriage was being hotly debated in the USA? Remember all the concerned people talking about how if we let gay people marry the next thing you know, someone will want to marry their dog?
This is called a slippery slope fallacy. And the 'parents are demanding litter boxes for their 8th graders' is pretty much the same thing. If we start allowing transgender students to use different pronouns and bathrooms and otherwise make accommodations for them, then the next thing you know parents are going to start demanding litter boxes for their kids.
But it's not ALWAYS a fallacy, and it's not ALWAYS so blatantly about the extremes. The slippery slope doesn't have to be about "A" and "Z", it can be about all the incremental steps in between. Remember when Mick Jagger had to sing "Let's Spend Some Time Together" and Elvis couldn't shake his pelvis on television? That seems so naive today, but it's also a prime example of the slope at work.
Interesting, but I have [what I think to be] a more nuanced take on it. Hip shaking didn't lead to a loosening of standards on television, as the fallacy would suggest. The standards were already in flux, which is why hip shaking was a thing in the first place. I agree with you about it being used in the extreme, but I think the problem comes when we look at it as a cause and effect. They're both effects of the same cause. I suspect that some nutjob actually will try to marry his dog at some point, but it won't be because we legitimized same sex marriage, as some conservatives will gleefully insist. They will both be a reaction to state imposed morality in a changing society.
That's a pretty insightful take; I have to think about that. I was prepared to argue that Mick and Elvis ARE the cause, in the same way that the 1,000 cuts kill you. No one cut is solely responsible but it's the sum total. But I think you may be on to something.
-
Do these parents have litter boxes at home for their children and clean them?
Yes. In all three cases. However, I don't believe they are used in place of a toilet. It's more like a total immersive type of behavior. They lick their paws and pretend to eat from bowls on the floor. They hiss and purr and generally adopt the animals behaviors.
WTF?! :lol
-
I'll own whatever I need to own. I was pecking away on a phone during a 15 minute break and could have laid things out better at home on a PC.
This is a class A district and a wealthy one. I live in Central Florida. My wife's friend lives in Michigan.
One thing I learned from this conversation that I didn't realize (see my first sentence about not knowing what everyone else probably knows) is that this is a highly politicized subject. I was looking at it from a parenting perspective. The whole thing just seems so weird and detached from reality. Like snowflake parents on steroids.
This is really the most heartbreaking facet of the story.
I am a parent of a soon to be 21 y/o autistic son. Yes, we needed accommodations when he was in school. Compared to some issues kids have, my wife and I considered ourselves quite lucky with my son's challenges.
When I hear of things like..transgender, comfort animals, etc... I always think..what if that were my son..or daughter. How would I want this to go?
We had an aquaintance in town who's daughter thought she was transgender when they were in like 5th or 6th grade. The father, who was a lawyer (and was happy to tell whoever he could, a fucking blowhard), fucking accosted the school officials on behalf of his daughter.
There's a fine line between advocating and threatening. Especially when it's your child.
-
I’m fascinated by the two sides of the “slippery slope” conversation.
My take is that I don’t think Elvis or Mick (or Jim Morrison for that matter) are personally to blame. But I don’t think that negates the “slippery slope” argument.
People thought Gorgoroth was off the chart for putting sheep’s heads on spikes, but everyone who was shocked probably loved Alice Cooper as a kid…and their parents were just as shocked by him.
My wife and I were just talking today about how…at some point…there was a shift in school. It used to be that if you got a bad report at school, you were in trouble. But in more cases than not, if you get a bad report now, it’s the teacher who gets in trouble and the child is defended no matter what. This didn’t happen overnight, but where did it start? Taking away “swats” at school? Or a different step on the ladder? I don’t think you can point the finger at one defining moment in the paradigm shift, but the slippery slope happens.
Let’s take it back to what Harmony said. She’s right. Right now, the examples are trolling and they’re ridiculous. It’s ridiculous now for two reasons. 1) the people doing it are trolling (which also makes them completely disingenuous) and 2) they are moving way too fast. That’s not how slippery slopes work. But it’s not so far out to say that in 30 years, people who are then 30 WILL be standing up for something akin to this furry story that YOU think is totally ridiculous and then suddenly you will sound like like your parents (or possibly your grandparents) did about [insert any modern controversial moral based argument here].
Why do you think old people are always shocked? Their grandparents were shocked too…they just aren’t around anymore.
The curse of life in this world is that when you finally get to age when you actually see the cycle go around and you have that wake up OMG moment…then people laugh at you and call you old. Then that generation will have it’s own catch phrase with the same meaning as “OK boomer!” with the appropriate eyeroll attached.
-
So…teacher’s pet?
I'm sorry I'm not around more, because this thread should have been locked at this point. There was no topping that start. You sir are awarded 10 internet points.
-
I'll own whatever I need to own. I was pecking away on a phone during a 15 minute break and could have laid things out better at home on a PC.
This is a class A district and a wealthy one. I live in Central Florida. My wife's friend lives in Michigan.
One thing I learned from this conversation that I didn't realize (see my first sentence about not knowing what everyone else probably knows) is that this is a highly politicized subject. I was looking at it from a parenting perspective. The whole thing just seems so weird and detached from reality. Like snowflake parents on steroids.
This is really the most heartbreaking facet of the story.
I am a parent of a soon to be 21 y/o autistic son. Yes, we needed accommodations when he was in school. Compared to some issues kids have, my wife and I considered ourselves quite lucky with my son's challenges.
When I hear of things like..transgender, comfort animals, etc... I always think..what if that were my son..or daughter. How would I want this to go?
We had an aquaintance in town who's daughter thought she was transgender when they were in like 5th or 6th grade. The father, who was a lawyer (and was happy to tell whoever he could, a fucking blowhard), fucking accosted the school officials on behalf of his daughter.
There's a fine line between advocating and threatening. Especially when it's your child.
We're in a similar boat; you know that. And we've had to have certain accommodations. It's a case-by-case thing, and it's sometimes situational. I've written about some of this before; my stepson (he's technically my step son, but I think of him as my son) was being physically restrained on a weekly basis; they even had a room with blue padding to "let him calm down". We were having biweekly meetings with the school, and finally we opted for a full psych exam. We paid for it (it was several thousand dollars) but it was something that the school LEGALLY should have paid for, so this is something that is open to ALL students. That was when the autism spectrum diagnosis came through; he has literally not once been restrained since then. It was all a matter of understanding the root cause and dealing with it appropriately. I've alluded to it twice now, but the specifics of the matter are, the kids had to share two "interesting facts" about themselves to the class. Now, he's new to the school (as of January; we moved in large part because his old school system, which I've written about a lot, is a shit show on ice) and he's a... conspicuous kid; he's 14 years old, 6'1" and 260 lbs. who faced a significant amount of bullying in his previous school, and the current administration knows that from our pre-school meetings. One of his "facts" was simply that he identifies as a "furry". We've talked about it, to the best of my limited knowledge and with the help of a therapist and at least so far, there are none of the "behavioral" aspects, and none of the "sexual" aspects. As part of the sensory processing issues he has, he likes the idea of coat of fur, and often (at home) wears an orange fuzzy blanket around him and I think there's an association there that he's made. His online presence at gaming forums and what-not are as a "fox".
When he went to disclose that, the teacher pulled him aside and handled it 10000000000% correctly, IMO. She honored him, saying she understood his wanting to be open, but she counseled him to contemplate the consequences, to think hard about whether OTHER kids would accept that at face value (or draw assumptions). She notified us of the discussion, and her advice, and asked us to weigh in before she went forward with the classroom exercise where the students would stand up and present. Now, on one hand, I get the teacher's position, and based on my way of thinking, that's the way I would go. I'd pick two facts that were a little less... personal or open to interpretation. But I also get the need this child has to be accepted for who he is. I've been around for about 60 or 65% of his life, now, and am a father-figure of sorts (I've also written about his shit-head dad; his response on the team call with the teacher? "What the hell's a furry. I've never heard of that in my life!" Flat out lie, since he regularly hacks into his son's online accounts.). As such I've tried to reinforce in him all the things it's taken me decades to learn: be considerate of others, and their feelings, but be just as kind to your own feelings. You can't control your feelings, but you CAN control - and you're responsible for - your actions in handling your feelings. Be who you are, love who you are, love who you want to love, and build your own story. DO things. Experience things. Talk to people. Share with people. But at 14, we're not good at assessing or accepting consequences. He WANTS to be liked, and this is potentially one of those things that bring his various life goals into conflict. And he has to resolve that, perhaps with our (his mom and me) help. We did finally suggest that he opt for less complicated facts, but that if he really insisted on sharing that facet of his life, do so in a manner that minimizes that complication. Perhaps rather than say "I'm a furry", share his affinity with foxes and leave the "f-word" out of it for now. Those that know can make the implication, and those that don't, or aren't inclined to be tolerant, can be kept at arm's length. Not perfect, but the world isn't perfect.
-
Wow, thanks for sharing that personal story. It really helps bring perspective in a very unique manner.
One of my nephews (11) is on the spectrum and he definitely has some tactile idiosyncrasies. From a very young age, he preferred pressure blankets and enclosed spaces to help calm his stimming. He does this less now as he prefers making videos on his laptop - mostly commercials interestingly as he is way into logos and jingles. As much as I struggle to communicate with him the way that I want - which is not the way he wants - I do find being around him to be fascinating and challenging to my neurotypical brain.
As for the furry alliance it makes sense to me that he's taken on the persona of his online handle and translated it to his everyday in the way he has. As I was reading it, I couldn't help think about the history of the way kids on the margins of cliques in schools - goth kids, punk kids, etc - look to find an identity that they can connect with to make it through that period of life when everything can be so difficult. Maybe the furry persona is the new outlet for some of these kids?
-
I do find being around him to be fascinating and challenging to my neurotypical brain.
Thank you for the kind words; I talk about myself freely, it's another matter with someone else. I feel okay with it, since he's so okay with it, and I know the consequences here won't be disastrous for him.
But that one sentence really bears repeating. I've learned so much from him; I literally find myself watching the same sensory inputs hitting me, my wife, my son, my other kids, and seeing his reaction being sometimes radically different. I don't mean the normal sort of "that makes me angry whereas it's only a mild irritant to you" that we all experience. I mean radical, science-based reactions.
-
I do find being around him to be fascinating and challenging to my neurotypical brain.
Thank you for the kind words; I talk about myself freely, it's another matter with someone else. I feel okay with it, since he's so okay with it, and I know the consequences here won't be disastrous for him.
But that one sentence really bears repeating. I've learned so much from him; I literally find myself watching the same sensory inputs hitting me, my wife, my son, my other kids, and seeing his reaction being sometimes radically different. I don't mean the normal sort of "that makes me angry whereas it's only a mild irritant to you" that we all experience. I mean radical, science-based reactions.
Yup!
-
Three times in the last 6 months, parents have gone ballistic with the school system and board because their child identifies as a furry. The parents want special treatment such as litter boxes. When I heard this I thought my wife's friend was pulling our leg so I Googled it. Crazy.
as a literal furry on this literal website this is a total hoax lol. it's fox news pandering right-wing garbage to cause a panic bcuz the vast majority of the furry fandom is LGBTQ+
-
Want to know how cynical I am?
To this day, it persists that “The Momo Challenge” was a hoax. (Look it up on Wiki, it’s got its own entry) Now, I don’t doubt that reports of massive casualties coming from this are totally bogus (I don’t think children are that stupid) but people say the video never existed. I saw it personally, first hand, with my own two eyes. The video absolutely existed, it was the creepy face everyone has seen, and the character does instruct children to do “fun” things around the home that would absolutely result in their harm or death. I watched it myself for probably about two minutes. It came across as an extremely sick joke, but it was a real video.
It has since been pulled, and since the entire internet now says it was a hoax, no one believes me.
I’m not saying the same thing is happening here, I’m just relating a personal true story to explain how cynical I am.
-
Want to know how cynical I am?
To this day, it persists that “The Momo Challenge” was a hoax. (Look it up on Wiki, it’s got its own entry) Now, I don’t doubt that reports of massive casualties coming from this are totally bogus (I don’t think children are that stupid) but people say the video never existed. I saw it personally, first hand, with my own two eyes. The video absolutely existed, it was the creepy face everyone has seen, and the character does instruct children to do “fun” things around the home that would absolutely result in their harm or death. I watched it myself for probably about two minutes. It came across as an extremely sick joke, but it was a real video.
It has since been pulled, and since the entire internet now says it was a hoax, no one believes me.
I’m not saying the same thing is happening here, I’m just relating a personal true story to explain how cynical I am.
I had not heard of this, so decided to just google it. I easily found a report on the video which had clips of the video. And god DAMN is that a creepy looking face. I think the hoax part was that children weren't offing themselves or seriously injuring themselves in huge numbers. Not that the video never existed. But I might be wrong.
-
I hate to say it, but that would be a bit of a relief. If the video itself is now finally back out there, at least people won’t be calling me crazy for saying that it did exist. There was a time when CNN even ran a story claiming that no one‘s ever actually seen the video and they could find no evidence that the video ever existed. For a long time after that I had to give up even talking about it. Because no one believed me.
-
I hate to say it, but that would be a bit of a relief. If the video itself is now finally back out there, at least people won’t be calling me crazy for saying that it did exist. There was a time when CNN even ran a story claiming that no one‘s ever actually seen the video and they could find no evidence that the video ever existed. For a long time after that I had to give up even talking about it. Because no one believed me.
Well, it goes to show something I've said for a long time and will keep saying. IT'S NOT ONE SIDE. IT'S NOT ONE GROUP. IT'S NOT JUST THE "THEM". The truthfulness, the veracity of our information is highly suspect these days as a general proposition, and anyone who is picking and choosing their information simply because it "agrees" with them or fits their world view is as ignorant as any of the "deplorables/libtards" on both ends of the extreme at whom we so frequently point fingers.
-
I hate to say it, but that would be a bit of a relief. If the video itself is now finally back out there, at least people won’t be calling me crazy for saying that it did exist. There was a time when CNN even ran a story claiming that no one‘s ever actually seen the video and they could find no evidence that the video ever existed. For a long time after that I had to give up even talking about it. Because no one believed me.
Well, it goes to show something I've said for a long time and will keep saying. IT'S NOT ONE SIDE. IT'S NOT ONE GROUP. IT'S NOT JUST THE "THEM". The truthfulness, the veracity of our information is highly suspect these days as a general proposition, and anyone who is picking and choosing their information simply because it "agrees" with them or fits their world view is as ignorant as any of the "deplorables/libtards" on both ends of the extreme at whom we so frequently point fingers.
Let’s not take this to P/R territory. We’re dancing on the edge already.
-
I hate to say it, but that would be a bit of a relief. If the video itself is now finally back out there, at least people won’t be calling me crazy for saying that it did exist. There was a time when CNN even ran a story claiming that no one‘s ever actually seen the video and they could find no evidence that the video ever existed. For a long time after that I had to give up even talking about it. Because no one believed me.
Well, it goes to show something I've said for a long time and will keep saying. IT'S NOT ONE SIDE. IT'S NOT ONE GROUP. IT'S NOT JUST THE "THEM". The truthfulness, the veracity of our information is highly suspect these days as a general proposition, and anyone who is picking and choosing their information simply because it "agrees" with them or fits their world view is as ignorant as any of the "deplorables/libtards" on both ends of the extreme at whom we so frequently point fingers.
Let’s not take this to P/R territory. We’re dancing on the edge already.
I didn't take it there.
-
I took a few days away from here because honestly, I felt demoralized and angry after posting this.
My intent was to try to learn about parents and their reaction, levels of support, etc., for children who identify this way. And to understand why a parent might get irate when special accommodations are not agreed to. As I understand it there are some things, like a litter box for instance, that are...emotional props that enable the individual to immerse themselves deeper into an alternate reality that provides comfort. The litter box is not used to deficate in. There are other things, like saucer bowls of milk that are actually used. I figured that someone here would identify this way or have kids that do and they could shed some light on this for me.
Moreover, I wanted insight on how far should parents go when providing this alternate reality setting, before actual harm might be done. It feels to me as if our society and it's love of animals - humanizing them in many ways - combined with cosplay and virtual reality, gaming...etc, is taking us into uncharted territory.
To reiterate. These private meetings happened. They are not news stories to be found on the internet. My wife's friend was troubled by how angry the last meeting went. As such, she called her best friend, my wife, and I listened to the call. It troubled her so much, especially having occurred three times ( the last meeting being the worst) that she said she wanted to retire because things were getting so crazy.
I also admitted in my first sentence that I didn't know anything about this until the phone call. So obviously I was not aware that this was some political hot button topic - hence, why people came at me so hard. I felt assaulted and confused.
I greatly appreciate the people who tried to show support and also for those who shared personal experiences. This helps me to understand how complicated this situation can be for parents.
Peace out....
-
If someone born female identifies as male, or without gender, or somewhere in between, that's up to them (or some would say, not up to them but rather just the way they were born). If it's a biological male who identifies as female, okay, same thing. And that same thing is "who gives a shit?" I really don't.
But a child identifying as a cat or dog or whatever, I'm sorry, that's just not the same thing. Gender identification is a very personal thing and I'll defend people's rights to identify however they want. And I guess that extends to kids. But a kid who decides that they're a cat or dog or whatever is not exercising their gender identification rights; they're deeply immersed in make-believe and alternate reality, and I think humoring them to a certain degree might make sense, but I'm gonna draw the line at schools having to accomodate them. Gender ID is 100% mental, and no one other than the person involved can tell you what they ID as, if they even can. Species ID is biological. No, Johnny, you are not a cat, and the school is not obligated to provide a litter box for you.
-
For me, though, it's less about the issue itself than emtee's core question: where is the line for parents. As much as I agree with Orbert and as much as I want to teach my kid to be his own man and all, there are limits to this. We still live in a society. School is not home. There is no right to be perfectly comfortable with all your psychological needs met at all times. There are benefits to fitting in. There are benefits to learning to deal with adversity. I owe him to teach him how to fit in so that when he's old enough to make the decision for himself, he knows how to. I don't subscribe to this notion that we ALWAYS have to ACCEPT everyone exactly how they present. If I'm hiring for a job and I have two candidates, and I'm looking for creativity, I may go with the dude with the bone in his nose and the painted finger nails. But if I'm looking for a salesperson, or a tactical process person, I may go with the girl with the prim dress and subtle makeup and finely manicured nails. Whether the kid accepts it or not, adopts it or not, they have to understand that SOME people are going to judge them. That's not bigotry that's human nature. So putting my kid - who has been bullied to the point he was punched in the face in his old school - in a position where he might be judged because I forced his school to let him lick milk out of a pet's bowl, not going to happen. I'd rather take the time and teach my kid that he can lick his milk from the toilet for all I care AT HOME, but in school he's going to have to drink it from a milk carton like everyone else.
I'm sorry; I may be old school, but we're going soft with this shit. A little discomfort isn't a bad thing. When I think of my grandparents - who got on a fucking boat with the clothes on their backs to come to America, not speaking a word of English, and here I am today, I feel ZERO sympathy for a kid that doesn't feel exactly 100% comfortable and relaxed in every setting. We're setting that kid up for failure.
There's a great line in Yellowstone; native American man walks in and sees his kid sitting there with a peanut butter and jelly sandwich on the plate, and he asks "what's this?" Mom says "oh, he doesn't want peanut butter and jelly." And dad says "he's not hungry enough." Goddamn right. :)
-
I was hoping Adami would weigh in on this. Of all of us, he is a student of the mind and of behavior.
-
If someone born female identifies as male, or without gender, or somewhere in between, that's up to them (or some would say, not up to them but rather just the way they were born). If it's a biological male who identifies as female, okay, same thing. And that same thing is "who gives a shit?" I really don't.
But a child identifying as a cat or dog or whatever, I'm sorry, that's just not the same thing. Gender identification is a very personal thing and I'll defend people's rights to identify however they want. And I guess that extends to kids. But a kid who decides that they're a cat or dog or whatever is not exercising their gender identification rights; they're deeply immersed in make-believe and alternate reality, and I think humoring them to a certain degree might make sense, but I'm gonna draw the line at schools having to accomodate them. Gender ID is 100% mental, and no one other than the person involved can tell you what they ID as, if they even can. Species ID is biological. No, Johnny, you are not a cat, and the school is not obligated to provide a litter box for you.
But even as I am reading this…weren’t the *exact* same arguments used about gender identity 30 (or 50) years ago? I feel like I could substitute that topic, and I’d be looking at this exact conversation back then.
-
I was hoping Adami would weigh in on this. Of all of us, he is a student of the mind and of behavior.
Honestly I've avoided posting in this thread because I have some issues with it. I figured it'd be better for me to just read than to cause any issues.
However, I'll do my best to avoid my concerns and try to address what I perceive as your questions.
It didn't seem like you were asking about furries in general, and since I am not an expert on them, I'll refrain from even guessing as to what's going on there. And we seem to have a furry on the board, and I can let them talk about it.
As far as why parents would do this? Putting aside the fact that I'm not sure many have, assuming everything you've told is true, I think it's been 3 parents who have gone a bit nuts? Honestly I think that's a low number for parents going nuts about most things. I'm surprised there aren't stories about parents threatening violence because of the use of white paper over black paper for their kids to drawn on, you know? In the end, there's not really a huge explanation to this. Some people are just weird and get really angry over very little thing. Some of those people are parents. Some of those parents have kids with odd needs/wants. Mix them all together and you get parents threatening to sue a school for not letting her kid bring peanuts or for the school letting his kid get a failing grade. Parents are just really dumb and bad sometimes and can have bad tempers. Unless there's more specific information than parents getting angry cause their kids aren't getting special treatment, I don't have much to go on. Parents are a main reason I don't like working with kids. I usually can't stand parents in a professional capacity, their relationship to their kids often blind them to any sense of rationality.
Sorry it's not a more scientific explanation, but I just haven't seen enough info to see anything more than a small amount of people being insanely irrational and some of those people being parents.
-
Meow.
-
also fwiw like 95% of this thread seems to be operating on the conflation of "furry" and "otherkin" which are two very different things lol
-
Otherkin?
*googles otherkin*
-
also fwiw like 95% of this thread seems to be operating on the conflation of "furry" and "otherkin" which are two very different things lol
Unless it's a translation issue, I'm not sure a "lol" is warranted here; I think there ought to be some acknowledgement that EVERYONE is, despite a lack of knowledge on the subject, being eminently respectful and willing to discuss this with an open mind. We all know full well that ignorance - whether accidental or purposeful - tends to breed fear and insecurity and misunderstanding, which then leads to a hardening of the "in-groups" and "out-groups" until hilarity ensues. Whether that line is clear or blurred, if one isn't even aware that the line exists, it's a sort of counterproductive move to make that line a point of judgement.
I say this respectfully but I don't give a shit about the difference between a furry or an otherkin (other than as human curiosity). The fact remains that I have a son that is dealing with a circumstance and I have to help him navigate his interface with the real world in such a way that he comes out better for it.
We were watching TV last night and a commercial came on that had anthropomorphic cats in tuxedos, and I paused it to make a comment to my wife. She says, "oh, did you hear? Supposedly, one of the schools in the [neighboring] school system has a litter box in the bathroom. Can you believe it?" And I related the conversation here, and the possibility that it was a hoax. We also sort of reaffirmed our commitment to honoring our kid, but at the same time preparing him for a world that might not genuflect at every little quirk he brings into it.
-
Otherkin?
*googles otherkin*
I be also never heard that term before.
-
Otherkin?
*googles otherkin*
I be also never heard that term before.
Neither have I. And I want to thank Cyril for expanding my limited knowledge on the topic.
I don't know that chastising someone for an 'lol' (that can be open to many meanings) is helpful either. It could be that people who participate in furry (should I capitalize that?) culture are aware that non-furries attempting to talk about subjects we obviously know nothing about is amusing. Sort of like someone on this board posting about Kiss culture and talking about how great Paul Stanley is on drums. It could also be an uncomfortable 'lol' in that Cyril can see from some of the responses here that perhaps the discussions about their culture is seen as unwelcome or something to mock.
At any rate, I'm with Adami, allowing someone who is better informed on the topic participate seems like the best way to learn more about it. If we are going to help our children navigate these topics in the real world then understanding them seems to be prudent - at least to me. YMMV
-
If someone born female identifies as male, or without gender, or somewhere in between, that's up to them (or some would say, not up to them but rather just the way they were born). If it's a biological male who identifies as female, okay, same thing. And that same thing is "who gives a shit?" I really don't.
But a child identifying as a cat or dog or whatever, I'm sorry, that's just not the same thing. Gender identification is a very personal thing and I'll defend people's rights to identify however they want. And I guess that extends to kids. But a kid who decides that they're a cat or dog or whatever is not exercising their gender identification rights; they're deeply immersed in make-believe and alternate reality, and I think humoring them to a certain degree might make sense, but I'm gonna draw the line at schools having to accomodate them. Gender ID is 100% mental, and no one other than the person involved can tell you what they ID as, if they even can. Species ID is biological. No, Johnny, you are not a cat, and the school is not obligated to provide a litter box for you.
But even as I am reading this…weren’t the *exact* same arguments used about gender identity 30 (or 50) years ago? I feel like I could substitute that topic, and I’d be looking at this exact conversation back then.
I get your point, but I think it's a pretty big leap to go from transgender to trans-species. I don't think that's the same conversation at all.
-
I remember the basic argument, which was biology, if that's the connection you're making. If you're born biologically male, you're a boy; biologically female, you're a girl. Act like one. We now know that it's more complicated than that.
But a human is not a cat, or a dog, or a hamster. If in 30 years it turns out that humans can actually be cats or dogs, okay. Right now though, I'm just not seeing it. It's make-believe. A kid wants to be a cat at home, fine. At school, you're a fucking human being.
-
I prefer all my women to be non-furry. :hat :p
-
To reiterate. These private meetings happened. They are not news stories to be found on the internet. My wife's friend was troubled by how angry the last meeting went. As such, she called her best friend, my wife, and I listened to the call. It troubled her so much, especially having occurred three times ( the last meeting being the worst) that she said she wanted to retire because things were getting so crazy.
Were these three meetings about the same parents and kids?
-
I prefer all my women to be non-furry. :hat :p
Amen!!
-
God I wish I could go back to the 80s and finish my time there.
-
God I wish I could go back to the 80s and finish my time there.
:lol
I do think to myself all the time that I'm glad that I won't be here in another 50+ years. Can't imagine what the world is going to turn into.
-
I am not even sure where to go with this, but I find this "I identify as..." thing fascinating. I had to look up "furry" and WebMD says
Furries are people who have an interest in anthropomorphic animals, or animals with human qualities. Many furries create their own animal character, known as a fursona, which functions as their avatar within furry communities
Ok, so it is a thing, an "interest" but is that such a defining characteristic of their personality that they need a special term for it to identify by? It doesn't read as if these people believe they are the animal they identify with, which to Orbert's point, is a different...erm... animal. People use the term "Metalhead" to describe those who like metal music. But those people are still people.
-
I don't know if that WebMD definition goes far enough. If it's to the point where someone needs a litter box in the bathroom, then this is not just an interest in anthropomorphic animals, this is identifying as an animal. I've heard of it happening with adults; they literally get lost in the fantasy. Prior to this discussion, I hadn't heard of it among children, but I can certainly see it happening. Kids' abilities to get lost in make-believe far exceeds that of adults.
-
That's what I am struggling with. It is all over the map. The quote I posted gave no indication it's a situation where someone believes they are an animal. In many instances "Identifying as" doesn't equal "is." And it is becoming hard to know where someone is with their self-identification, and how to accept it.
Rachel Donezal was black, because she said she was, until everyone realized she wasn't, but then race is apparently a "social construct" so she is. She can identify as black (whatever that even means) but the genetics and biology don't make it so any more than Orbert can be that tiger.
-
So...you're not a llama?
-
By that same thought…is this any different from the fanatical sub-culture of Avatar? Anyone remember that? There were people so obsessed with the movie that they didn’t want to leave the fantasy of that world?
-
Rachel Dolezal was black, because she said she was, until everyone realized she wasn't, but then race is apparently a "social construct" so she is. She can identify as black (whatever that even means)
I like youtuber T1J's videos on subjects like this because he's usually very nuanced. like this one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7HD5jHSkmN8
TLDR: race and gender don't really work the same way
-
oh fuck.......I have an animal in my username............does that mean I'm actually a furry?
-
oh fuck.......I have an animal in my username............does that mean I'm actually a furry?
Kip's lookin' pretty furry too
-
oh fuck.......I have an animal in my username............does that mean I'm actually a furry?
Kip's lookin' pretty furry too
:angel: :heart
-
That's what I am struggling with. It is all over the map. The quote I posted gave no indication it's a situation where someone believes they are an animal. In many instances "Identifying as" doesn't equal "is." And it is becoming hard to know where someone is with their self-identification, and how to accept it.
Rachel Donezal was black, because she said she was, until everyone realized she wasn't, but then race is apparently a "social construct" so she is. She can identify as black (whatever that even means) but the genetics and biology don't make it so any more than Orbert can be that tiger.
But at some point all these machinations are going to fall flat. There's going to be a logical reckoning. It was a great dawning of realization for me, back whenever it was that my gay roommate in college (true story) didn't choose to be gay. He was attracted to men the same way I was attracted to curvy women with pretty faces. We've already sort of glossed over the notion that most pedophiles didn't choose to like little boys and little girls, but we rationalized that by saying "just because you feel it doesn't mean you have to act on it"; basically the "harm" argument. And one of the arguments, at least back in the day, was that African Americans - and any other U.S. minority as compared to "white" - didn't choose to their races, and further, it was something they couldn't really control or mask. You knew straight away 99% of the time whether someone was African American or whatever (how else could you know to cross the street?).
But that was all predicated on "tolerance". You didn't have to LIKE what was going on around you; you COULD secretly think - wrongly, IMO - that homosexuality was a moral problem. You COULD secretly think - wrongly, IMO - that the races weren't entirely equal, but you couldn't ACT on it. And that's the way we conduct most things in life. I don't have to LIKE the structures and strictures of society, but if I want to participate in it, I have to make concessions and/or bear the consequences. We've moved past "tolerance" like a tornado and are in fact even moving past "acceptance". It's not enough now to even "ACCEPT" those around us. We've now got to forget everything we've been told/we have learned about things like choice, free will, etc., and are now subject to the whims and wills of 7.6 billion individuals, whether we agree with them or not. It's not a tenable solution, and it's CERTAINLY not a path to removing the in-groups and out-groups that are definitionally at the heart of our problems of divisiveness and bigotry.
-
Rachel Donezal was black, because she said she was, until everyone realized she wasn't, but then race is apparently a "social construct" so she is. She can identify as black (whatever that even means) but the genetics and biology don't make it so any more than Orbert can be that tiger.
This was an interesting case. I honestly believe that if more people start trying to pull this, that we'll eventually get to the point where this is acceptable. If biological sex is independent of gender, why does race need to be tethered to genetics?
-
Humans are an animal species, we are "bipedal primate mammals", Hominids. Some humans just believe Humans are the dominant animal species on this planet.
Humans being animals is what the lyrics to Panther by Pain of Salvation is mentioning, I would think most people on this forum would have caught on to that meaning of the lyrics at least. How we are all animals, with different perspectives, yet some feel like a Panther living in a Dogs world, feline in a world gone canine.
If you look throughout history, you will find some fascinating stories and information about human animal hybrids typically called, Chimeras. There are stories that say humans experimented before with cross-breeding which gave birth to some of these Mythological Chimeras.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_hybrid_creatures_in_folklore
That's what I am struggling with. It is all over the map. The quote I posted gave no indication it's a situation where someone believes they are an animal. In many instances "Identifying as" doesn't equal "is." And it is becoming hard to know where someone is with their self-identification, and how to accept it.
Rachel Donezal was black, because she said she was, until everyone realized she wasn't, but then race is apparently a "social construct" so she is. She can identify as black (whatever that even means) but the genetics and biology don't make it so any more than Orbert can be that tiger.
But at some point all these machinations are going to fall flat. There's going to be a logical reckoning. It was a great dawning of realization for me, back whenever it was that my gay roommate in college (true story) didn't choose to be gay. He was attracted to men the same way I was attracted to curvy women with pretty faces. We've already sort of glossed over the notion that most pedophiles didn't choose to like little boys and little girls, but we rationalized that by saying "just because you feel it doesn't mean you have to act on it"; basically the "harm" argument. And one of the arguments, at least back in the day, was that African Americans - and any other U.S. minority as compared to "white" - didn't choose to their races, and further, it was something they couldn't really control or mask. You knew straight away 99% of the time whether someone was African American or whatever (how else could you know to cross the street?).
But that was all predicated on "tolerance". You didn't have to LIKE what was going on around you; you COULD secretly think - wrongly, IMO - that homosexuality was a moral problem. You COULD secretly think - wrongly, IMO - that the races weren't entirely equal, but you couldn't ACT on it. And that's the way we conduct most things in life. I don't have to LIKE the structures and strictures of society, but if I want to participate in it, I have to make concessions and/or bear the consequences. We've moved past "tolerance" like a tornado and are in fact even moving past "acceptance". It's not enough now to even "ACCEPT" those around us. We've now got to forget everything we've been told/we have learned about things like choice, free will, etc., and are now subject to the whims and wills of 7.6 billion individuals, whether we agree with them or not. It's not a tenable solution, and it's CERTAINLY not a path to removing the in-groups and out-groups that are definitionally at the heart of our problems of divisiveness and bigotry.
Black and White are just descriptors to describe a persons skin tone. Black people are not just from Africa. Asians are also white, but for some reason they are described as yellow. Indigenous Americans and Arabs of the Middle East are both brown in skin tone, but one is only called Red Skinned. Mexican and Arab men are a bit difficult to tell apart, to quote Ramrod from Super Troopers, "He thinks I'm Mexican."
This is why to me, Race does not exist. If we really want to label people truthfully, we should be labelling them based on place of origin. It's more complicated now since humans have become so mixed within the world. If you come here and see some of the Pueblo Native Americans out in the cities, many would assume and think they're either Pacific Islander, "White", or "Black", but in reality they are Pueblo Native Americans just like me. Blacks from Jamaica or Haiti are not African American, there have always been humans with a dark skin tone residing in those areas.
The issue is, Eurocentric Humans have utilized many forms of Justification to claim that they are the ultimate, number one, chosen dominant race of humanity, that must save all of mankind from destruction. In the early 20th century, they tried to include intelligence in that justification by measuring brain size.
I don't like using Wikipedia as a source, but this is what was on there...
In the 18th century, debates surrounding the institution of slavery in the Americas hinged on the question of whether innate differences in intellectual capacity existed between races, in particular between black people and white people.[8] Some European philosophers and scientists, such as Voltaire, David Hume, Immanuel Kant, and Carl Linnaeus, either argued or simply presupposed that white people were intellectually superior.[9] Others, such as Henri Gregoire and Constantin de Chasseboeuf, argued that ancient Egypt had been a black civilization, and that it was therefore black people who had "discovered the elements of science and art, at a time when all other men were barbarous."[10] During the French Revolution, Jean-Baptiste Belley, an elected member of the National Convention and the Council of Five Hundred who had been born in Senegal, became a leading proponent of the idea of racial intellectual equality.[11]
In 1785, Thomas Jefferson wrote of his "suspicion" that black people were "inferior to... whites in endowments both of body and mind."[10] However in 1791, after corresponding with the free African-American polymath Benjamin Banneker, Jefferson wrote that he hoped to see such "instances of moral eminence so multiplied as to prove that the want of talents observed in them is merely the effect of their degraded condition, and not proceeding from any difference in the structure of the parts on which intellect depends."[12]
Samuel Morton, an American physician, used the study of human skulls to argue for racial differences in intelligence.
During the 19th and early 20th centuries, the idea that there are differences in the brain structures and brain sizes of different races, and that this implied differences in intelligence, was a popular topic, inspiring numerous typological studies.[13][14][15] Samuel Morton's Crania Americana, published in 1839, was one such study, arguing that intelligence was correlated with brain size and that both of these metrics varied between racial groups.[16]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_race_and_intelligence_controversy
I don't have to LIKE the structures and strictures of society, but if I want to participate in it, I have to make concessions and/or bear the consequences.
Here is another issue. There are many humans that had no choice but to adopt that Eurocentric societal structure or become extinct. The consequence for not participating in it was annihilation by genocide, when they couldn't "kill the man", they shifted to destroying the very essence and identity that makes that man, the societal structure in which their lifestyle is based upon. As an example, "kill the Indian, save the man." Also, this was done to animals as that Eurocentric Societal Structure demanded animals to give up their habitats and migrate, some are now endangered and some have gone extinct. Native Americans were not the one's that wiped out the buffalo population...
By that same thought…is this any different from the fanatical sub-culture of Avatar? Anyone remember that? There were people so obsessed with the movie that they didn’t want to leave the fantasy of that world?
I believe, this is due to humans having a desire to escape reality. To escape the reality that the world is not a utopia, or dandelions, sunshine, and rainbows all the time. The weather tells us that the world is not always pleasant, the sun doesn't always shine. All animals/organisms struggle in this reality.
I also feel that with Avatar, humans desire that same connection as those Avatar beings had with the nature and their mother tree. Avatar is a conglomeration of Indigenous cultures throughout the world, to create a utopia like world. This is why the creator meant for it to be visual and for people to experience this "utopia". It's why I also say, that every human has this, but for some reason, some humans forgot or lost it along the path of life.
In regards to people acting out upon their desires to escape reality, such as becoming a Furry. I don't have an issue as long as the understanding of reality is still apparent. But don't expect others to easily tolerate or accept such a desire. That is because their own perspective of reality is highly based on their cultural beliefs. All human perspectives of reality are based upon their cultural beliefs. Which this world is dominated based upon one central belief with a disregard for the other perspectives of reality.
Hence, this is where Stadler is pointing out the Tolerance and Acceptance of those other perspectives of reality that are not chosen, but that a human is born with or into. Just as the Eurocentric humans did not tolerate or accept those perspective and forced them into adopting theirs, so are these groups utilizing the same by forcing others to adopt their perspective of reality.
-
The issue is, Eurocentric Humans have utilized many forms of Justification to claim that they are the ultimate, number one, chosen dominant race of humanity, that must save all of mankind from destruction. In the early 20th century, they tried to include intelligence in that justification by measuring brain size.
But I'm not talking about the relative perception of place here. I'm not interested in what members of what race thought them superior or not, at least for this conversation. I'm also not going to make the argument that man (as in homo sapiens) is perfect; we advance in fits and starts, sometimes learning more from our mistakes (or the mistakes of a few) than our successes.
I don't have to LIKE the structures and strictures of society, but if I want to participate in it, I have to make concessions and/or bear the consequences.
Here is another issue. There are many humans that had no choice but to adopt that Eurocentric societal structure or become extinct. The consequence for not participating in it was annihilation by genocide, when they couldn't "kill the man", they shifted to destroying the very essence and identity that makes that man, the societal structure in which their lifestyle is based upon. As an example, "kill the Indian, save the man." Also, this was done to animals as that Eurocentric Societal Structure demanded animals to give up their habitats and migrate, some are now endangered and some have gone extinct. Native Americans were not the one's that wiped out the buffalo population...
And again, I'm not looking to relitigate all the sins of mankind's past. If we want to go down that path, then it's a wholly different conversation. Not for nothing, but we're talking "First World Problems" here; the Ukrainians on the front line probably WISH they had the luxury of debating what bathroom to use and whether you can check "female" if you have a penis or not.
I believe, this is due to humans having a desire to escape reality. To escape the reality that the world is not a utopia, or dandelions, sunshine, and rainbows all the time. The weather tells us that the world is not always pleasant, the sun doesn't always shine. All animals/organisms struggle in this reality.
I also feel that with Avatar, humans desire that same connection as those Avatar beings had with the nature and their mother tree. Avatar is a conglomeration of Indigenous cultures throughout the world, to create a utopia like world. This is why the creator meant for it to be visual and for people to experience this "utopia". It's why I also say, that every human has this, but for some reason, some humans forgot or lost it along the path of life.
In regards to people acting out upon their desires to escape reality, such as becoming a Furry. I don't have an issue as long as the understanding of reality is still apparent. But don't expect others to easily tolerate or accept such a desire. That is because their own perspective of reality is highly based on their cultural beliefs. All human perspectives of reality are based upon their cultural beliefs. Which this world is dominated based upon one central belief with a disregard for the other perspectives of reality.
Hence, this is where Stadler is pointing out the Tolerance and Acceptance of those other perspectives of reality that are not chosen, but that a human is born with or into. Just as the Eurocentric humans did not tolerate or accept those perspective and forced them into adopting theirs, so are these groups utilizing the same by forcing others to adopt their perspective of reality.
This is also as good a place as any to bring in that other topic I love to talk about so much; the mass insecurity that we as Americans (and I limit it to that, because that's all I can speak to) exhibit every day. I don't believe "being a furry" means you're insecure; it doesn't work that way. But we have a culture that not only can't seem to abolish the very in-groups and out-groups that cause most of our problems, but we seem hell bent on creating even more. And then have the gall to point to science and yet wonder "why did people react THAT way?" If we're going to continue this inexorable trek toward the individual, then we need to start committing to that. If any person can determine their sexuality, their gender, their race, based on their "feelings", then why the constant attacks on the wealthy? Why can't I make my goal, then, to amass as much wealth as I can? Why do I have to kowtow to a government that seems more and more every day interested in their own self-sustenance and the well-being of only those on the right "team", as opposed to the 335 million (in America) they are nominally charged to lead?
-
Rachel Donezal was black, because she said she was, until everyone realized she wasn't, but then race is apparently a "social construct" so she is. She can identify as black (whatever that even means) but the genetics and biology don't make it so any more than Orbert can be that tiger.
This was an interesting case. I honestly believe that if more people start trying to pull this, that we'll eventually get to the point where this is acceptable. If biological sex is independent of gender, why does race need to be tethered to genetics?
(https://i.gifer.com/Cddj.gif)
-
I guess this conversation went to a place where this article might be relevant.
https://nypost.com/2021/06/28/oli-london-identifies-as-korean-after-surgeries-to-look-like-bts-jimin/
-
God I wish I could go back to the 80s and finish my time there.
I'm sure it wasn't easy for older people in the 70s and 80s to turn on their TVs and see Kiss or And The Cradle Will Rock.
The future isn't that scary and all you need to do is choose to meet it with an open mind every day.
-
God I wish I could go back to the 80s and finish my time there.
I'm sure it wasn't easy for older people in the 70s and 80s to turn on their TVs and see Kiss or And The Cradle Will Rock.
The future isn't that scary and all you need to do is choose to meet it with an open mind every day.
I don't disagree with that, and I certainly try (sometimes failing) to do just that. But if I've learned anything in my 39 years on this planet, it's that we are a species DRIVEN by fear. Whether it's fear of the unknown, fear of failing, fear of our own insecurities, fear of the other guy fucking me over/getting one over on me, fear of being alone... it is an integral part of who we are as a species. Just look at the P/R thread for daily evidence of that; there are some people in this world that simply cannot face the fact that someone else doesn't agree with them, even though ostensibly, with an open mind, one would recognize that there are potentially 7.6 BILLION different points of view in this world, with no guarantees that any one particular one - least of all YOURS - is right.
-
39?? GTFO! :lol
-
He looks a lot older in his avatar pic.
-
39?? GTFO! :lol
Give or take...
-
He looks a lot older in his avatar pic.
We were in Disney a couple weeks ago, and at one point we went to see the Muppets 3D adventure. It's pretty cool (I'm a Muppets fan, though) but the best part was... they had a balcony on the right side of the theater (stage left) with Waldorf and Statler. I find them hilarious to this day. Best part of the show.
-
God I wish I could go back to the 80s and finish my time there.
I'm sure it wasn't easy for older people in the 70s and 80s to turn on their TVs and see Kiss or And The Cradle Will Rock.
The future isn't that scary and all you need to do is choose to meet it with an open mind every day.
I don't disagree with that, and I certainly try (sometimes failing) to do just that. But if I've learned anything in my 39 years on this planet, it's that we are a species DRIVEN by fear. Whether it's fear of the unknown, fear of failing, fear of our own insecurities, fear of the other guy fucking me over/getting one over on me, fear of being alone... it is an integral part of who we are as a species. Just look at the P/R thread for daily evidence of that; there are some people in this world that simply cannot face the fact that someone else doesn't agree with them, even though ostensibly, with an open mind, one would recognize that there are potentially 7.6 BILLION different points of view in this world, with no guarantees that any one particular one - least of all YOURS - is right.
I've read the posts about how you handle your son and it's inspiring. Having an open mind doesn't necessarily mean total understanding, or endorsement. It just means the willingness to meet somewhere in the middle, keep an open mind, be supportive. :tup
-
He looks a lot older in his avatar pic.
We were in Disney a couple weeks ago, and at one point we went to see the Muppets 3D adventure. It's pretty cool (I'm a Muppets fan, though) but the best part was... they had a balcony on the right side of the theater (stage left) with Waldorf and Statler. I find them hilarious to this day. Best part of the show.
I love them needling the crowd. It's hilarious.