ZA Furries

Have a read over here:

http://theoatmeal.com/comics/believe

That was brilliant. The Oatmeal is so clever in the way he puts things together and stats things and...

I enjoyed that. Thanks Lee.

I haven't experienced this directed at me?
I try to keep an open mind and I'm always up to being proven wrong.
But I guess people don't notice?
Let me know?

I have observed this when trying to convince someone of something...
Even with all the evidence. They refuse to even listen.
Especially with elderly people.

You missed the whole thing. It's not about you. If I'm correct (correct me if I'm wrong) it's about how our views over small things are fine but when it comes to something like morals or values, we go bat shit fucking crazy. It builds a worldview of things we like (friends, religion etc.) but when new evidence comes to show (Your friend screwed your girlfriend for example) then we deny this because we believe in what we think is right.

Read it a bit more closely, look at the facts (and the pretty pictures OwO) and you'll see.

Adagio wrote: ↑Thu Jul 19, 2018 8:33 amI try to keep an open mind and I'm always up to being proven wrong.

Sadly most people don't think that way, and it's hard even for a rational person to suppress an emotional response of "fact feel bad, fact must be wrong".

And the older you get, the stronger the response becomes, because your internal universe is more established, and you have less time to rebuild it should it collapse.

The examples given are very US-centric though, and more difficult for us to relate to. If it were talking about Madiba instead of Washington, it would make more sense to us.

True... I really couldnt judge my reactions very well.

But I tried applying it to, in particular, a conversation I had with a cetain friend.
Yes. I got upset at him, at first. But I ended up looking at it more carefully.
lots of the things he said were true. And I opened my mind to this possibility.

Course, I ended up deciding against it at first. There were too many logical things in the way back then. But I recently realised visited it.
and its been on my mind a lot in the last year.

@noah-lausberg.
Yes.its about a problem with society as a whole. I managed to catch that. But its you missing the point.
Its about you, improving yourself, so you can realise this flaw in biology. And work past it. To see things more objectively.

Adagio wrote: ↑Thu Jul 19, 2018 12:59 pm @noah-lausberg.
Yes.its about a problem with society as a whole. I managed to catch that. But its you missing the point.
Its about you, improving yourself, so you can realise this flaw in biology. And work past it. To see things more objectively.

Here's something though. You must improve yourself for yourself and not for others. Hope you have a wonderful day!

So we are expected to respect and tolerate everybody huh? Listen to every Jehovah witness and SJW.
Respect and tolerance is an old idea. Maybe even older than recorded history.
But regardless we fight.

The reason for this?
Respect and tolerance does not promote actual progress.
In order too further any idea: whether it be a social construct like respect or something more material like science:
There has to be a "dialectic", and this sometimes spills into reality for better or worse.

But at the end, people need to choose.
And the ones that made the right choice grow to the next step.

When ever someone asks you for respect before you even know them. (That's a sign of weakness and trouble)
Stick with people that rather earn your respect and don't feel like you need to tolerate any bullshit.

It didn't say anything about having to listen to everybody. There are some people and/or groups that we know are objectively wrong (flat-earthers etc) and whose opinion we can safely disregard. Those are a corner case. This is not for a context of cold hard scientific discussion, because those should be devoid of emotional interest regardless. This is more for discussions between laymen about layman things, or the more soft sciences like philosophy and politics. People can't differentiate fact from opinion any more because of this "everybody's opinion is valid" garbage. Opinions are like arseholes: everybody has one, and most of them stink. Demanding respect for your shitty opinion makes about as much sense as demanding respect for having a shitty anus, and then getting mad when somebody offers you toilet paper.

It didn't say anything about having to listen to everybody.

Meta: why is civilised discourse so difficult?

What I meant to say was, It’s not difficult… It’s impossible,
The fandom here wont change because the universe wont allow it.
I suggest making the process of drama go over quicker by not giving respect to anybody that demands it.

Splicer-Fox wrote: ↑Thu Jul 19, 2018 3:22 pm

It didn't say anything about having to listen to everybody.

Meta: why is civilised discourse so difficult?

What I meant to say was, It’s not difficult… It’s impossible,
The fandom here wont change because the universe wont allow it.
I suggest making the process of drama go over quicker by not giving respect to anybody that demands it.

Fundamentally the furry fandom is presented as a ticket to dispense with (amongst other things):

- Common Decency
- Being civil
- Respect

In regards to discourse, the fandom has somehow promoted the ideology that collectivism is OK. This has happened because of the ease at which special snowflakes and SJWs have been allowed to infiltrate it. I see it overseas, I see it here.

You yourself are part of the collectivism, you have never bothered to see the point of the individuals in this fandom who mistakenly hoped for a better way. You prefer the hive-mind because without it I suspect that you'd be quite lost. It is a function of the times unfortunately. Me being much older (by some 20+ years in many cases) has made this quite apparent. I don't quite get the SJW and SS movement, nor do I actually understand why life has to be so difficult today because almost everything one says is a trigger, and these special snowflakes lose their shit if you say anything that hurts their little feelings.

I do trust that, with natural selection, these people will fall by the wayside, however that's going to take a long time. Until then, DILLIGAF

ArtyLoop wrote: ↑Thu Jul 19, 2018 3:37 pm

Splicer-Fox wrote: ↑Thu Jul 19, 2018 3:22 pm

It didn't say anything about having to listen to everybody.

Meta: why is civilised discourse so difficult?

What I meant to say was, It’s not difficult… It’s impossible,
The fandom here wont change because the universe wont allow it.
I suggest making the process of drama go over quicker by not giving respect to anybody that demands it.

Fundamentally the furry fandom is presented as a ticket to dispense with (amongst other things):

- Common Decency
- Being civil
- Respect

In regards to discourse, the fandom has somehow promoted the ideology that collectivism is OK. This has happened because of the ease at which special snowflakes and SJWs have been allowed to infiltrate it. I see it overseas, I see it here.

You yourself are part of the collectivism, you have never bothered to see the point of the individuals in this fandom who mistakenly hoped for a better way. You prefer the hive-mind because without it I suspect that you'd be quite lost. It is a function of the times unfortunately. Me being much older (by some 20+ years in many cases) has made this quite apparent. I don't quite get the SJW and SS movement, nor do I actually understand why life has to be so difficult today because almost everything one says is a trigger, and these special snowflakes lose their shit if you say anything that hurts their little feelings.

I do trust that, with natural selection, these people will fall by the wayside, however that's going to take a long time. Until then, DILLIGAF

What the....?

Have you ever met Splicer? XD You're describing the exact opposite of the dude. lol

Also it isn't limited to the fandom... ever try telling a dog owner who walks their dog on tarmac not to walk their dog on tarmac on a hot day?

Pretty much all of the fandom's woes are due to modern cultural norms that are not exclusive to it.

Leeward wrote: ↑Fri Jul 20, 2018 10:30 am Pretty much all of the fandom's woes are due to modern cultural norms that are not exclusive to it.

Indeed, and these cultural norms (which are not the same as what they were in the past, hence my remark about hive-mind collectivism) have easily slipped into the fandom. Perhaps the fandom is where it comes to a head in spectacular fashion because, in this fandom we have more sensitive types. IDK

I think it's more because there's so few of us:

In London furs we have the same drama. But there are like... hundreds of these furry fuckers running around and hundreds more willing to take their places. So when shit goes down we can shut it down. Because we have numbers.

Now in the SA fandom we don't have numbers. So when drama rears its pretty little head it's exploded because there's only say.. mmmm... 10 of us to respond!

And that's why it becomes so shit. Not because furs are shit but because the same 10 oaks start debate and you and I already know who's gonna side with who and who's gonna be offended (me) and who's gonna leave and who's gonna sit quietly at their laptop in their briefs waking off to this shot (Animew I'm looking at you!).

Drama becomes comedy gold to us because we are such a small unit we are exposed to it 10 times faster.

Elsewhere only those involved in said drama notice! They called the police on a fursuit theft last month and 6 people responded put of a possible 50!!!

So yes, we are all sensitive snowflakes (even you Arty in your own eay. Even you Lee) but it's only because we are literally the core of this fandom in this country. I can guarantee if there were 300 of us it would be different. I mean 300 active always making a noise members.

Now if you'll excuse me I have vodka to go drink.

Peace out homeys

I remember that comic from seeing it a while back. I also remember not having any emotional response to anything that was presented there. None of it mattered to me and it makes little sense to get upset about facts. The facts aren't going to change because you're upset.

Marcus Aurelius wrote:Constantly down the list of those who felt intense anger at something: the most famous, the most hated, the most whatever. And ask: Where is all that now? Smoke, dust, legend…or not even legend.

Difficulty in discussion online comes from many sources, including the backfire effect. I highly recommend this essay on the problem of polarisation. https://aeon.co/essays/why-its-as-hard- ... lee-a-cult While it was primarily political, the same things happen within the furry fandom. There are two issues he brings up; epistemic bubbles which means that we only listen to people who have the same opinions as us. It's fairly easy to hear differing views but the real issue is the second phenomenon; echo chambers.

C Thi Nguyen wrote:In epistemic bubbles, other voices are not heard; in echo chambers, other voices are actively undermined. The way to break an echo chamber is not to wave “the facts” in the faces of its members. It is to attack the echo chamber at its root and repair that broken trust.

With echo chambers, people don't trust anyone from outside their own viewpoint, that makes it nearly impossible to change their minds, even if you are right. No matter what you say, or what evidence you have, your words will always be doubted and dismissed. That is extremely difficult to overcome. For example, if a fur x is trusted by y and spreads rumours about z. Then y will believe the rumours about z and any defence by z, whether true or not, will be rejected as some sort of coverup because y has put all his or her trust into x.

C Thi Nguyen wrote:Listen to what it actually sounds like when people reject the plain facts – it doesn’t sound like brute irrationality. One side points out a piece of economic data; the other side rejects that data by rejecting its source. They think that newspaper is biased, or the academic elites generating the data are corrupt. An echo chamber doesn’t destroy their members’ interest in the truth; it merely manipulates whom they trust and changes whom they accept as trustworthy sources and institutions.

And, in many ways, echo-chamber members are following reasonable and rational procedures of enquiry. They’re engaging in critical reasoning. They’re questioning, they’re evaluating sources for themselves, they’re assessing different pathways to information. They are critically examining those who claim expertise and trustworthiness, using what they already know about the world. It’s simply that their basis for evaluation – their background beliefs about whom to trust – are radically different. They are not irrational, but systematically misinformed about where to place their trust.

Ironic.

Not really. I've seen it happen in the South African fandom too. Some furs have fixed ideas in their head and they will ignore evidence even if it's put right in front of them. But it's not always possible to help everyone, even one-on-one.

OMFG it's like talking to an ironic brick wall.

No, I know what he meant, I was deliberately ignoring it. He... we'll say talked, to me in private and it was obvious he had already made his mind up before ever making any contact with me. It's really more double irony, if anything.

So you're not oblivious to your own double standards: you have your head so far up your arse you think they're not double standards. Makes sense.

Which double standards? I am open to hearing from all sorts of people and have done on several occasions. But, then there needs to be some basis in fact for the discussion. That is often lacking.

My brain is so confused.
How did this go from a topic discussing how people often don't see eye to eye because of their refusal or inability to see anything past the facts pre-existing in their own brains...
To two people not seeing eye to eye because of their pre-existing friction with each other.

Well in principle I agree with everything Rakuen originally said.

I just find it extremely hypocritical coming from him.

I'll leave it at that. It's in the past.

*sniff sniff* OwO hmm, whats this?

honestly still not sure wtf people are actually talking about really... but i suppose that doesn't matter.

Rakuen Growlithe wrote: ↑Sat Jul 21, 2018 9:52 pm Which double standards? I am open to hearing from all sorts of people and have done on several occasions. But, then there needs to be some basis in fact for the discussion. That is often lacking.

UwU/ come now firedog we can all clearly see your double standards when it comes to dealing with people, its plain for all to see. remember that thing where you simply refuse to accept that FA pictures don't show up for people that don't have FA accounts despite the multitude of people saying that?
ever consider that the reason you believe a lot of things you do so devoutly is due to your limited perspective? i mean if there was a bunch of people standing around you telling you your butt was on fire yet you felt nothing of the sort you would assume your own senses are correct and not the multitude of other people who can actually physically see your butt?
UwU/ trust me firedog... the forum users are in a good position to have decent perspective of how you treat people. more so than you i'd say because for you it may not be something you do intentionally.

Raven Song wrote: ↑Sat Jul 21, 2018 12:03 am and who's gonna sit quietly at their laptop in their briefs waking off to this shot (Animew I'm looking at you!).

i know, i'm such a bad man.

Splicer-Fox wrote: ↑Thu Jul 19, 2018 1:46 pm So we are expected to respect and tolerate everybody huh? Listen to every Jehovah witness and SJW.

we could... OR perhaps we can just mind out own business and not try to tell other people how to live their lives based on our ideas on whats right or wrong? UwU/ you know so that we are not big fat hypocrites doing the exact same thing as those Jehovah's witnesses SJWs and other social cancer?

i totes get you on conflict tho, that IS how things progress... like you know, how a bear can just rip off your head and drink your insides like a protein shake furthering its own progress...that is very natural right? "if you can, you may" kinda thing? yea, lets drop the pretense of civilization and just take whatever we want. that sound about right?

Raven Song wrote: ↑Sat Jul 21, 2018 10:27 pm My brain is so confused.
How did this go from a topic discussing how people often don't see eye to eye because of their refusal or inability to see anything past the facts pre-existing in their own brains...
To two people not seeing eye to eye because of their pre-existing friction with each other.

There was nothing that said people cannot disagree, the topic was about denying reality due to cognitive biases and/or rejecting things because of the source. People can and should disagree on things, but there needs to be an objective standard that all can agree on for those disagreements to be productive.

Animew wrote: ↑Sat Jul 21, 2018 11:08 pmremember that thing where you simply refuse to accept that FA pictures don't show up for people that don't have FA accounts despite the multitude of people saying that?

If that's what you truly then it's exactly the kind of thing that is worrisome. I never refused to accept that and, in fact, in a post replying directly to you, I even said so explicitly. The part I didn't believe was the proposed reason for not seeing it which didn't, and still doesn't, make sense or fit the observations. So if you believe I refused to accept that, you are doing so without any evidence and in contradiction to what I posted. What can I possibly do in such a situation?

I'm not disputing that we can't disagree. It's the manner in which it's done. Also I'm shit with words so sorry if thats how it came across

I'm all for friendly debate. I'm not all for seeing the same argument over and over again in different scenarios with the same players... it's tedious

Raven Song wrote: ↑Sun Jul 22, 2018 8:51 am I'm not all for seeing the same argument over and over again in different scenarios with the same players... it's tedious

Not going to argue with you there.