No see again, where porn is acceptable is at someone’s house, not in public. The people on the train do not need to see you watching porn whether you’re cranking it or not, and whether it’s furry porn or not.
nobody is arguing for this? Public obscenity laws exist for a reason.
are you comparing fur suits to literal porn? If so, then i may argue we ban all public display of sports attire because i find it distinctly related to sex.
If you see a furry in a mcdonalds, they’re probably buying food because their hungry lmao. It’s not like it’s some weird BDSM psyop.
Interesting to note about the possible overlap or lack thereof, and possible correlation but not causation, thanks for your insight on that!
I am relating fursuits to BDSM leather, gimp suits, pup play gear, latex, etc, yes. Sports attire clearly doesn’t fit this category, save maybe the cheerleaders of course I suppose. I was talking about fursuits in public from the get go, in the quote you quoted me in fact. You brought up porn, that’s why I responded about porn in public. Seems maybe you’re one of those people who don’t bother reading what they’re responding to?
How eat with suit on? Why not just not wear the suit in public? At least the gimp while being similarly inappropriate in public despite your protests can unzip the mouth, that just seems like added difficulty to me.
that’s like relating halloween costumes to BDSM gear. Or like i said, sports jerseys.
That was literally the point lmao.
You brought up porn
yes. for an irrelevant reason
that’s why I responded about porn in public.
fursuits are not porn, public indecency is not porn, and fursuits are not public indecency.
How eat with suit on?
take off the head.
Why not just not wear the suit in public?
they don’t? Like most of the time? Whenever you see a furry in public chances are, there’s a fur con, if not, they’re probably not causing problems.
At least the gimp while being similarly inappropriate in public despite your protests can unzip the mouth, that just seems like added difficulty to me.
nobody is arguing for this? Public obscenity laws exist for a reason.
are you comparing fur suits to literal porn? If so, then i may argue we ban all public display of sports attire because i find it distinctly related to sex.
If you see a furry in a mcdonalds, they’re probably buying food because their hungry lmao. It’s not like it’s some weird BDSM psyop.
that’s what im here for, np
I am relating fursuits to BDSM leather, gimp suits, pup play gear, latex, etc, yes. Sports attire clearly doesn’t fit this category, save maybe the cheerleaders of course I suppose. I was talking about fursuits in public from the get go, in the quote you quoted me in fact. You brought up porn, that’s why I responded about porn in public. Seems maybe you’re one of those people who don’t bother reading what they’re responding to?
How eat with suit on? Why not just not wear the suit in public? At least the gimp while being similarly inappropriate in public despite your protests can unzip the mouth, that just seems like added difficulty to me.
Fursuits are not revealing or sexy and the people in them are not putting them on only in cases they want to have sex. It’s not connected like that.
that’s like relating halloween costumes to BDSM gear. Or like i said, sports jerseys.
That was literally the point lmao.
yes. for an irrelevant reason
fursuits are not porn, public indecency is not porn, and fursuits are not public indecency.
take off the head.
they don’t? Like most of the time? Whenever you see a furry in public chances are, there’s a fur con, if not, they’re probably not causing problems.
you have to be trolling