Log in

No account? Create an account
ATTN: RCFM attendees - are ya proud? [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Open Paws - Proud to be Furry!

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

ATTN: RCFM attendees [May. 20th, 2006|11:17 pm]
Open Paws - Proud to be Furry!


It has come to my attention that a member (or members) of the RCFM constaff will not allow a babyfur panel to be sponsored by the convention. In light of this, I am going to be hosting my own babyfur panel in my room at 1:00 P.M. on Saturday. Anyone interested is gratefully invited; don't think this is only for babyfurs. The purpose of the panel is to shed some light on who we are and why we do the things we do. The panel should not last any more than a half hour, but I wouldn't set my watch to that. Additionally, I will again be hosting the Babyfur inContinental Breakfast Sunday morning at 10:00 A.M. My room number is TBA at this time, but I will be posting flyers up at the con for both the panel and the breakfast with that information.


From: wayahpuppy
2006-05-21 04:25 am (UTC)
Just curious as to why that is? Wouldn't that be called DESCRIMINATION...
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: banalheart
2006-05-21 04:39 am (UTC)
it's called "furry".
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: aethwolf
2006-05-21 04:54 am (UTC)
Why would the constaff not allow a babyfur panel to be sponsored by the convention?

Gah, it's making me want to write up my post ranting about all the babyfur hate (to be posted in my own LJ, of course). I'm not a babyfur, but I don't see anything inherently wrong with what the normal babyfurs (ya know, the ones who don't soil themselves in public) do.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: banalheart
2006-05-21 04:58 am (UTC)
as I have been told a "key staff member" threatened to quit if they allowed a babyfur panel.
Screw it, I say. Four more babyfurs would stand up to take this "key" person's place and do a better job to boot.

I've colunteered every year since it's inception. I will not volunteer this year.
If it gets worse, I will stop supporting a convintion I was there to see started like many others have.

a shame. I met my mate of 2 years there so it's a pretty important con for us, but the furtardedness is getting a bit deep.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread) (Expand)
[User Picture]From: x_eleven
2006-05-21 06:06 am (UTC)


Now, mind you, I am not into the babyfur trip in any way, shape, or form. I find infantilism in any form, furry or not, to be decidedly creepy. So I don't hang out at Cub Central, attend babyfur panels, or go looking for it. Problem solved.

So who are these folks harming? How does wearing diapers and all the rest of it pose any possible harm to the persons and/or property of any one else? If it's out there in the wider mundane world, it will find its way into that microcosm of the mundane world that is furry. They're here; they aren't going away any time soon, you aren't going to drive them out of furry, so why not allow a panel? How is that a threat? Is that any "worse" than having something called the "inContinental Breakfast"? Isn't that just a bit hypocritical?

We had a babyfur panel and a BDSM panel at Morphicon this year. If you don't like it, no one's going to put a gun to your head and force you to attend.

Certain someone(s) at the RCFM needs to extract cranium from rectum.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: symphonic_rp
2006-05-23 04:29 pm (UTC)

Re: WTF??!!

“no one's going to put a gun to your head and force you to attend.”

Well, there is also the consideration of those being forced not to attend by all this blatant sex related stuff. You know, some people, like myself, would like to enjoy a nice wholesome con devoted to the idea of anthropomorphic art, fantasy, literature, cartooning, etc. One of the primary reasons I don’t attend Furry cons is because I hear about all this BDSM and inContinental Breakfast stuff and think it might forever taint my love of the anthropomorphic arts to attend such a thing. I mean, as an anime fan, I would never attend a Hentai con.

It kind of gives off the impression that the con organizers really don’t care about the genre or the art form. They just let the fans run wild and draw sexually oriented graffiti over it to their heart’s content. Doesn’t seem right to me.

Then there’s the Baby Fur thing. Is titling an activity “The inContinental Breakfast” really good for the image of Baby Fur? Isn’t that focusing attention on a central stereotype that’s at the core of why most detractors want to get rid of Baby Fur?

You know, I love the fandom. But it seems to me the fandom is its own worst enemy. There are far too many fans out there who couldn’t care less about public image, who they might be scaring off or what prejudice they might be engendering.

Every other fandom has sexual or controversial issues attached to it. But they don’t let those side interests get shoved to the foreground to the extent that they obscure the main genre that the fandom is supposed to celebrate. So, I think we need to recognize that there’s a line that needs to be drawn between prejudice against a certain type of Furry fans and exercising common sense in what aspects of the fandom deserve to be on primary display.

In other words, sure, “inContinental Breakfast” may be a good gag, but somebody’s going to pay a heavy price for that laugh.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread) (Expand)
[User Picture]From: tabernak
2006-05-21 06:28 am (UTC)
What's the big deal?
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ionotter
2006-05-21 11:22 am (UTC)


It's a furry con in Alabama.

Please...they still segregate their schools by black and white. Be glad they're even allowing you to attend, and I wouldn't be surprised if someone tries to break up your little room panel.
(Reply) (Thread)
From: i_kyo
2006-05-21 02:43 pm (UTC)

Re: Sarcasm?

My eyes have seen the glory of the tramplin' at the zoo! We warshed ourselves in niggers blood, and all the mongrals too, we're taking down the zog machine, jew, by, jew, by jew, the white man marches oooon.~
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: daughterofhavok
2006-05-21 03:07 pm (UTC)
Yeah...I don't see any big problem with there being no BabyFur panel.

Sitting in a room filled with babyfurs doesn't sound fun to me, either. Consider the feelings of the staff, why don't'cha. Cleaning up soiled diapers from those who aren't children...Ugh.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ashland_pup
2006-05-21 03:12 pm (UTC)
Actually, babyfurs are exceptionally clean about their habits. Every time there is a C'ubhouse at a con, the babyfurs in that room take great care to clean up their mess, and usually leave a big tip for the staff.

Additionally, there won't be any diaper changing going on at the panel.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: symphonic_rp
2006-05-21 03:11 pm (UTC)
This is an issue I find difficult to resolve. On the one hand, I’m tempted to applaud that a con is finally taking a stand on setting some limitations in this respect. On the other hand, I really don’t understand Baby Furs. I get it as a fetish, but in general I don’t see how it specifically has anything to do with Furry. And, even if it does have something to do with Furry, does it really belong on public display?

I’m afraid some clarification is needed here for furs like myself who have only heard the negative view of Baby Furs and may be laboring under some prejudicial misconception. Please explain what exactly is a Baby Fur, how does it relate to the anthropomorphics fandom, and what exactly will you be discussing at this panel.

I may do a write up on this issue some time in the future for my FAQ on the fandom. Anything you can tell me might be helpful.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ashland_pup
2006-05-21 03:21 pm (UTC)
The babyfur phenomenon isn't just a fetish. For most babyfurs, it is simply a way to escape from the real world. To put it bluntly, babyfurs are furries who want to be taken care of, coddled like babies. The term for someone who likes to be treated this way is "infantilist". It really has no relation to the fandom other than the fact that babyfurs are furries who happen to be infantilists. I'll be discussing this and other things relating to it at the panel, such as what entails in being a babyfur, how infantilism is not pedophilia, and just where do we get those snazzy overalls. :P
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread) (Expand)
(Deleted comment)
From: penguin_boy
2006-05-21 04:10 pm (UTC)
Yeah seriously what the hell. This is unacceptable... I wanted to do a panel about the Jew menace and they wouldn't let me! So then I wanted to do a panel on pedophilia, but they told me I couldn't. What the fuck! This is some deskrinamation.....
(Reply) (Thread)
From: enigmas
2006-05-21 04:34 pm (UTC)
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread) (Expand)
[User Picture]From: greenreaper
2006-05-21 06:31 pm (UTC)
This is kinda off topic, but the latest WCOTP features babyfurs, and (oddly) not in a bad way. :-)
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ashland_pup
2006-05-22 02:44 am (UTC)
lawl I tried asking Groat for a con badge once and he gave me two birds. :D
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: caninemilk
2006-05-22 03:38 pm (UTC)
You could have simply posted that you're having a babyfur get together at RCFM. Whatever, nothing wrong with that.

But NO, you have to be all "waaaaah RCFM doesn't like babyfurs." You know, supposedly to not call attention to yourself. Way to go, dramabus.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ashland_pup
2006-05-22 08:11 pm (UTC)
Way to go, Dick Tracy, you figured it out. Yes, I'm trying to start drama.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)