As I said in another post, I was under the incorrect impression that it was primarily/exclusively a sexual fetish.
I still stand by my point because according to wikipedia it seems like sexualization is, at least, a major subculture within it, if not an outright majority.
To be clear about my point, two consenting adults can do whatever they want with each other as far as I’m concerned, and if they aren’t hurting anyone, they are alright with me. But the reason people are weird about furries and not a mascot is the sexualization attached to furries, whether justified or not, while anthropomorphized animal mascots are not about sexualizing anything.
What point are you trying to make?
As I said in another post, I was under the incorrect impression that it was primarily/exclusively a sexual fetish.
I still stand by my point because according to wikipedia it seems like sexualization is, at least, a major subculture within it, if not an outright majority.
To be clear about my point, two consenting adults can do whatever they want with each other as far as I’m concerned, and if they aren’t hurting anyone, they are alright with me. But the reason people are weird about furries and not a mascot is the sexualization attached to furries, whether justified or not, while anthropomorphized animal mascots are not about sexualizing anything.