Thanks for putting words in my mouth, Sly Wolf.
That's all I said and addressed, and what's quoted isn't a pro or con statement. Nowhere did I say I thought furries were "dirty," yet somehow that's the conclusion you jumped to... a jump in logic that would have made Evel Knievel proud. I stated a simple fact, that people who have sex wearing animal costumes are called furries (they were called that long before the Internet was around I believe).
I personally don't care what two consenting adults do in their bedroom. And frankly, there are things that people do together to get off that are far more out there than simply playing dress up. I don't see the allure of fucking in costumes, but if that's how some people get their jollies, so be it. When it comes to those who make the full-body costumes and just hang out with others who do the same, I don't see the fun of it, but it's really no different than a cosplay convention. So it's no biggie to me. Regarding the artwork, I don't have a problem with it at all. I've seen fantastic art, ridiculously bad art, and plenty in-between over the years. I think the idea of part animal/anthropomorhpic characters is just fine (I greatly enjoy the werewolf mythos after all), and it can lead to great character designs. But I also feel the idea gets a black eye from the copious amount of sploogy and hyper-sexualized furry art that so many are intent on churning out. It makes a fair number of people forget that there's a non-porn side to the genre as well, and fantastic clean works like this or this, and atmospheric/emotional nudes like this, get lost in the whole debacle. We both know there's more to furry art than just fucking, giant dicks and insanely-sized tits, but a search for the stuff makes it look like quite the opposite more often than not.
So there's my actual opinion on the subject. Kindly refrain from making it up on your own from now on.
Not a very respectful attitude, for something you supposedly respect.

