I assume your brain is still going to be turned off when reading this, but I might as well say this for anyone else reading this:
This article is mainly about defending certain anthropomorphic animal victimless art but on fours, and is about calling out outrage furry culture that publicly harasses certain people like KaimTime mainly for what I assume is enjoying furry content the furry puritans do not agree with. That's what this article is more about. It is irreverent saying a zoophile likes it too, especially since there are zoophiles that enjoys many cases of modern two-legged certain furry NSFW art too.
The closest of a "defense" I can really think of when it comes too zoophiles is simply somewhat respecting their right to enjoy legal unrealistic fiction that isn't even the same thing, and also out of care believing that taking away less realistic outlets contributes to animal abusive behavior (also to be used against the annoyance possible rise of outrage furry culture going against four-legged victimless anthros). That's all I can think of. Also a random tag on a fictional character isn't proving anything here.
You want to prove that you care about real animals so bad? Then please stop wasting your time arguing with a random furry defending certain anthropomorphic FICTIONAL CHARACTERS. Why don't you join the police if you can and go after criminals who actually are abusing animals? Endlessly lying about people and saying others are lying without proof isn't helping your case.
I assume your brain is still going to be turned off when reading this, but I might as well say this for anyone else reading this:
This article is mainly about defending certain anthropomorphic animal victimless art but on fours, and is about calling out outrage furry culture that publicly harasses certain people like KaimTime mainly for what I assume is enjoying furry content the furry puritans do not agree with. That's what this article is more about. It is irreverent saying a zoophile likes it too, especially since there are zoophiles that enjoys many cases of modern two-legged certain furry NSFW art too.
The closest of a "defense" I can really think of when it comes too zoophiles is simply somewhat respecting their right to enjoy legal unrealistic fiction that isn't even the same thing, and also out of care believing that taking away less realistic outlets contributes to animal abusive behavior (also to be used against the annoyance possible rise of outrage furry culture going against four-legged victimless anthros). That's all I can think of. Also a random tag on a fictional character isn't proving anything here.
You want to prove that you care about real animals so bad? Then please stop wasting your time arguing with a random furry defending certain anthropomorphic FICTIONAL CHARACTERS. Why don't you join the police if you can and go after criminals who actually are abusing animals? Endlessly lying about people and saying others are lying without proof isn't helping your case.