Creative Commons license icon

Reply to comment

You're welcome - though I'd note the term is used more positively this side of the Atlantic.

As for defense: I spent most of my effort in that area trying to explain and justify the story that started all that - several times - to fans of the artist you went out of your way to disparage by using their name as a derogatory term. (Frankly, I didn't find much to support there, so I didn't try all that hard.)

What you say reflects on you, but also on Flayrah. For some, your comments may be their first impression; it concerns me that they may also be the last. Honestly, it doesn't make much sense when you spend significant time on stories that you presumably want to be read. Going out of your way to denigrate artists does not encourage readers to return.

I don't remember much about 2016, but I guess we might have been a tad cynical about Disney (whose tolerance for its employees interacting with furry fandom had not been great over the years) basically adopting furry concepts about a more mature depiction of anthropomorphic animals once it saw the chance to make a huge pile of money out of it.

Reply

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <img> <b> <i> <s> <blockquote> <ul> <ol> <li> <table> <tr> <td> <th> <sub> <sup> <object> <embed> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <dl> <dt> <dd> <param> <center> <strong> <q> <cite> <code> <em>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This test is to prevent automated spam submissions.
Leave empty.