Keyboard shortcuts are available for common actions and site navigation.
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
Child porn isn't a catch all term, it's specifically meant for actual children who're victims of an actual, tangible crime, not a shame tag to throw on drawings that makes you uncomfortable. Comparing the abuse of actual kids to lewd drawing of a cartoon character is asinine
The fact that you are defending cub is concerning and trying to say every furry is into bestiality when furry art isn't inheritantly sexual while cub is is asinine. Don't support cub. People can draw baby furry characters and thats called babyfur. Cub is the sexualization.
I support this logic actually. A fictional depiction of something always has the same moral weight as the real thing. That being said, anyone lusting after a character with dog features probably shouldn't be around real dogs.pic.twitter.com/4z7AGxWQBK
Cub put a sexual tone on the form of an underage character, therefore the vast majority of furries put a sexual tone on the form of "dog" or "horse." Completely agree with this logic. Furries are monsters.
Im genuinely confused over the tone of your responses. Being furry doesn't inherently mean you like the porn of it or contribute to it. Cub is 100% liking and contributing to child porn. What's hard to understand about that?
Oh I'm just mocking you, don't worry I'm not being serious. I just find it really cringey when furries follow your logic, but then not acknowledge that this same logic condemns at least 3/4 of the fanbase as animal abusers.
Like I'm legitimately willing to see your point of view as long as we can both agree that that same logic means an overwhelming proportion of the fanbase is ok with sexualizing animals, and therefore its disgusting Animals cannot consent
I can agree but I want to note that people who commit or draw beastiality are always railed by the community when found out. There is a line that shouldn't be crossed and it's bestiality and child porn.
I think we both know that first sentence is a complete lie. "Anatomically_correct" is never something you'll hear furries complain about despite the fact that according to your logic animals are at a far greater risk than any child in terms of the sheer number of depictions.
You and I have clearly different experiences with this fandom. My first sentence you call a lie is the truth of the history I witnessed and experienced within this fandom and it's been like that for years.
To those who draw babyfur, don't interact with me despite the fact I said you can draw babyfur. It's not inherently sexual but I think it's really weird so I'm just blocking y'all fyi.
I say that to make a point, that being you making the broad generalization that cub porn is CP/people into it are pedos is just as unfounded as someone saying furry art/porn is zoophilia, and those who partake in it are zoophiliacs for no other reason then themes overlap.
I've already had this conversation with someone else so check my profile. Not going to repeat myself. Have a good day.
And yes, furry art is inherently sexual, it doesn't require exposed genitals or straight up sex, the detailed human features with animal parts slapped on top still qualify, and said features/standards are inherently what furries have always been about.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
She/They
Gaymurr
Ace/Age/Demi - I draw and play a lot of video games. Gay with 
