/sp/ - Football

I can see why people would associate horsefuckers with furries, based on their traits at face value, but I think it's important to note that horsefuckers are also a distinct niche of their own, and a lot of horsefuckers prefer not to be lumped together with furries. This was a theme at the recent Mare Fair.
That being said, I have no real hard feelings for furries. Furries have had a lot of overlap with bronies/horsefuckers for a while now.

I think there's also a question of what a "furry" really is to begin with. It's such a large umbrella term that it can be applied to fans of practically any genre or media if interpreted generously enough. If the definition of furry is vague enough, then surely horsefuckers could be interpreted as such, but a lot of horsefuckers still do not self-identify as furries.

>>21980
I think the main reason mareschizos avoid association with furries is because they know that if mlp becomes a definitive sector of the "furry fandom", furries will flood into their spaces (cons, boorus, forums, projects, etc) and dilute the pony fandom. This is why people on the boorus get pissed when furry version of pony OCs get posted there.

I have no problem with the furries. there's a lot of overlap between the two fandoms. pic related

Hypothetically speaking, if someone came up to you and said "Hey, Ive got this Luna* suit, never been worn, would you wanna try it on?"....
Now, theres an obvious difference between being willing to wear random-surprise Luna suit and making/buying a Luna suit (*- insert preferred pony here), but my argument is that if circumstances were "optimal" (you) would wear the suit.
I know we all have hangups around furries. Anyone partial to MrMetokur, Internet Historian, et al has plenty ofreasons to have hangups with furries.
Except,... THOSE furries are as particular to the entire furry group/fandom as that AJ killer was to the MLP fandom.
Im just saying, you can be more or less "sane" and still be a furry. Or, just "like furry things".

This is like saying that the Star Wars fandom is just a subset of the Star Treck fandom, because both are about Sci Fi space series and there is decent overlap between their fans. No, the two have distinct origins and are their own things, even if the two likely had non-zero influence on the development of the other.

The same with the pony and furry fandoms. The furry fandom is its own thing with its own history, and My Little Pony is centered around the fandom of the TV show My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, with its own development cycle.

>but the characters are anthropomorphized!
And Star Trek, Star Wars, Cowboy Bebop, Babylon 5, and Warhammer 40k all have space ships, so they are the same series and same fandom. No, they obviously are not.

Furry characters and Gen 4 ponies aren't even anthropomorphized in the same, or even similar ways. The only way that Gen 4 ponies (or Gen 5, or Gen 3, or Gen 1 for that matter) is that they talk and sometimes do human like things. Furry characters are bipedal, and otherwise have far more human traits. And while it's true that a hell of a lot of people who once watched Disney movies with talking animals later became furries - just as many who have watched inset-x-sci-series-here later became fans of insert-y-sci-fi series-here, not all of them did, and Disney movies and their fandom is clearly distinct from the furry fandom.

>>21985
No anon, star trek and star wars are all encompassed by the umbrella of "sci-fi"
Just as Ponies, warcats, Lion King, et al are all encompassed by the umbrella of "furry"

>>21986
This is a fair point. "Furry" can be considered a genre, or at least self-identified furries see it that way.

>bakes bait thread in /sp/
>gets banned
Jeez, I wish the admins were this efficient when dealing with retarded britmutts and boomers.
What a faggot website full of faggot furries.

>>21988
Wait a minute.
Was OP banned for this thread? At /sp/?

>>21989
Yes.

>>21991
Why not let the degenerate to explain himself?

>>21992
Who?

>>21993
I mean OP, the furry apologizer.

>>21994
I don't think he's a shill.

>>21990
It seems only those who've had an affair with Lotus can dodge the bullet no matter what. That'll explain how niggel's still here.

>>21990
No, in fairness I was banned for this and a number of other shenanigans which, when compiled together gave *ahem* anon "sufficient" justification to then ban. Also there was the 404 message thing, not sure how that worked.
But yeah, dont tell horsefuckers theyre furries they might lose their shit

>>21995
If he is who I think he is, then I agree, he is not a shill but a disturbed man.

>>21996
The gall you have.

>>21997
>don't tell furries they're furries they might lose their shit
Noted.

>>21995
Ill invite - both to not hijack and for aesthetics - to the Cozy Pub thread, of which Im also OP.
No, not version 2, thats haram.
But while being many things, I am not a shill

So yeah, I argue that horsefuckers are a "degree" of furry.

Change my mind.

>>22002
Picrel response.
You want to drag everypony to your level. It won't happen.

>>21987
>>21986
Furry isn't a genre though, it's a fandom of its own. And if it were, it isn't broad enough to include every single talking animal fandom like Bluey, My Little Pony, or Disney Films. Quadrupedal as opposed to substantially more anthropomorphised bipedal creatures.

See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8aF2GxWi7Ag&pp=ygUPa251ZHNlbiBmdXJyaWVz for a decent history of the early furry fandom

>>22004
Also a fair point.

>>22001
>Ill invite - both to not hijack and for aesthetics - to the Cozy Pub thread
Sorry but the momentum is happening here. Perhaps if you would not abandon your thread and keep it alive instead the situation would be different.

>>22006
Heavens no, Im attempting to segregate discussions based on topic. This thread is about how horesefuckers are furries in denial, etc., while the other thread can allow for discussions of bans, etc.

>>22007
Well, my view... I might be mistaken, is to encourage the shitstorm, no matter where or when, just let the post counting to increase.

>>22007
Even if horsefuckers were a "degree" of furry, what difference would it really make? What is the necessity of this discussion, or the consequences of accepting brownies/horsefuckers/mareschizos as "furries"?

>>21996
>>21988
Can you cease shitting up every part of the board with your obsessive hatred of individual posters that have nothing to do with the thread? Jesus, it's like these people are your exes. Weren't you supposed to be quitting the board anyways? Fuck off with your Boom Boom/Nigel thirst posting.

If Elway or Fasces wanted Nigel or Boom Boom banned, they'd be banned. They don't, and that's why they are not. I'm not vetoing anything. It's much more fun to review Nigel's fan fiction or turn his posts into text-to-speech movies in any case.

Also, for the record, I had no part in the decision to ban Ninjas the last time.

>>22010
>What is the necessity of this discussion?
It depends, in my case I only wish to make you seethe.

>>22012
Well, I'm not seething, because I've already had this argument a million times over the past decade, and it no longer triggers my autism.
I know schizos who would seethe about this though.

>>22010
The same 'necessity' of being a /pol/lack who reject mlp cuz reasons, only to realize later I had so much in common with, and was rejecting friends of

>>22011
Oh wow, did pooper finally let you out of your cage?
Maybe if I was the only one, your narrative would make more sense. Many, many users have left because you refused to kick that bisexual nigger. You yourself admitted it when you were begging niggel to stay.

>>22014
You are going a bit too far. One thing is shared goals, but a different one is to partake in perversion.

>>22016
>partake in perversion
Not defending furries, but it's not like horsefuckers are free of perversion.
This is the fandom that boiled rainbow dash in cum.

>>22015
>Many, many users have left because you refused to kick that bisexual nigger.
>kick the fags I don't like out
Ahem. I might one of them and I'm not going anywhere.
Just saying.

>>22018
Zald

>>22019
Keep guessing.

>>22020
That's not the point, you idiot. There comes a point, perhaps after years and years of trying. When it's probably better to let go of your british husbando. Too bad lotus couldn't grow out of it.

>>22021
>When it's probably better to let go of your british husbando
Keep guessing identities.

>>22016
Uhm, about that. Im generally not one to abide statistics, but furscience.com has accumulated a wealth of statistics wrt anonymously self-reporting furries, and the overall percentages indicate that zoophilia - as one example - is LESS prevalent than non furries.
Gestalt: I know, furries have a reputation. Or rather, SPECIFIC AND EXCLUSIVE furries have a reputation. Overwhelmingly, furries can be witnessed to being comparable to say,... horsefuckers.

>>22015
>I left
>Is still here, adding nothing of value
The post you are referring too is one where I was pointing out Nigel's ingratitude. The point of that post was to explain to Nigel, in detail, why he was being a faggot. I spoke about it with the other members of staff, and they all agreed that what was done was fine. The people I was thinking about would have left anyways - one became a literal communist just a couple months later, and left just because. Another explicitly stated that Nigel wasn;t the reason and that /mlpol/ had run its course. Another left mlp altogether when he saw the leaks for G5, I guess afraid it wouldn't be the latest fad... or something. Still another... Is actually the OP of this thread. We didn't really lose anything of value. Elway's response to Nigel, however, lead to his review series that is one of the best things that this board has created.

So no, I'm not going to cater to bitchy fags like you.

>>22021
You're starting to sound like him now. Like him and HCL

>>22021
Bruh, the time for Lotus-bashing is nigh, but not ITT. Stave your rage

>>22022
No one is guessing identities. I'm purposeful shitting on lotus even if I'm not directly replying to him. Are you retarded?

>>22023
>Overwhelmingly, furries can be witnessed to being comparable to say,... horsefuckers.
Not even close.
Horsefuckers are not drug-addicts, nor pedophiles, nor communists, neither homosexuals. I believe mare pussy keep them in line.

>>22026
How long have I been living rent free in your head, alongside Nigel?

>>22024
So you lied to him just so he would stay? That's even worse, how can you say it out loud?
>So no, I'm not going to cater to bitchy fags like you.
Am I asking anything from you? Anyways, namefag more often and sooner or later you won't be able to hop out of this. I'm not niggas or your other mod faggots. I don't need to advertise my presence, unless I consider it to be funnier. Later, fag.

>>22024
Do you ladies need a room?
>>22027
Not even CLOSE to being accurate, though understandable.
The overwhelming majority of furries arent mentioned in media and such. Cuz theyre chill about shit.
Its that way with most fandoms and interest groups. You get outliers who draw attention/infamy, but the vast majority are sweet, kind, personable, and more or less socialized.
I invite evidence to the contrary, but I assert that furries - just like horsefuckers - are a group stygmatized by individuals who have become notorious.

I mean, Y'all dont ALL have RD cum jars, right?
>inb4 RDcumjar-posting

>>22029
Hey, you're still here? Good to see ya!

>>22028
Oh but I'm done trying to make this place more appealing. You both only serve as tools. You don't even now how much of your drama is actually on you. Niggel didn't lashed out against the writefags on his own volition.

>>22032
>>22029
Anyways, Nigel affairs are handled by Elway, and I do not stop him.

>>22032
>Oh but I'm done trying to make this place more appealing
I'm curious. How exactly you did it?

>>22027
>Horsefuckers are not drug-addicts, nor pedophiles, nor communists, neither homosexuals
We have all of those things too though.

>>22036
>We have all of those things too though.
Not here that I'm aware of.

>>22035
Nigger, post furry or non-furry
With respect
>>22036
This is the most important point. Its easy to get distracted by the notables. I STILL have "Kero the Wolf" memorized, and cant unsee.
Bit Kero the Wolf is one of hundreds of thousands, and among the exacting minority. Like, maybe a handful on his tier.
Not to sugarcoat, its not great that theres people like him, but it goes that way for society, and interest groups as a whole.

One would be remiss if they avoided camping, because a person who did bad things was an avid camping enthusiast. There are good people who like camping, and are arguably among the majority.
So it is with furries

>>22033
Not asking you for anything tho. In fact, it would be quite helpful if they were to stay. Let's see if it was all worth it.
>>22035
You should be more concerned about the rest of the post. Till next time.

>>22038
>B-but it is not all of them
I know where that is going.

>>22040
You do, do you? So you ARE suggesting that all horsefuckers are part and parsel to the AJ killer? He was a horsefucker, after all, and your tone suggests that distinctions are irrelevant.

>>22041
>AJ killer?
>He was a horsefucker
A brony bullied by forced non-White diversity.

>>22041
>the AJ killer
The AJ Vigilante.
/)

>>22042
That sounds like a distinction. A specific one.
But distinctions are okay when it comes to ponies,but dont exist for any other genre?

>>22044
>But distinctions are okay when it comes to ponies
There is a reason exists Ponerpics and Derpibooru. Both field different human species.

>>22045
Yes, because people are wont to deny being furries. Or rather, ppl are wont to divide their segment of furry (and attempt to rebrand under a different name) for a variety of reasons.
>ponerpics
Nigger please, thats just opportunism

But lets be honest,... you would totally wear the Luna suit,....
And if you can admit that, you can acknowledge that its not bad to want to wear a Luna suit. Why WOULDNT u wanna be best princess, if just for a moment?
Its not bad to want to wear the Luna suit.
It IS bad to want to fuck animals (except horses, apparently), children, use drugs, and lots of other bad things. Those are bad.
So, if you DO wanna wear the Luna suit, but DONT wanna have sex with obscure/illegal things,... is that a thing? Like, can you avoid over-the-top degeneracy while still accepting ponies?
Yes!
And theres countless who think the same way!
And most of them identify as furries!

>>22047
>It IS bad to want to fuck animals (except horses, apparently)
Horses are white, so it's okay to fuck them.

>>22048
*stares silently, judgingly*

>>22049
I stand by my statement.

>>22047
> It IS bad to want to fuck animals (except horses, apparently), children, use drugs, and lots of other bad things. Those are bad.
This, but unironically

I know alot of y'all are being ironic, but its very telling when the same crowd that REEEEs about degeneracy, openly endorses zoophilia. Jus sayin'

>>22054
It's not zoophilia though. Horses are white.

>>22055
I give your mental gymnastics a 7/10

>>22054
Does anypony have that edit of the orange Anon plowing Aryanne from behind and saying "I strongly disavow and condemn homosexuality"?

>>22054
>I know alot of y'all are being ironic
Do you know where you are?

>>22058
I think I have something like that. The problem is that has not been renamed to find it. Sorry.

>>22061
Based and redpilled

>>22061
/)

>>22054
We are /mlpol/: we can do BOTH.

>>22059
Do you know who you're talking to?
>>22064
No anon, you cant. In the best case, thats doublethink.

In the entirety of my interactions with horsefuckers, about 6 years total, I have met ONE unironic horsefucker.
Reiterating, of all the ppl Ive interacted with, there was ONLY one who WASNT full of shit, and honestly meant what they said (with a record to prove it) about fucking horses.
But then theres y'all. Who wanna play pretend. "If I meme it enough, Ill be based right?"
While crying about degeneracy.
And mostly 'christian' Ill wager.
Smh

>>22066
I love this opening.

>>22070
>In the entirety of my interactions with horsefuckers, about 6 years total, I have met ONE unironic horsefucker
>my interactions with horsefuckers
WTF

>>22066
You thought we’d all go fur
But hell no sir we’re pretty sure
Our mare fixation has no cure!

>>22070
>you are degenerates for fucking horses!
>you guys are full of shit and don’t fuck horses!
Pick one.

Also, horses are sexy, so it’s really not the same. And you obviously haven’t met enough horsefuckers. Did you go to MareFair?

I have made a Venn diagram that I hope will clear up this controversy once and for all.

>>22099
This is fair.

>>22099
Except thats not accurate. A better diagram would have furries encompassing horsefuckers entirely, with only the smallest crescent evading the furry bubble.
This is due to the fact that furries were objectively defined long before MLP even came out. You can criticize the overly generalized definition of furries all you want - plenty do - but that doesnt change the fact that all MLP activity - whether the individual self-identifies AS a furry - is furry in nature.

>>22101
You haven't yet clearly defined what a furry is. What counts as a furry? Is anyone who ever enjoys or appreciates a form of media that includes anthropomorphized animals a furry?

>>22102
Uhm, you mean aside from the OP?

I'll phrase differently
>>22102
>Is anyone who ever enjoys or appreciates a form of media that includes anthropomorphized animals a furry?
Technically and definitively, no. Self-identification is a necessary component.
Having SAID that, horsefuckers self-identify as part of the MLP fandom, which IS definitively furry in that it centers around/toward anthropomorphized ponies,....
So yes, all horsefuckers are furries, but some are in denial.

>>22104
Wouldn't that make Disney movies fans, Pokemon fans, and d&d players "furries"? What's the criteria? Where does it end?
>Self-identification is a necessary component.
Why does it matter with one component, but not the other? People self-identify as bronies, but don't identify bronies as furries.

>>22104
>IS definitively furry in that it centers around/toward anthropomorphized ponies
On what basis do you imply that the ENTIRE archetypical concept of anthropomorphizing animals is furry? It's a literary concept that exists independently of the furry fandom. It's as old as humanity itself, since long before the "furry" fandom came about.
Next you're going to tell me that ancient Egyptian priests, practitioners of most other pagan religions (99.9% of humans in history), Greek poets like Aesop, speculative evolution science fiction writers, cave painters, Japanese monks cataloguing Yokai, all of the Roman empire, all Hindus, and basically anything else that

>>22103
The OP doesn't specify the degree to which those criteria apply.
Is Imhotep a furry? He talked about anthropomorphized animals a lot.
Is Aesop a furry?
Were Dacians furries?
How much do you have to be interested in anthropomorphized animals do you need to be? What kind of interest must it entail? How anthropomorphized do the animals have to be?

>>22104
Are Broncos Fans furries?
Are ALL sportsball fans with an animal mas ot furries, since they identify with a group and that group is associated with an anthropomorphic animal?
Are all Christians furries, due to Christ being repeatedly referred to as a lamb in symbolism?
Are all Hindus furries, because they're fully committed to an identity that involves anthropomorphic animal figures?
Are fans of Hesiod's works furries?
Are African Magic Warriors furries? They don't use fursuits, but they have fancy masks.
Are people who celebrate Easter furries, because of Peter Rabbit?
Are fabs of LotR furries, because it has anthropomorphic dragons and spiders?

What's the criteria?

>>22099
Lmao, imagine being a clopper in 2023.

>>22109
Where do you think you are?

>>22110
Furbooru?

>>22105
No, that would make them fans of furry content. Did u miss the part about self-identification?
>ppl dont identify bronies as furries
In ignorance
>>22106
>on what basis do you hurr nurr
By the definition. Dont take my word for it, look it up.
>all that historical shit
Predates the establishment of furries,as being a thing.
Wanna know what DOESNT predate the establishment of furries being a thing?
Mlp
>>22107
See this post
>>22108
The criteria being, establishment of concept. Also, weak attempt at broncoposting. You wanna know who has a bronco brand on both sides of her ass, and who THEN got those brands tattooed so the colors are correct?
Adeline did. It took 2 different sessions under an anti-magic screen, but nigger look lively, shes a cow who has matching bronco.cutie marks on both sides. Cuz you know why? As much as she has contempt for many in the periphery, she absolutely loves Mlpol and the Denver Broncos. You wanna know who DOESNT love Mlpol and the Denver Broncos? Jews, for starters.

>>22112
What you're missing is that furries are just a recent subset of worship of the Egyptian gods of Anubis, Heh, Kek, Tefnut, Set and others. They came first.

>>22112
>By the definition.
The definition is vague, and has no exact parameters.
>Predates the establishment of furries
Why does it matter that it predates them? If it's "by the definition" timeline shouldn't matter. You're moving the goalpost.
Also several sportsball teams were post "furry fandom".

>>22112
How is a fan of "furry content" different from a fan of pony content in terms of self-identification?
A pokemon fan is a fanatic for Pokemon. A pony fan is a fantastic for ponies.

>>22112
>Predates the establishment of furries,as being a thing.
>Wanna know what DOESNT predate the establishment of furries being a thing?
So, what you're saying is that all instances of anthropomorphic animals before the "furry fandom" are non-furry by seniority, but all instances of anthropomorphism after the fact are furry by-default?

>>22101
>This is due to the fact that furries were objectively defined long before MLP even came out. You can criticize the overly generalized definition of furries all you want - plenty do - but that doesnt change the fact that all MLP activity - whether the individual self-identifies AS a furry - is furry in nature.
I think you're working from a flawed definition of what a "furry" is, either that or I am. My understanding is that a furry is someone who identifies as an animal, either in the sense that they literally believe themselves to be an animal "on all levels except physical, I am a wolf. *barks*", or as part of an elaborate role-playing fantasy or sexual kink. The furry "fandom" isn't related to any particular media franchise, but they have a general interest in any media franchise that involves animal characters.

Bronies, or horsefuckers, or whatever the preferred term is these days, are a group of people specifically interested in MLP and its world. There is plenty of crossover since it stands to reason that MLP would appeal to furries along with just about any other cartoon that features animal characters, but most of the bronies I've encountered don't fit the definition of being furries.

Examples:

>image 1
Nice feet.

>image 2
Nice hooves.

If you can't tell the difference between these two types of characters and the audience they appeal to, you are literally retarded.

>>22113
I wont contest that there may be furries who iconographically view... specific (or general) furries as... being consistent with pagan/polytheistic dynamics,... but Im gonna need a citation.
And then, breakdown the demographics of who believes this shit versus practice.
Cuz lets not pretend that it isn't 10 to 1 (or worse) ppl who claim to be christian versus are.
>>22114
No, the definition is GENERAL.
>>22115
Pony content IS furry content. Until you can argue that pony content doesnt involve anthropomorphized animals, ur in the detention box.
>>22116
More or less
>>22117
Oh wow, you're exceedingly wrong.

The ppl who identify as having been an animal in a previous life are known as Therians. The ppl who identify as being an animal in an incorrect body (not u like certain transgenders,... we'll get to that) are referred to as Otherkin.

Literally speaking, from the definitive meanings of the word:
Bronies are a specific term pertaining to a specific aubset of fandom that is WELL within the established definition of what is "furry".

>>22119
Wew, you got a 2 minute response time! Better grt those numbers down, I was at sub 30 seconds

>>22118
>Until you can argue that pony content doesnt involve anthropomorphized animals, ur in the detention box.
Ponies are barely anthropomorphized at all. They have human-like personalities, but their bodies are fully pony. They're closer to xenos/aliens than anthros.

>>22121
Uh, did you miss the whole speaking fluent english, havig things like libraries and shops and vendors, witch-doctors even?
Do horses have those?
Oh wait, no

>>22122
Oof, up to 3+. Better luck next time sport

>>22123
That doesn't make them anthros in the way furries are generally attributed. They're distinctly different.

>>22118
>pony content doesnt involve anthropomorphized animals
They literally aren't. They are just horses, with cutesy features like thick legs and big eyes. They have no human features

And in today's edition of "didnt read/comprehend what I said" we have (you)

>>22128
No. I read it. I just reject the premise that furries own the entire archetype of anthropomorphization since their conception.

>>22131
Then fight the internet

>>22132
That's what I'm doing.

>>22133
Good luck

Shutup Stix

>>22135
To the bitter end

>>22138
Thats exactly how trans ppl feel, you'll have good company.

>>22139
I wouldn't know. I'm not a tranny.
Are you?

>>22141
No, but transfags seem to think they can defy objective reality in a comparable manner.
They think how they identify changes things

>>22142
That's a silly generalization to make. You're silly.

>>22144
Oh? People pretending that their personal perception that defies objective reality is different in vases of bronies who arent furries versus transgenders who are abominations? Do tell. Tell me about how your refusal to accept being a furry is different from their refusal to accept biology. Go on

Anyways, we've already established that the Ancient Egyptians were the first to anthropomorphize animals. So furries and bronies are just subsets of the Egyptian religion

>>22147
Egyptians did so spiritually, so youre still wrong

>>22149
Is this what youve reduced yourself to?

In YOUR words, is this what God wants of you?

>>22148
Anubis is literally an anthro dog

>>22145
I think the better comparison is trannies trying to say everything revolves around trannies (Trixie, Minecraft Bee, Samus, etc) is like furries hell-bent on calling anything that even vaguely references anthropomorphic animals "furry".
>>22147
I am willing to compromise and say that bronies are actually a subsect of Roman/Celtic Epona-worshippers, as our cultural practices, beliefs, and rituals line up.
Also note how Epona is depicted as either a woman or a sapient mare, but never a grotesque hybrid. Ponies are the same vein.

>>22152
What are you even saying?

>>22154
And? Is there a furry Anubis cult? Or are you being lazy and suggesting that anyone who costumes as a dog is ipsofacto worshipping anubis?

>>22156
That was for stix

>>22155
So, you wouldnt be adverse to the suggestion that horse-based furries are derivative of epona worship?

>>22161
Much vetter numbers. Still a wibbler, tho

>>22155
You cannot argue that the Egyptian god Kek, god of primordial chaos, does not have a significant influence over the Brony fandom

>>22157
I mean yeah. Furries are based around Anthropomorphized animals, and the Egyptians were the first to do so en masse.

>anyone who costumes as a dog is ipsofacto worshipping anubis?
Not necessarily Anubis is actually a Jackal, and Set, for example, is also a caniform. There are many Egyptian gods. I would, however, consider him to be the first furry husbando. And while he likely isn't the first fursona, he certainly perfected it.

>>22163
Wooh, seems Ive hit a nerve. Not even stix can make a reply that quick. Pupper? Is that you? Nevermind, youre irrelevant

>>22148
I spiritually want to marry a mare and venerate her as the ideal of feminine beauty and motherly compassion, just like my ancestors did. Your argument is invalid.

>>22164
Kek only has relevance because ppl think it does

This goes the same for what people define as furry, which has yet to be contested

>>22158
What does that have to do with the guy posting YouTube videos?
What's that have to do with god?

>>22168
>only has relevance because ppl think it does
Same goes for any deity/idol.

>>22168
Kek was one of the first anthropomorphizations, and thus the founder of anthropomorphization. Saint Christopher the Dog-headed of the Christians, The Lion King, Bluey, My Little Pony, and the furry fandom all owe their existence to those who came before.

>What people define as furry
Which is a subset of Egyptian godhood

>>22170
Well, that depends.
What is gonna happen when i post? Is it gonna be well thought conjecture and hypothesis?

>>22172
Yeah. Egyptians did it first, therefore furries are an offshoot of them.

>>22174
Or is it this?

>>22175
Ill gladly prove you wong, but this is clearly not the venue for intellectual exploration, so no

>>22178
Then why are you here?

>>22180
To allow you the opportunity toseehow waifishly insufficient you are, i. your piny dreams and concepts.
You WASTE in your excess.
And you pretend sovereignty.
Need I go on?

>>22168
>which has yet to be contested
We are literally contesting it right now.

>>22181
In your, sorry, Im not perfect

>>22181
What are you even talking about?

>>22183
Ill give u ti.e to catch up

>>22185
I told you to shut uo

>>22189
Post more Epona vids

>>22191
I love this one.

>>22192
Same
https://youtu.be/elbSeta2UtA?feature=shared

>>22188
You first.

>>22194
Are you gonna stop? I know "all your carefully crafted arguments will be summary ignored" is a rule, but at least TRY

>>22196
You didn't even refute his argument. You flat out refused to.
What is your point?

>>22157
>Is there a furry Anubis cult?
Probably, actually.

>>22181
>Still not accepting our Egyptian forebearers

>>22196
>asking me to repeat myself
Certainly. The logic is straightforward. Bronies, furries, disney films, Bluey, Celts, parts of the Christian religion, etc, have as a part of their essence the attribution of human characteristics and features to animals. This idea is inspired by those who came before. The ancient Egyptian religion was the first to anthropomorphize animals on a large scale, including in art. Thus, furries and bronies both are simply the offshoots of the ancient egyptian religion.

Alright, Ive said my peace
Y'all are a bunch of delusional and denialistic furfsgs. Live and deal.
I wont try to combat the bots (both living [stix] and otherwise [who knows?])
Furfaggotry existed before MLP.
Bury this post, ur still a furfag.
Deny it, you're just like a transgender.
Hate yourself all you want. You are the thing you're trying yo hate.

And theres plenty of people who want to lime you for what and who you are, once you stop hating them cuz of fucking labels.

>>22157
uwu
https://www.furaffinity.net/view/36388963/

>>22112
Ponies pre-dates furries.
Mlp first launched in 1982. The term furry fandom was only first used in 1983. This means that there were pony fans (mostly women and girls) for a whole year before furries became a distinct thing.

>>22201
>Furfaggotry existed before MLP.
Actually no. See >>22204
Ponies are older.