Japanese man goes viral after fulfilling his dream of becoming a dog

[Teletubby 152,378]

 

[Teletubby 152,378]

@PartySick are you Japanese?

[Guest]

[skaxboy 5,833]

Coming for Heidi Klum’s gig

[SharkmanthaC 114,699]

I mean I have often wished that I've had my dog or cats' life. But to have $16k to spend on a dog costume. 

[TwistedTeeth 2,388]

You know what? Good for him

[nATAH 51,297]

ok im logging off

[Ayesha Erotica 1,788]

well, "otherkin"is on the rise and the man is ahead of his time, more and more people identify as animals,especially younger ones. Possibly the LGBTIQ Community will be expanded by them and integrate them. In 2035 it will considered a hate crime in some western countries when  self-identified animal is recognized as a human and not the way the living person wishes.

[vanna shintuyu 10,930]

12 minutes ago, LoliLux said:

well, "otherkin"is on the rise and the man is ahead of his time, more and more people identify as animals,especially younger ones. Possibly the LGBTIQ Community will be expanded by them and integrate them. In 2035 it will considered a hate crime in some western countries when  self-identified animal is recognized as a human and not the way the living person wishes.

nah, furries have been around for decades. and nobody's moved like that. this is the same line of thought conservatives like to use against queer people. "WHAT NEXT? ANIMALS? TREES? The alphabet gang will include p*dophiles and animals next!"

[SevenWonder 4,437]

I'm clearly too basic for modern life. 

[Ayesha Erotica 1,788]

1 hour ago, Hold my Manjobi said:

nah, furries have been around for decades. and nobody's moved like that. [..]

so is your stance to include them (in future) into the LGBTIQ community or not? And if not, why not? Somehow your posts hints not to, but I will not make overhasty conclusions. I define the LGBTIQ-community as "transcending and changing the fate one were originally expected to be", I don't draw the definition border between animals and humans, although I would tend to differentiate between mammals and non-mamals as an ultimate biological border and would have problems to include e.g. birds into it.

They (furries) may have been around for decades but I have not heard of them until before around 2016. They used to be a so tiny minority but they are growing and growing, and getting bigger and having more presence, just like trans people who existed long before but didn't enter increased public awareness until recently and are now more numerous. Yet, furries is not equivalent to people identifying as animals because not all animals have fur, not even all mammals.

The Japanese man hides and cannot live freely because he fears to be condemned, I see many paralells between him and queers (of the past). If it is his wish to be an animal, what makes him different from someone who is biologically not a woman, but wishes to be a woman? The LGBTIQ-community in the long-term will have to think about intregrating these living beings (I wanted to write people but then again not the right word for it).

[vanna shintuyu 10,930]

14 hours ago, LoliLux said:

so is your stance to include them (in future) into the LGBTIQ community or not? And if not, why not? Somehow your posts hints not to, but I will not make overhasty conclusions. I define the LGBTIQ-community as "transcending and changing the fate one were originally expected to be", I don't draw the definition border between animals and humans, although I would tend to differentiate between mammals and non-mamals as an ultimate biological border and would have problems to include e.g. birds into it.

They (furries) may have been around for decades but I have not heard of them until before around 2016. They used to be a so tiny minority but they are growing and growing, and getting bigger and having more presence, just like trans people who existed long before but didn't enter increased public awareness until recently and are now more numerous. Yet, furries is not equivalent to people identifying as animals because not all animals have fur, not even all mammals.

The Japanese man hides and cannot live freely because he fears to be condemned, I see many paralells between him and queers (of the past). If it is his wish to be an animal, what makes him different from someone who is biologically not a woman, but wishes to be a woman? The LGBTIQ-community in the long-term will have to think about intregrating these living beings (I wanted to write people but then again not the right word for it).

I'm not going to dignify your ignorance 

[River 118,730]

The furries are out of control 

[Ayesha Erotica 1,788]

58 minutes ago, Hold my Manjobi said:

I'm not going to dignify your ignorance 

Ignorant because I integrate Otherkin into LGBTIQ (in future)? If anyone is ignorant, it is you to the maximum. You are the equivalent of TERF, just that you are not excluding trans women, but transhumans/animals instead.

[Meruk Holland 2,296]

15 hours ago, LoliLux said:

so is your stance to include them (in future) into the LGBTIQ community or not? And if not, why not?

I'll assume this is a good-faith argument. 

First off, I wouldn't group together furries and other-kin. I agree that there is overlap but the distinction is that furries do not believe themselves to be nor aspire to be anthropomorphized animals. As for furries, I don't think they inherently warrant an inclusion to the queer community, not because they aren't welcome, but more for the fact that their community spans far greater bounds than the queer community does. It would be a disservice to them to be put under the queer community. But, if they should want to be included in the queer community, then I think we should be inclusive to them. As of now, I see too much nuance in the furry community to identify them as queer, especially since that is a point of contention amongst the furry community. 

Now otherkin, I can see an argument for the inclusion of otherkin since it's an identity and that's a big thing for the queer community. As of right now, it would be irresponsible to include them, for both the queer community and for the otherkin community. I don't believer queer people in general are informed enough to answer questions about otherkin (and what they want) when asked, and I don't believe otherkin are prominent enough to educate queer people on answers to those questions. There may come a day when that is the case, but as of now, it would only be harmful to otherkin to include them as part of the queer community.

The problem is that there are assumptions and connotations to being included in the queer community, usually related to the sexual nature of those included. "So what are otherkin? They want to be animals? That's another LGB thing? Do they want to have sex with people or other animals? Do they think people should have sex with them even though they think they're an animal?" And I don't feel comfortable with non-otherkin queer people being tasked with handling these questions with the amount of education they generally have as of this moment. Hell, I wouldn't want to burden otherkins with answering these questions. And while they may already be getting asked these questions, I feel being put under the umbrella of "queer" would only increase the frequency of these questions.