That's probably owed to the fact that therian communities are frequently bombarded by trolls etc., and one of the most common trolling techniques is to pose as a "clueless newb" that will ridicule them mercilessly with the defense that they are "just curious." In other words, they probably would take the time to explain it for you if they weren't sick of being asked that.Morkulv wrote:Usually when I pose such questions on forums, I get scolded for "not understanding" and "not accepting things" and other weird stuff.
Somebody once said that if you ask ten furs what it means to be furry, you'll get a dozen answers. I imagine the same could be true of therianthropy.
This, however, is absolutely correct. Half of the problem with misinformation about internet subcultures like furry, therianthropy, otherkin, etc. is that people may start associating with said subculture because of that misinformation. Now for every one honest-to-God therian, there are a hundred more that just use the term "therian" as a status symbol; something they can use to make themselves feel like they're better than everyone else around them.Like it or not; therianthropy has become more and more of a trend these days, and like any trend it is filled with people who just want to stand out, and if you pose a question about his/her believes you usually get a agressive reaction.
Still, it's not like any other spiritual movements do not have their fair share of pretenders. The only difference is that the lunatics of mainstream religions tend to get disregarded as being contrary to the cause, whereas the lunatics of underground and/or Internet subcultures tend to get paraded around front and center. You'd object if I called Fred Phelps or Heidi and Spencer the true face(s) of Christianity, so why should the snobby emo coffee shop poet serve to represent Therianthropy?
Matt. . . *shudder* You know, I probably would have responded the exact same way. Then again, I saw Akira for the first time when I was eight years old, so at the same time, I don't think I can really relate either. I think it pertains more to my rants about the misconception that cartoons are strictly for children (which my dad had, which is how I got to watch Akira at that age) than it would anything I could say about furry/therians, but I think the lesson there would be that furries, like animation, are not capable of being represented by a single case example.
All I could think to add would be that the misconceptions are enforced on both sides. On one hand, you've got people like the sicko that drew the Disney/Bluth porn. It's my honest assessment that some people aren't exactly furries but associate with the fandom anyway because it's comforting to think there's an entire community of people that are just as sick in the head as they are. I don't think that guy actually believed you were into furry porn -- he just wanted to believe you were so he wouldn't be the only one.
But on the other hand, you've got the upper classmen that also made the immediate leap to the furry association and were quick to tell you all the most horrible horror stories imaginable about them. I wouldn't assume they necessarily believed it either, but I would assume that they wanted to believe it. What I'd assume about them is that they also perpetuated all the misconceptions about furry so that people will keep getting fired for being furry (one artist fired for being a furry is one less artist they'll have to compete with later). It goes both ways, so don't ever believe what you hear.
I wouldn't know, but I assume therians have similar problems: people on the inside trying to convince everyone that therianthropy is whatever the hell they wish it was, and people on the outside trying to convince everyone that therianthropy is whatever they think will help forward their careers.