History in the making...

As an excl. zoosexual, how excited are you to embrace the term "yiffy" to describe your orientation?

  • a little...

  • kind of more than a little, but not quite a lot...

  • very...

  • HOLY SHIT, I'M YIFFY!

  • I'm a schlub and reject the whole notion


Results are only viewable after voting.

ordinon

BANNED
You know how exclusively homosexual people call themselves "gay" to make the whole concept super squeaky-clean and easy to understand?

Well... ladies and gentlewolves, the time has come for the most historical post of this whole section of the forum (thus far).

The analogous term for zoo-exclusive zoosexuals is... "yiffy"!

We are YIFFY PEOPLE! Isn't it wonderful?

I'm yiffy, you're yiffy, he's yiffy, she's yiffy, and we're all exclusively sexually attracted to animals! (And/or people in fursuit who identify as non-human)

Let's celebrate!
 
yiffy is taken by furry, so idk if co-opting it is going to bring this meaning to it.

Well, kinda...

Furry is dominated by human-identifying people who are sexually attracted to other human-identifying people.

They consider furry "their hobby," and they treat yiff with derision and scorn. To them, the world is filled with human people only, and anything that transgresses sexual species boundaries is somehow "bad." They don't understand that not all people are human... and, not all people are sexually interested in humans... they don't get this, or care!

The reason why it is important to reclaim (not co-opt) the term "yiffy" is because of all the hatred from so-called "furries" against non-human identifying people, and those of us who are exclusively attracted to non-humans, be they non-human people or non-human animals.

And, when you get right down to it, those kind of "furries" don't want anything to do with the word "yiffy" anyway. They want to brush it under a rug and pretend it doesn't exist. So, who exactly am I supposedly taking this term from? People who want to be free to discriminate and persecute those of us who actually ARE yiffy? Hm...

...

I see one other person is excited to be yiffy! Welcome to the future, sir/madam!

--- ADDENDUM ---

I want you to read and consider this article: Drag Isn’t Like Blackface. But That Doesn’t Mean It’s Always Kind to Women.

In it, a woman person compared Drag Queens to acting in blackface. Obviously, this caused a stir, but the woman in question still felt that Drag Queens, in a way, "mock" femininity and womanhood. Her feelings are valid, but clearly this was a faux-pax.

The article ends by saying this:
Without chilling drag’s wonderful tradition of free expression, we can take this moment to ask if our drag personae and performances truly celebrate feminine gender expressions, or if they lazily mock them. ... I don’t think that listening to women’s concerns will hurt us. In fact, I think it may make our drag even richer."

So, basically, yes, the "blackface" comparison was extreme and insensitive, yet we can still try to understand this woman's feelings. Women, and Drag Queens, will be better off if the Drag Queen community tries to understand a bit more what they are representing when they put on drag and do a performance.

And, transgender people also have concerns about Drag Queens, as you can see in this article: Viewers slam India Willoughby after she compares drag to blackface.

India Willoughby, a transgender person, was on a TV show when a Drag Queen came on the set. She got upset and started crying, while running away saying basically that Drag Queens "mock" transgender people. She proceeded to compare the whole Drag Queen culture to blackface.

Drag Queens need to understand that they are not only dealing with womanhood, but also femininity itself. And, just like Drag Queens should be more considerate of women's feelings, they should also be more considerate of transgender women's feelings. Simply being aware that some transgender people feel the way they do when a Drag Queen does a performance would benefit all parties involved. After all, how would you feel if you were a biological male who had to put on women's clothes every day to feel normal and accepted, and then some Drag Queen comes along, does the same thing, says it's "performance art," and acts like a goofball on TV? Wouldn't you feel a little misrepresented, a bit?

And, I can definitely relate to how India feels, because often times, I feel that my non-human identity and yiffy sexual orientation are "lazily mocked" by furries who don't understand how zoosexuals, therians, otherkin, and non-human people in general feel when they put their fursuit on and act like a goofball.

A person in a fursuit is still a person. I get offended sometimes when furries put their fursuits on and act unintelligent or buffoonish, because to me, that's my identity they are playing with. Why is my species, or the species I'm attracted to, so interesting that it has to be your "hobby?"

I don't get why a human-identifying person would want to put a fursuit on in the first place, but I get it. They are like the Drag Queens of the yiffy world. They identify as human, are sexually attracted to humans... But they don't understand that, for some of us non-human people out there, fursuiting is a core part of our identity. They also have no regard for the sexual orientation of those who aren't, like them, attracted to human people.

So, I'm just pointing this out so that other yiffy people out there can see the boundaries of the ideological battleground. Gaining acceptance for zoosexuality requires that we also understand and explain species identity as well. After all, the Stonewall Riots were started by transgender people! How far do you think LGBT would have gotten if it weren't for the fact that transgender people were trying to explain their gender identities? Same goes for us... understanding and explaining species identity is pivotal if we ever wish to see any change.
 
Last edited:
I see that this thread got a lot of views while I was editing it. I'm bumping it from an alt so that everyone can see that my post changed substantially since its first iteration.
 
Am i yiffy?

isn't yiff the furrie word for fuck ... because some of them act so much like 10 yr olds they find it offensive to say the word fuck or fucking or fucked
:rolleyes:
I know that out of dozens of dogs, i have never had a dog yiff me ... they generally try to fuck the living shit out of me as hard as they fucking can.
I do not think i have ever in my life been yiffy.
While getting pile driven by a super horny rott, hard enough you would swear your ass was getting bruised .... a yiffy good time :eek:, is not the way i could ever describe it. Getting flat out fucked senseless so you are almost brain dead other then the constant thinking of OMFG!!!! Mindblowing!!!!! Beyond amazing .... yiffy? ... Nope
OMFG! I have been truly yiffed ..... NOPE
I will stick with zoosexual.
 
I don't have a hard time saying I'm a fur.. I love fursuiting and such.. but I've never really got the concept of ýiff.. I am an older person so maybe I just like the old words of fucking.. etc.. So Nah.. but I know if I hear people talking about yiff(ing) then I know there are furs near by.. (it's late and that didn't make sense did it??)
 
Not interested, because no matter how hard you try to claim a word out of place. It already clearly has a foothold in furry culture. Furries that like to get all murry-purry all over each other (in or out of fursuit) that is yiffing.

All you will get if you try to use "Yiff" as a zoo/beast term... is confusion and probably anger. Because believe it or not, a huge percentage of furries are appalled by zoo activity.
 
"I'm a schlub and reject the whole notion"

wow, biased much?

as others have said, "yiffy" is a furry word, not a zoophile word. people who are both might decide to use the word, but otherwise... no. just no.
 
"I'm a schlub and reject the whole notion"

wow, biased much?

as others have said, "yiffy" is a furry word, not a zoophile word. people who are both might decide to use the word, but otherwise... no. just no.

Heh, the schlub thing was not meant to be taken too seriously :)

Well, it's clear that people aren't embracing "yiffy" as our word.

I think we need a word, like gay people have, to rally around. It could be any word, really, and I guess I thought yiffy was a natural fit.

Zoophile, after all, is just a word some psychiatrist came up with to label us. I don't see why people like it so much. Maybe you could come up with a word to describe us?

Everyone pick a word, or make one up, and share it in this thread!
 
<starts recorder> I always wanted a tape of crickets...

Is the forum not living up to your expectations of what you think it SHOULD be?

Do you expect to see post after post, several times each hour, in every thread?

If you desire internet excitement, I suggest going to twitter or IRC.
 
<chuckles gently> Have a bit of irony, friend - I'm told its good for the blood.

Alternatively, "Whoosh!"

Can't decide which one actually applies better...

Or perhaps an old AA maxim: Take the cotton out of your ears and stuff it in your mouth for the first month.
 
"Yiff"...

That word brings back some painful memories. I was attracted to a furry years ago, but she ended up betraying me. I've been in the ER for anxiety attacks because of her 3 times.
 
Zoophile, after all, is just a word some psychiatrist came up with to label us. I don't see why people like it so much. Maybe you could come up with a word to describe us?
actually we came up with the word .... they simply started using it because we did
 
Because "zoo" isn't good enough?

I am zoo
You are zoo
He/she is zoo
They are zoo
We are zoo

Sounds good to me.
 
Back
Top