Under 18...
Hi 
I'm under 18 and i was wondering what people my age can participate in at the AC. So what can i participate in?? 
thanks alot! 
You should be selective in what you want to view. Assuming that you already know a good deal about the furry subculture, expect quite a little bit of ecchi ("perverted") artwork on display (though it has to be mostly censored as a convention rule) and a few shows/events to deal with sensitive topics (possibly even ones that aren't rated Adults Only). Aside from that, though our subculture can have alot of garbage, it also has many creative and talented individuals crating great fiction, illustrations, shows, and so forth. If you ARE able to attend next year, I wish you the best of luck.
expect quite a little bit of ecchi ("perverted") artwork on display
I didn't see any perverted artwork at AC. What do you consider perverted?
it`s all relative. to some people anything with sex in it is perverted.And as far as the law goes, anything of sexual nature and a minor seeing it is dicey legally.
Also, the badges of minors have the word "MINOR" plastered on them with big fat letters haha
I don't consider the mere existence of sex, or different sexual orientations, to be perverted (I'm bisexual myself). To me, sex and the human body are mostly good things. But I don't like media that explores this subject matter in a vulgar or extremely self-indulgent way.
In my opinion, pornography is to the psyche what tobacco is to your lungs.
Sure! In this regard, otakus and furries are partly to blame for their negative image. I don't get how some parts of these groups accept disgusting trash for entertainment like lolicon/shoutacon porn (hentai mangas and animes, but with CHILDREN used sexually) or erotica centered around fictional, but still NON-HUMAN, species (furry porn consumers are probably the cutting edge when it comes to making bestiality acceptable 
). Sorry, but this media pretty much BEGS for government internvention or moral guardians complaining about how evil these subcultures are (despite their generally innocuous status). I don't support censorship, especially against "different" ideas, but I sometimes find myself tempted to play the devil's advocate.
There is a HUGE difference between pornography and tasteful artistic nudes (which are still tucked away in the adult art section). I find its the general media LOVES to dig up dirt on people. Negative stories always sell better then positive ones.
On that note, I sense Rule 25 of the Internet kicking in. I'm going to shut up now 
Of course, the the art show, it's somewhat less relative, because we have to make decisions about what art should be shown in one section of the art show instead of another.
But every so often there are pieces that are considered borderline, which the artist may or may not bring to our attention in advance; where possible, the art show staff discusses the piece and how comfortable we'd be if small children walked past it, and then we decide whether to
a. put it in the mature section,
b. put it in the general section, or perhaps even
c. put it near the edge of the general section and strike an agreement with the artist that if someone complains, we move it.
Our mature gallery also has mild limits drawn on it for content, but they almost never come up. In fact, i can only think of one piece where we needed to talk about where it should go in the years that i've worked with the art show, and i think the artist brought it to our attention herself. Our folks are pretty good about policing themselves.
We trust that if folks have concerns about the content of the art show, they will bring them to staff attention so that the concerns of our audience can be properly considered.
What would the edge of the general-audience section be for? 12/13/15+ artwork? Please clarify it.
Basically, if you won't see it on a normal beach in the U. S., it won't be in the general art show. That is, breasts will not be visible on females and both genders will have their crotches covered.
That brings up an interesting point. "A normal beach in the U.S."
In Europe, it is fairly common for women to go topless, and in some cases people appear completely nude and nobody bats an eyelash.
The Eurofurence Art Show does not differentiate between "mature" and "general" art. It is all displayed together, and nobody bats an eyelash.
Ah, what a marvel to be born in a country settled by people who would hang a woman for showing her ankle...
Depends on your definition of "together":
Since some guests of Eurofurence may not want to look at the more adult part of the show, and some "clean" artists may not feel comfortable to be displayed next to explicit artwork, the show will roughly be divided into "zones", with the most adult zone being farthest away from the entrance. That way, any visitor can decide by him/herself how far to proceed, and artists don't need to worry about what will be displayed on the panels next to his.
Also, EF doesn't allow under-18s to attend.
And better this country than one (cough*Iran/Afghanistan*cough) that still stones women for such "offenses"...
There is that, of course. German law still defends children under 18. Once they are over 18, though, they don't seem to have the hangups that we have.
The vague separation was actually put in place for the Americans in attendance, since they know we are fragile that way.
An interesting case arose a few years ago with the artist Selderaya from the Netherlands, who at the time was 14 years old. She drew some artwork that would give prudish Americans heart attacks and it was very popular in the art show...but the con could not let her go into the art show to look at her own artwork because at the time, the entire art show was legally considered "18 and over only."
That is when I introduced the Eurofurs to the concept of the Post-It note.
i wonder how the person who invented those would respond to seeing them used that way
Post-It stickers are a highly ambiguous tool. They've probably been put to more bizzare uses.
How ironic. The balance between freedom of expression and its responsible use is delicate. Looks like EF went through alot of bad things.
Sooner or later, the religious extremism in the Middle East, Northern Africa, and Central Asia (where all the Islamic nations are situated) will be put in its place. Just as the Catholic church didn't get to reign over Europe and the superpowers' colonies for all eternity. Something will come up.
Shame for younger European furs. Looks like they'll need to use a U.S. event as a substitute.
Also of note: I'd hate to have been born in Germany. As a country, it seems so anti-liberty and totalitarian (just in case you didn't know, present-day Deutschland was preceded by the military dictatorships in Prussia).
China and Islamic republics are even bigger prudes. Just note that I will NEVER equate sexual freedom with porn (just like tobacco isn't a necessary part of your diet).
Basically, if you won't see it on a normal beach in the U. S., it won't be in the general art show. That is, breasts will not be visible on females and both genders will have their crotches covered.
Basically, yes. But there are some interesting exceptions to that rule:
--if the work is sufficiently gory or violent, we may still ask that it be in the mature section, so the younger ones don't get nightmares
--Exposed genitalia on a regular animal, the sort you might see in dogfancy or national geographic, is usually ok for the general gallery.
I wasn't sure about the gore factor, so I didn't mention it. 'Real' animals with exposed genitals could be seen on a 'normal US beach,' depending on local regulations. So my (half) fast answer holds up there as well! 
For the real animals, it also depends on the manner they are displayed and their purpose they serve in the artwork.
*Let's not exclude Minty (unless she hasn't logged in recently, or doesn't want to respond)!
Also, Glelin, some of the questions and answers in that furry survey are wall-bangingly stupid ("Do you consider yourself human?" Why, of course I do! I'm a bit crazy, but not THAT ionsane.)
Some people don't think they are stupid. I'll admit that I used to. However, now that I've met a few other furs and realized how diverse the Fandom really is (as well as gained an open mind), I now accept those questions as perfectly legitimate.
Still, until plastic surgery becomes sophisticated enough to allow your body to assume a wide variety of forms, we're still (relatively) hairless apes. And unless you can bend our physical universe like the Matrix, I don't think that will change soon.
But, if it comes true, I won't discriminate against people that alter their appearance to look like anthros, Grey/Reptilian aliens, or anything else that comes up. I've nothing gainst it, but I won't use it (and I hope I'm not discriminated for it, either!)
Also, I don't think zoophiles should be officially accepted. That's just creepy.
Uhhhhhh, where did zoophilia come into play? Completely unrelated. It's not even part of a small corner of the Furry Fandom.
Didn't you pay attention to the survey?
First off, there's no 'officially accepted' - furry's a community, not a club, and therefore nobody decides what's 'in it' or 'out of it,' so there's no way that the community can officially come together and say 'we don't recognize these folks.' If you say you're furry, you're furry.
Second, zoophilia is not in any way related to furry or Anthrocon, so I wouldn't worry about it too much. It's pretty much a safe assumption that in a community 100% focused on the way human beings relate to animals you're going to wind up catching a few people who fall into that interest group. That doesn't mean anything, though - it's similar to how if you take a sample of folks at a gun show, you could probably find a few folks with loose screws who are exceptionally violent and dangerous. Most people at the gun show are just there to take part in their common interest (shooting for sport and competition) but unfortunately the nature of the subject attracts people of a less savory sort of character, and all you can hope to do for that sort of person is impress on them how frowned upon that sort of attitude is.
The vast majority of furries not only are squicked by the idea but also agree with the general consensus that it's not just gross - it's animal abuse. I think it's pretty safe to say that most people in the community are not on board with the concept of animal abuse, we like our fuzzy friends a bit too much for that.
One more post (this one) and I'm done: Since we're a very subjective species, I'll now speak to the people that have very different (sometimes even radical) opinions in a much nicer manner.
Okay, this is it.
You'd be surprised. There are people, in their heart of hearts, that believe that they are merely a human shell with the soul of an animal trapped within.
Not that there's anything wrong with that! /Seinfeld
I can understand, but you must be a wacko to literally believe you're a dog, lizard, or something else. Those furs are (no offenses) detached from reality.
Your criticisms of something you don't understand are quite offensive. You have no idea what it's like to be in that sort of situation of self perception/awareness, knowing oneself to be so different and unable to do anything about it. Please do not pass such negative judgments on people who are different from you.
I'm sure he doesn't mean any offense in what he says. He is just 17.
"He is just 17." If he wasn't backed by religious literature and scientific magazines/journals, I'd say that he was the more childish one. But alas, I made a mistake in judgement.
I've dealt with many complex and conflicting emotions these past few years. Not all youths just focus their attention on i-Pods and Lady Gaga.
If you're using religious literature as an authoritative source in competing with someone else's ideas, you're going to have to step back and take a look at your argument.
I don't mean to be passing judgement, and I don't mean to come across as anti-religious, but a lot of religion flies in the face of the current understanding of the universe and the way the world works, or outright does away with the concepts of verification or review. Much of it requires to you to step well past what scientific knowledge, understanding, and logic would lead you to believe. If this is what makes someone happy, then fine - but glass houses, man - can't throw rocks in 'em. You can't call someone crazy for believing in something that logic dictates is not possible and turn around and use your own brand of the same line of thinking as a rebuttal. :]
Religion isn't science, but some texts do have philosophical, cultural and moral content within them (as long as you don't interpret them in a fundamentalist manner; that's terrible). That said, you're right in that I shouldn't have used them or at least not given prominence to the Buddhist and Hindu texts (esp. Hinduism, since just like conservative Christians are unashamedly homophobic, Hinduism supports class divisions). I wasn't rebutting Skyfox; I was trying to be more comprehensive (even though I failed).
"Your criticisms of something you don't understand are quite offensive. You have no idea what it's like to be in that sort of situation of self perception/awareness, knowing oneself to be so different and unable to do anything about it. Please do not pass such negative judgments on people who are different from you.
'Furries are everywhere, furries are everybody.'--Me"
Apologies if my post hurt your feelings, and I also identify with animals. But you also need to take criticisms one in a while to help you become a better individual of whatever species your soul and mind belong to (since you don't feel human-whether we're foxes or humans, our inability to hear others talk about our negative sides can block us from improving relationships and our interactions with the world).
You're right! How could I not see the signs? If modern science, Buddhism, Hinduism, and even Scientology are to believed in that our universe is like a hologram made out of data, or a programmed dream (this has been covered in highly prestigious publications like the Scientific American, and on various independent documentaries), we might not even be people in the Orthodox sense of the word. No, I'm not kidding. And a study also published through SA Magazine suggests that human nature is fundamentally corrupt.
Well then, fox, I humbly ask you to explain your feelings. My lack of understanding clouds my vision.
*gazes up at the 20-story wall of text. After reading through for the tenth time for full understanding* Criticism? There is nothing to criticize. Some people are realists and others are idealists. It may be worth exploring that the grass may very well be greener on the other side.
We'll see about exploring. Although not completely satisfied with it, I'm more than comfortable assuming that I'm a (mostly) hairless ape. But go ahead (both you and Skyfox) and believe in what gives your lives meaning.
Criticisms in the form of expressing doubt are perfectly valid. As a very logical and science-minded person I can fully understand when somebody doesn't understand or believe something as intangible, untestable, and unprovable as therianthropy. But a criticism in the form of referring to such people as "crazy" is an insult. I do accept your apology, however.
As Desteredra said, I never referred to anything regarding myself any my own species identity. I have a con badge that refers to it but I don't really discuss it openly except for in related discussion panels because of the fact so many people will just roll their eyes in disbelief as if it's "furry taken way too far". This thread of the current topic isn't the place to discuss it, and since therianthropy really has very little to do with Anthrocon (which the AC staff prefer to keep from being a general socializing message board) this forum overall isn't really a good place to discuss it. However, since discussion panels do have to do with Anthrocon and furry conventions, I invite/recommend you to attend a therianthropy discussion panel at Anthrocon or any other furry convention you attend which has a panel on therianthropy (ie. Midwest FurFest). The hosts of those panels are much more qualified to talk about the topic than I am.
Skyfox
I now understand. It's just that I've also come under similar prejudice for many different reasons, even within my own family (furry, Asperger's, ex-Catholic, bisexual, and not being the center of attention when it comes to socializing). So it felt completely alien to me the first time I saw therianthropy being taken casually here (something even "tolerant" websites and media like TV Tropes harshly talk trash about).
Alsoo, about the discussion panels: I'm planning to sooner or later make AC my first con. I found out about the furry part in me approx. four or five years ago, but due to the initial shock from the "furotica" (even though, like any other person confronted with an undeniable aspect of his identity, I chose to acknowledge the negatives, brush them aside, and focus on what I do like), my family's said prejudices and complex relationship, and their additional absent-mindedness when it comes to anything that doesn't concern mainstream pop culture, their jobs, or Catholicism, I only found ways to unite that aspect with my recreational time (starting with Furc) until recently. Would any convention offer online transcripts from their previous panels?
Conventions usually don't have transcripts of their panels but you can sometimes find videos of panels on youtube and such. Just depends if anyone took video of the panel and posted it.
My speakers currently don't work. If only YouTube, Daily Motion and other video-sharing portals created subtitles for uploaded videos (though they might get repaired soon). Posting videos isn't bad, but it would be nice if people cared to use printed media and the written word as much as images and sounds nowadays. This isn't to rant against the conventions, it's a general problem in our culture.
Printed media and the written word are fine but don't always capture all the nuances of what happened, no point in being a luddite for the sake of being a luddite.
Youtube does (or did, at least) have automatic transcription and captioning of videos. Dunno if that's still around.
there are only a few things you CAN'T participate in. the Adult art auction, a few of the shows, there really isn't much you can't go to
Due to economic recession and budget cuts the light at the end of the tunnel has been turned off, we're sorry for the inconvenience.