Squicking the mundanes
I would define "squicking the mundanes" as any behavior by a fan intended to provoke a reaction of shock from a non-member of the fandom. It may or may not have anything sexual about it. The phrase is not limited to furry but may apply to other groups as well. --mwalimu 14:39, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
- Oh, it absolutely is not limited to furry fandom; it was a common phrase when I was in the SCA, and I've heard it used at various science fiction conventions as well. From my experience, the usual connotation had nothing to do with sexual material.----DuncanDaHusky(talk) 14:44, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm thinking we should add links to some furotica categories, including Category:Mature art archives and Category:Mature story archives, and probably some others. Once we do that, however, do we still want to keep the "Popular locations of Furotica" section of the article? (Note that I am not advocating it's removal, just asking for opinions.) --mwalimu 15:40, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
- That's what I changed it to: a link to the general category of Category:Mature websites. Any other websites we might mention directly in this article will already go there, though perhaps a shout-out could be given to those who distribute physical erotic material (like prints and comics) at conventions, but aren't explicitly (s'cuse the pun) mentioned in that category. Maybe it would be good to have a section discussing the distribution of erotica online and off. -- Siege(talk) 07:00, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
While this article presents useful information, it does not cite sufficient sources, nor is it necessarily NPOV. There are what appear to be several personal opinions interspersed throughout. To prevent disputes and to maintain a degree of encyclopedic accuracy, we should strive for well-referenced articles written in an objective, neutral tone without editorializing. In particular:
- the 2nd paragraph makes the term more ambiguous. Can this paragraph be rewritten? Perhaps it would be appropriate to explain that it is a subjective term in the eye of the beholder (i.e., different furs will have different ideas about what is erotic). Certainly there is a large amount of erotic art and fiction produced "by furries, for furries." At its core, I think this is what we would call furotica since it was created specifically for a furry audience. The examples of Leda and the Swan, Minerva Mink, and Bugs Bunny could provide examples of non-furry art forms that are, nonetheless, potentially erotic to some furs.
- In paragraph 3, can this be quantified in any way? Sure, we've been to cons and browsed FA (etc.) and seen the amount of furotica out there. Are there any reliable estimates of an actual percentage of art/fiction that is erotic? I think we can also merge paragraphs 3 and 4, since 3 leads into the concept of non-furries' exposure to furotica, and 4 continues it. (There's some grammatical cleanup needed on aisle 4, though.)
- Paragraph 5 is an eloquent opinion. It would be enhanced by including reliable citations. For instance, see Wikipedia:Erotica for examples of how different governments have wrangled with the notion of pornography vs. erotica.
--CodyDenton 10:03, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Why does this need its own page?
Why not just merge it with pornography, or yiff? In fact, merging pornography with yiff sounds like a good idea to me as well...I feel like "yiff" is the thing people would search for. Equivamp 12:07, 17 May 2011 (EDT)