<?xml version="1.0"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" href="https://en.wikifur.com/w/skins/common/feed.css?303"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
		<id>https://en.wikifur.com/w/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=68.184.148.144</id>
		<title>WikiFur - User contributions [en]</title>
		<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://en.wikifur.com/w/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=68.184.148.144"/>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://en.wikifur.com/wiki/Special:Contributions/68.184.148.144"/>
		<updated>2026-10-10T16:52:58Z</updated>
		<subtitle>User contributions</subtitle>
		<generator>MediaWiki 1.23.16</generator>

	<entry>
		<id>//en.wikifur.com/wiki/Talk:Furfag</id>
		<title>Talk:Furfag</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://en.wikifur.com/wiki/Talk:Furfag"/>
				<updated>2009-01-18T17:35:49Z</updated>
		
		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;68.184.148.144: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;''About &amp;quot;FurFag,&amp;quot; sorry, but the article is more in reference to the demeneaning aspect of the term,... This is not a situation like about the use of the work N***** as a demenaning term vs n***** as part of a culture colloquialism'' &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This comes across as dishonest. The reverted entry stated that the term was often used as a joke, which is factual. Supposedly, information on Wikifur is supposed to be nuetral. Your revert makes it appear you're trying to spin a certain point of view and give the term an added gravitas. I also don't understand why you made your explanation under the author's IP, where it could be easily missed, instead of in the discussion of the term its self. [[User:733|733]] 21:08, 15 December 2006 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I don't think Wikifur should even have this article. [[User:Tretonin|Tretonin]] 21:15, 15 December 2006 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::The phrase is common enough to be included (Google for &amp;quot;Yiff in hell furfags&amp;quot;) and the term has become associated with Furry, for better or worse. [[User:733|733]] 21:23, 15 December 2006 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
::I think we should have the article, no reason not to, but we should be clear that it is a derogatory (and IMHO juvenile, frankly) term used by trolls, goons, and the like (you'll not catch me giving them the lofty moniker anti-furries). Whether they claim to be joking or not is of little relevance. [[User:Simba B|Simba B]] 21:41, 15 December 2006 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
:::I've seen furries on Taps and FurryMUCK call themselves and other Furries &amp;quot;furfags&amp;quot;. I think this is starting to evolve into the Furry version of &amp;quot;queer&amp;quot;, where to one group it's an insult and to others, it's a badge of identification. [[User:733|733]] 21:52, 15 December 2006 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
::::Yes.  Shouldn't we mention the FCTC, the trolls who make vids with this title on youtube.[[User:Blastthebat|Blastthebat]] 00:14, 2 March 2008 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The term &amp;quot;-fag&amp;quot; isn't neccsarily mean an insult or demeaning term on the /4/chan or annonymous community. Don't get me wrong I am not assosiated with Anonymous or so but I am well familiar by their terms. Understand what some words we may find vulgar to an extend, because Anonymous are... anonymous, they see some words to a level extend that doesn't offend them. After all they have referd even the very few people they respect as fags, not as an insult but as a simple to honoured title. Anonymous, /4/chan and whoever use the term &amp;quot;furfag&amp;quot; may be using it as an offense, but it can simply mean those who are furry. They call [[Wikipedia:Mark Bunker|Mark bunker]], a guy who supports Chanology and only guy who has some command over thearmy of Anonymous and liked by them, a &amp;quot;Beardfag&amp;quot;. not as an insult but simply because he has a beard. Though &amp;quot;Furfag&amp;quot; was probably made to insult furries, these days it is with the rest of the line of -fag titles all with neutral meaning. The true upset of this discussion isn't the word but how it's used.--[[w:c:Sonic:User:Mystic Monkey|Mystic Monkey]] 22:35, 8 August 2008 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
You furfags forgot an image.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
http://xs221.xs.to/xs221/07476/furfag-execution.jpg&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Special:Contributions/68.184.148.144|68.184.148.144]] 17:35, 18 January 2009 (UTC)BLOWME&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>68.184.148.144</name></author>	</entry>

	</feed>