Weirdo stan, stanning for weird

[breakinglight11]

So among my many pet peeves, I have one that is quite small and absolutely meaningless but still gets on my nerves. Because it gets on my nerves, I end up arguing against it on the occasions that it has come up in my presence (which has happened to me likely more often than it does to most people.) But because of the nature of the issue, I end up looking SUPER WEIRD for standing up for it. Which is NOT REALLY WORTH IT, as it DOESN’T REALLY MATTER, but it annoys me so I always foolishly stan for it even though it makes me look like a freak. Why? Why do I do this? WHAT IS MY LIFE?

…

Now that I’ve said that, I have to describe it, don’t I?

Okay, fine. It gets on my nerves when people characterize relationships between human characters and nonhuman but still anthropomorphic and sentient characters as “bestiality.” Because it’s not— as long as the nonhuman character’s a person, with thoughts, feelings, and consciousness analogous to a human’s, they’re NOT an animal. So it doesn’t count. To me this seems like an obvious fact.

But apparently, just because it’s clearly an obvious fact to me, for some reason I feel compelled to point that out anytime somebody makes reference to the opposite.

...

Really, Phoeb? This is what you need to rules lawyer? This is what you need to "well, actually" about?

Why? It doesn’t matter! There are no real people or relationships being harmed by the misconception! It harms NO ONE if somebody doesn’t understand this. So why do I put myself in the position of being the champion of characters’ right to fall in love with whatever sentient alien, mythological creature, or anthropomorphic animal they choose? Why do I need to make myself look like a freak over THAT?

Your life has taken a very wrong turn if you’re ever insisting something is “not technically bestiality.” And I’ve done it SEVERAL TIMES. *Sigh*

Comments

[qnmark.livejournal.com]

Where do people characterize such relationships as bestiality?

[breakinglight11.livejournal.com]

I'm just referring to in conversations I've heard.

[kdsorceress.livejournal.com]

You are one hundred percent correct here and the people who call it beastiality are wrong. Keep fighting the good fight!

[(Anonymous)]

It sounds like you have the complete opposite stance from people who say things like "Superman sleeping with Lois Lane is technically bestiality."
From what I can tell, those people try to justify their point of view by defining bestiality as when a person has sex with a member of a species with which it cannot reproduce.

[mirrored-echo.livejournal.com]

I've seen that as a trigger warning on AO3. Never in conversation.

It irritates me too.

The trigger warning s purely there to say "this ship is dark and edgy, because bestiality!" Human/furry pairings aren't any weirder than human/elf pairings in high fantasy. I don't think anyone considers Arwen/Aragorn bestiality.

Calling it bestiality in universe would be really offensive to the nonhuman partner (since it reduces the pairing to a sexual fetish.) Sort of like racial fetishes. Which are problematic in the real world, and rooted in considering other races inhuman (and often more animalistic).

So... yes, I can see where you're coming from. Keep it up. :)