Kemono

kemono

Other urls found in this thread:

e621.net/post/show/917676/2016-anthro-areola-armwear-belly-big_breasts-black
panpipes.org/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Which other attributes?
>tfw have had nothing but one night stands
Replied.

I'll send something back soon

Except that's wrong, retard.
Doesn't need to be soon: there's no obligation, I just like helping people orgasm.

Fucking hell, I'm upset that there is a total lack of web comics that I am interested in. Gun Show ended, now all that is left is Back and Hark a Vagrant. Basic Income Please cancelled her comics Pictures for Sad Children and Michael Keaton, so now I have one comic that updates once a week and one comic that updates randomly. Woe is me, who only likes overly specific things and can't enjoy things that aren't that.

From what I have been told I apparently have a nice ass. Take that for what it is, I'm not sure if it's nice or not since I can't look at it.

well it was gonna happen soon anyway~
also my printers low on ink so it'll be on something else

...

I miss reading webcomics: before high school started, I read so many. What sort are you looking for? Maybe I'll remember a couple I used to read.
I heard Homestuck ended, which means I might read it some day in the future. I like things that end instead of going on forever.
Okidoki~
>something else
Huh.

should I just back away slowly?

ipad?

hey riley

Oh yeah, asses are nice: you can look at it if you use your camera's 10 second timer feature.
From?

jef.

this thread

>owning a tablet
Pleb.
But I'm still excited. Today I fapped to this:
e621.net/post/show/917676/2016-anthro-areola-armwear-belly-big_breasts-black
N'aww~

whatcha up to

Gunshow was really good, my favorites were from Basic Income Please. She caught the utter hilarity in the bleak despair of the human condition. Pictures for Sad Children and Michael Keaton were my favorites.

I haven't even taken a picture of my face. I also removed my bathroom mirror. I'm not gonna just look at parts of my body, that seems weird to me, to just look at parts of your body.

No.

if you insist. how are you?

not much, just finished adding more gay to my skyrim install, the usual. you?

well it's real old at this point
also, that aint gay

I got to re-add my gay stuff to skyrim. I'm not doing much, probably play some games in a bit

I don't think you can ever have enough mods for skyrim.
what are you going to play?

the witcher probably. first one

I never got around to that one, is it any good?

Pictures for Sad Children is the only one I recognise. I really liked it.
The only other comic I can remember right now about despair is this one called terrible terrible terrible.
Just read the tumblr from oldest posts to newest posts to get them all. Unfortunately the author posted some of the recent ones on vice instead.
It's about an opossum doing despair/alcoholism shit. I liked it.
I'm doing okay. Didn't expect to be up all night, but I am. I don't feel sleepy either. I've been browsing Sup Forums all night.
And~?

it's great so far, but I'm working my way through all the side missions before I continue with the main mission

boys are best~

>tfw no one to touch my butt

how are you even able to find interesting content for that long on this site? I can't remember the last time I've seen even 2 threads in a row that kept my interest

is it worth playing if I thought 2 was ok and didn't like 3?

also seconding boys are bestr

...

cute butt

I like your potato cam

...

I think so, the combat is very different between it and the others. they'res also a big emphasis on story

alright, is the story any good?

So, how many of you fags are actual zoophiles?

I''m not opposed to anthropomorphic work, my favorite comic of all time is Krazy Kat, I adore the work of Norwegian cartoonist Jason, and Maus was the graphic novel that really got me into the medium (though I read comics as a small boy, namely violent comics about monsters and going crazy), but a comic where that's part of it, the whole, it's anthropomorphic animals, is kind of a turn off. I may check it out though.

I think so, I'm nearing halfway in and I've been hooked by it

...

Sup Forums is the board I use least. Today I've used Sup Forums, /n/, /k/, /vip/, /qa/, /soc/, and /jp/.
That's really the thing: once you use Sup Forums the least, you realise Sup Forums is a site for intellectual discussion.
I completely understand. If it helps you feel better, I think the author is NOT a furry.

I might have to give it a download then, I'm sure it's not worse than 3

Do you mean zoophile as in zoosexual, or zoophile as in gets off to animals? Because I would consider myself zoosexual. I truly love animals.

What's the difference?

I only come to Sup Forums for these threads but most of the boards I actually like have been killed through some form of cancer

There's a massive difference which is why I asked. Zoophiles just like to fuck animals, but think of them as a zoosexual would. I use the term zoosexual because it's just that: a sexual orientation. It's far more than just a fetish, but a true and deep love for animals as you would see between two humans.

you're awesome. never let anyone tell you otherwise

Just stop
Get some help

I recommend trying it at least

Thanks, user.

Already getting it, but not for being zoo.

I really like slice of life kinds of comics, like Fun Home, American Splendor, or Jimmy Corrigan, the really zany wacky stuff like Frank or anything by Robert Crumb, or the stuff that's kind of weird and/or deeply philosophical like A Contract with God, Action Philosophers, or Goliath.

Generals are killing Sup Forums, particularly many of the boards I like(d).
I see.
I think you're wrong here. The way I see it, there are bestialists and zoophiles.
Bestialists don't care about love or consent: zoophiles do.
That's why I consider myself a zoophile, since I love animals. I think they're beautiful and amazing.
Zoosexuality is a misnomer since only three sexualities exist: homosexuality, bisexuality, heterosexuality

Are you in a relationship with an animal?

*don't think of them
Sorry, I'm tired.

Some people call them different things, but that's just that way I see it. I like to differentiate them in some way at least. As long as it's understood it's fine.

To some degree, yes.

For what dare I ask?

>consent
How the hell does a dog tell you that it wants to fuck?

Severe depression, anxiety, and sleeping problems.

By trying to fuck your leg.

You have to be very delusional and anthropomophisize animals.

...

You forgot Asexuality. There is currently some psychological basis behind there being Zoosexuality, it's kind of a fringe thing though.

Yup!
Also, don't post so many dogs, I'd hate to have the thread deleted like it was a few days ago. I know where to find cute dogs online anyways.
But yeah, the way I see dogs: I see it not as a sexuality, in the way being attracted to black or asian people also isn't a sexuality:
dogs have nice bodies and personalities, it's a set of physical and emotional preferences.
Dogs are still men and women, just not human ones. Don't worry, I don't mentally anthropomorphise them.

"Asexual" people are just attention whores

Asexuality is not a sexuality, in the same way atheism is not a religion.
Asexuality is the condition of being undersexed, is all.

HAHAHAHAHHAAHAAHAHAHAH

...

Atheism is very much a religion. There are people out there that feel literally no sexual urges.

Possibly.

...

...

This. Or rubbing their pusspuss against you if you're into that.

I won't. Normally the mods don't give a fuck so long as it's not called and a zoo thread outright, but my shit is now all unsorted anyway.
Well, I actually remember reading a study dating back to the early 90's that called it a sexuality as well, and referred to it as I do. The main reason I differentiate the two is because -phile implies it as a fetish which is most definitely not the case for me. I care far less about sex with and animal than I do about love and caring. That form of true love is also why I call it a sexuality: because you can't be in love with a fetish. Animals are creatures, and not objects thus should be seen as such. The same goes for pedophilia. But yeah, all that matters is the implications being understood.

...

More pics like this pls

Yeah, hence the -a part. That prefix implies the lack thereof. Asexuality isn't a sexuality, and atheism isn't a religion.

Just one more. Don't feel like searching through 2k files.

>atheism is a religion
But that's not true. Atheism is not a religion. It doesn't have a bearing on whether someone is religious or not.
There are atheist religions, like theravada buddhism. Theravada buddhism is a religion with no god.
But most atheists we know are irreligious: they have no religion.
But atheism itself is not a religion.
-phile doesn't mean fetish. While I don't support pedophiles, the ones I've known online certainly weren't into kids as a fetish.
-phile means lover, and traditionally we see this in many words: francophile, japanophile, anglophile.
-phile means a lover of something, which means zoophile is a good, positive word.

...

...

True, but I just don't like the implications of it because of the way it is used.

...

...

Well, my computer suddenly flipped over and launched a bunch of shit across the room. So now I'm covered in tea and there's cigarette ash everywhere.

Atheism itself is a system of beliefs that people adhere to about the fundamental nature of the universe as well as what happens after death.

But that's literally incorrect. Asexuality means a total lack of any sexual urges, otherwise known as a sexuality characterized by a lack of sexual urges. Atheism is a lack of belief in Theism and all that other stuff, otherwise known as a belief in the absence of those things.

>long brown hair
>green eyes
>tfw me
Hot. Brown hair + green eyes is god tier.

Ayyyy
sure

Whatever buddy. The same can be said about zoophiles/zoosexuals than can be said about atheist and asexuals: as long as it's understood it doesn't matter.

I wanna see your butt now

>tfw brown hair and blue eyes

I've seen the word zoophile improve in its usage lately. I normally see people use zoophile for the good things, and bestiality when they mean the bad things.
panpipes.org/
I used to go here, but the people were very authoritarian, freedom-hating, and harsh. But you should try it anyways.
Not really.

...

This is all you get from me, me in my sister's panties. I need some of my own.

Yeah, I've noticed that. I do like it.
Never heard of it, but I'll check it out. Thanks.

Low quality pic, but looks like a 9/10 to me

But I just said two or three posts ago that there is some psychological basis for there actually being a sexuality called Zoosexuality.

Yes really. It takes as much faith and belief to be an Atheist as it does a Christian. Both rely on faith and belief in an utterly improvable hypothesis.

I really don't know why people like it so much. It ain't nothing special. Though I do think I have pretty nice legs.

...

Zoosexuality probably does not exist. I think there are either three or one sexualities, but not more.
Legs are good for things like thigh sex.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not by any means a Christian or Buddhist or anything like that, I'm simply making the point that on a purely logical and literal level it is a religion as much as the others since it is a system of beliefs about the fundamental nature of the universe as well as what happens after you die, just like 100% of all other religions.

I think there's an escape from religion, and that irreligion is a real, possible thing.
I think it's possible to not be bound by those nasty things that religions are.

That is true.

Religion means the belief in a God or deities. Atheism is the opposite. You're objectively incorrect.

>Religion means the belief in a God or deities.
You're wrong. I just posted above that there are atheist religions.

I'm not arguing that it does exist, I stated there is some psychological basis behind there being one. There are psychologists out there that do believe that there is such a thing as Zoosexuality after having patients that were zoophiles who not only had absolutely no interest at all in other humans, but who also very specifically are interested in animals.

The only logical thing for anyone to truly be if we are removing faith and belief from the equation is Agnostic. Agnosticism is the only possible way one could escape from religion because it supports nor denies the two hypotheses.

I'm objectively correct though. What about Animism? Which has no sort of God or Deity? Or Buddhism, which also has no God or Deity? Or Confucianism or Taoism? I can not be objectively incorrect when there are religions out there that literally say there is/are no Deities.

imagine how soft those legs must be

Then it isn't truly atheism.

Those are atheistic religions, yes, but are not truly atheistic due to it still being a religion. I guess I could say that I'm kinda wrong for once, but that's just what I believe. See

Atheism is also a religion since it relies on faith and belief as much as Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, etc.

Like?

As for people only interested in animals, they are simply homosexual, bisexual, or heterosexual, and prefer the bodies and minds of animals.
I've known people like this.
>two hypotheses
There are many more than two.
It's not irreligion. But atheism simply means no belief in gods.
Some religions have no gods.
Atheism/theism is a very, very simple binary about whether one believes in or doesn't believe in gods. It doesn't imply whether a person is religious or irreligious.
Atheism and theism only make one single point.
Atheism does not imply religion or irreligion. Atheism itself is not a religion.
Or else irreligion cannot exist: as all irreligion is atheist.