It’s pretty typical for young students to go through unique phases of self-expression during childhood, however Oklahoma State Representative Justin Humphrey believes “furries” take it too far. What is a furry? A “furry” can take a range of forms, from a person dressing in an animal suit, to wearing cat ears and a tail, or simply identifying with an animal persona. Typically furries have an interest in expressing anthropomorphic qualities, meaning exhibiting a mix of human and animalistic traits. Justin Humphrey, who serves in Oklahoma’s House of Representatives, has made it clear that he condemns any animalistic expression in school, despite it likely being harmless.
Humphrey’s proposed bill would prohibit Oklahoma students from participating in the “school curriculum or activities,” if they “purport to be an imaginary animal or animal species, or who engage in anthropomorphic behavior”. His bill continues, asserting that a guilty child’s parent should, “pick the student up from the school, or animal control services shall be contacted to remove the student.” After backlash from the bill, Humphrey made a video response, calling schools’ allowance of furries “ignorance”, while threatening that tolerant teachers, staff, and students should be sent to the “mental ward.” Humphrey goes further to say, “If you've got an animal coming to school, how about we get them vaccinated? How about we get them neutered? How about we send them to the pound?” Humphrey argues that furries are disruptive to other students' education, while also presenting the false claim that schools are putting litter boxes in their classrooms for students, which he calls “insanity.” While it would be insane if students really were using litter boxes instead of a toilet, his reasoning for the bill appears frivolous and unnecessary, as it doesn't concern protecting safety or truly improving our flawed school system; it concerns limiting relatively harmless self-expression.
I think Humphrey measures furries as more dangerous than they really are. While I understand how a student arriving to school in a full cat suit could raise some issues, I think schools should enforce guidelines on their own discretion. I bet the alleged “furry” students aren't as prevalent, costumed, or disruptive as have been described, and I bet they likely are without mal-intention. It's not new for young people to assume unique trends that concern older generations; for example, many parents were distasteful of teen fashion in the 80s, and in the 2000s, some were averse to the “goth” appearance. The “furry” behavior appears to be a harmless trend of expression and imagination, and without cause for concern or claims of insanity. As a child, I personally have encountered classmates who pretended to be cats or dogs during recess, and since then they have reflected upon their behavior, and grown out of their phase. Furthermore, all students have a right to be respected and attend school, despite their appearance. Moreover, Humphrey’s bill reads like an encroachment of the first amendment, as the bill prohibits the expression of students from even voicing or identifying with animals. Such a strong reaction to children’s expression should be criticized as rash and unjust. To stifle self-expression is to stifle imagination, personal maturity, and to attempt to stifle the inevitable trend changes that will forever occur in cultural history.
Furthermore, this bill feels incredibly harsh for the declared crime of being a “furry”. While Humphrey accuses schools and teachers of insanity, in reality calling animal control on a child is truly insane. He completely devalues real governmental jobs, and mocks the function of government, by electing animal control to play a spectacle of enforcement in his “crime scenario.” His aggressive language and threat to genuinely treat students as animals, by getting them “neutered” and sending them to the “pound,” reveals his violent disregard for student well being, protection, and education; what he truly values is preserving typical American fashion and social expression. This bill shamefully distracts from real issues and flaws that public schools have, and actual dangerous student behavior, like bullying or school shooters.
It is shameful that such harsh and unreasonable voices are admitted into our democracy, voices who seem without the true interest of our citizens, and without interest in fixing true problems. Unfortunately, the existence of Humphrey’s platform reflects how there are many citizens with poor judgment, who will elect people like Humphrey into office. He makes a subjective distaste a political concern, diluting the seriousness and mocking the importance of lawmakers and our government. I hope that America will begin to support figures who actually strive to solve important issues critically.
Sources:
https://nypost.com/2024/01/17/news/lawmaker-proposes-bill-banning-furries-in-oklahoma-schools/
https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/furries-school-bill-animal-control-1234948434/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Furry_fandom
6 comments:
Although I'm not a furry, I actually think furries are great! I laud the furry community for their fearlessness of expression. On the internet, furries are often the targets of ridicule and mockery, but I never fully understood why. For the most part, the community keeps to their own and doesn't hurt anyone. Unlike legitimately violent groups like the Proud Boys and other similar conservative groups, furries aren't expressing themselves in a way that harms others, yet many of our Republican politicians and legislators fail to address real problems. Like Ava said, by focusing on suppressing the furry community, the government is making a mockery of itself. We elect politicians to focus on actual issues, not the suppression of people's expressions. That being said, I wonder if I will maintain this sentiment 50 years from now. Who knows? Maybe I'll be a 70-year-old who can only watch in disgust as the younger generation expresses themselves in ways that I never would've thought. But I guess that plays into the bigger idea of how my liberal viewpoints may transform into conservative ones in the future. But for now, Go Furries!
Go Furries!
This is actually so hilarious. The controversy seems so superficial, and maybe this is me being ignorant, but the entire time I was reading the article, I was in shock that the things Ava talked about were true..but you can't make this stuff up...hahaha! This article calls into question the extent to which our civil liberties are really protected--if, for example, Humphrey were to gather enough support to ban furries (or whatever he wants to do against them), he could limit the line of where our personal privacy begins. I also wonder what this incident will do for Humphrey's future campaigns. Hopefully there are some people out there who, like Ava and me, see the absurdity in his claims and stop supporting him. But no hate though! He has the right to believe what he wants to believe! It's more about when his beliefs begin to affect others, especially if it's in a negative way.
I believe that expressing yourself however you want is a right no body can take away although when it includes harming someone thats where you draw the line. The furry community is one that keeps to themselves as Zen has stated. It's a group that has the absolute courage to put into this harsh world how they truly feel about themselves, how they Identify. I believe that representative Justin Humphrey practiced judicial activism when he porposed the bill. His own beliefs and values are very projected in this bill because he states that students that refer themselves as furries should be treated as animals, implicating that he views furries as animlas and should be treated like one. As Ava stated everyone goes through a phase of pretending to be dogs, princesses, or robbers. Although that doesn't mean they will grow up to be one, I'mt not syaing that being a furry is a phase but either way everyone should respect how one identifies.
Reading this article was very interesting because there were so many ways it seemed Humphrey was trying to defend his banning of Furries, when in reality they don't seem to be a massive harm or issue in the grand scheme of things, or at least I have never seen it be one. I agree with Ava that this should be a school by school issue where if one school really does find it to be distracting, they can create their own guidelines to ensure school is a place where every student has the ability to learn. I agree with Maya that everyone has a right to believe what they want, but until there is harm or real distraction with furries, it seems we should focus on larger issues.
Reading or hearing about articles like these, it disappoints me to see how individuals in position of power put a lot of effort into trying to ban and getting rid of something that seem relatively harmless and pointless. I think it is very concerning to see Rep Humphrey is seriously trying to continue to pursue this even though there was already backlash against his idea, going as far to threatening teachers/schools to try and get them to make rules around banning furries from schools and proposing ideas such as sending students to "the pound." I really think that if Reps have enough time on their hands to pursue an issue something as marginal like this, they ought to be working on an actual issue that affects their communities and not purely for personal purposes.
Post a Comment