@Fluttershy3005
Actually, there are Animals who destroy the environment by eating too much. There are Rats and Mice for example who overpopulate to such a degree that they devastate the flora in an area, which not only damages the environment but can cause problems for other species of Animals. The Prairie Rat is an example of Humans having to step in to stop an Animal from screwing everything up in that way. There are also Birds that reproduce so much that their flocks generate so much faeces that it makes the air lethally toxic to biological life-forms.
Also Fluffies aren’t real. Just thought I’d let you know.
@Evil Emperor Proteus
Evil fluffies are called hellgremlins, and they’re basically their own separate fandom with nothing to do with the classic fluffyverse: >>2349428
They haven’t even pretended to be about justice or satisfaction for years now, as simply angering and frustrating the viewer is even worse when things don’t get resolved. You’re more likely to keep thinking of them if you’re unhappy about them, and that psychological trap is the only string to their bow.
TL;DR: fluffies are friendly creatures meant to be enjoyed. Hellgremlins are evil creatures meant to make you angry and unhappy. The goals and fluffies of the two fandoms literally couldn’t be further apart if they tried.
@NotThatAnyoneCares
They’re fictional, they do what the artist draws them doing, and a lot of art depicts many Fluffies behaving very badly. I do prefer to rationalize away the bad behaviour though, such as the ones who behave badly being defective early-models of the Fluffy product, with later versions being cuddly and completely friendly “fixed” and “debugged” versions.
@Background Pony #2A22
A lot of the people in the Fluffy fandom prefer to depict Fluffies as inherently abhorrent creatures and somehow deserving of the torment and death they receive, to depicting t hem as horrible little monsters who main and rape and kill each other, to depicting them as Feral pests that are ruining the environment that needs to be exterminated, the “justice” of their destruction further adds to the satisfaction many get from seeing these things tormented and destroyed.
@hyperwave90000
It appeals to cute aggression and the genuinely unique feelings you can get from it. I’m too empathetic to enjoy Game of Thrones and such, but fluffy abuse feels absolutely cathartic in how you can watch innocent things suffer without getting overwhelmed with sympathy. It feels good in the most bizzarre way.
humans have no right to step in or even mess with mother nature and i know that there not real
Edited
Actually, there are Animals who destroy the environment by eating too much. There are Rats and Mice for example who overpopulate to such a degree that they devastate the flora in an area, which not only damages the environment but can cause problems for other species of Animals. The Prairie Rat is an example of Humans having to step in to stop an Animal from screwing everything up in that way. There are also Birds that reproduce so much that their flocks generate so much faeces that it makes the air lethally toxic to biological life-forms.
Also Fluffies aren’t real. Just thought I’d let you know.
only human destroy environments not animals silly ab
Evil fluffies are called hellgremlins, and they’re basically their own separate fandom with nothing to do with the classic fluffyverse: >>2349428
They haven’t even pretended to be about justice or satisfaction for years now, as simply angering and frustrating the viewer is even worse when things don’t get resolved. You’re more likely to keep thinking of them if you’re unhappy about them, and that psychological trap is the only string to their bow.
TL;DR: fluffies are friendly creatures meant to be enjoyed. Hellgremlins are evil creatures meant to make you angry and unhappy. The goals and fluffies of the two fandoms literally couldn’t be further apart if they tried.
Punk fluffy
Iperyt - Blades of Malice & Scorn: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vQg9mt5wc4
What would happed if a female of the “bad” strain had “special hugs” with a male of the “debugged” strain?
They’re fictional, they do what the artist draws them doing, and a lot of art depicts many Fluffies behaving very badly. I do prefer to rationalize away the bad behaviour though, such as the ones who behave badly being defective early-models of the Fluffy product, with later versions being cuddly and completely friendly “fixed” and “debugged” versions.
Which is ridiculous. I don’t care how much you tart them up, they couldn’t hurt a drunken ant.
A lot of the people in the Fluffy fandom prefer to depict Fluffies as inherently abhorrent creatures and somehow deserving of the torment and death they receive, to depicting t hem as horrible little monsters who main and rape and kill each other, to depicting them as Feral pests that are ruining the environment that needs to be exterminated, the “justice” of their destruction further adds to the satisfaction many get from seeing these things tormented and destroyed.
It appeals to cute aggression and the genuinely unique feelings you can get from it. I’m too empathetic to enjoy Game of Thrones and such, but fluffy abuse feels absolutely cathartic in how you can watch innocent things suffer without getting overwhelmed with sympathy. It feels good in the most bizzarre way.