As most furry fans know, "ConFurence" is the first and longest-running science fiction con focused solely on anthropomorphics. It was an outgrowth of the San Francisco Bay area "furry parties" started (and usually always held) by Mark Merlino and Rod O'Riley. At some point, they decided to see if they had enough critical mass to hold a full-fledged furry convention rather than just have some furry "programming," official or informal, at other cons. They did. CF had attendance of one to several hundred its first few years.

Then FurryMUCK, the virtual furry world created on the Internet, "invaded," and for better and worse CF's attendance skyrocketed. Some people, myself included, feel its character also changed somewhat. It's been my observation that many players on FurryMUCK who were introduced to the fandom solely through the MUCK have only passing interest in things the original fandom considered integral; what binds them is what binds most subcultures, both fannish and mundane: "outsiders" looking for a group they can belong to that will support them in being outsiders. They are not fans of furries, but simply fans of the fandom; the late '80s furfen are to this newer, larger group what original goths are to the mass of all-in-black NIN fans who gather in front of expensive mall clothing stores and glare sullenly at passersby.

And yes, I find that exasperating. But there's been an increasing condemnation of ConFurence for "letting" congoers run wild. Stories of obscene misbehavior have built up over the last few years to the point where people who haven't been to recent ones, or haven't been to one at all, are genuinely worried they're going to see live gay sex shows in the lobbies.

Let me put this delicately.

GET A GRIP.

That was delicate because I deleted the obscenity-for-emphasis before "grip."

Folks, get some things in perspective. Cons are known for being "wild" to varying degrees. It's a fact of fan life. The local con in Tampa, Necronomicon, has things I find exasperating and annoying on certain occasions. And over the last few years it seems to have been invaded by all-in-black NIN fans who decided to play a three-day White Wolf LARP on their way to the mall. But it doesn't have a reputation for being particularly wild and crazy--despite the fact that in the late '80s some fen "misbehaved" in a manner that caused the hotel to ban the con from returning. It is worth noting that this is a milestone ConFurence has never, to my knowledge, achieved.

Could it be that furry fans are being oversensitive? A little? Just maybe?

There's a very strong libertarian bent in fandom, which tends to amplify our culture's current "do what you want and screw anyone else" attitude. Despite all the high talk about furry fandom being an extended family or a community, it has this attitude in spades. Anyone who has the temerity to suggest toning down anything is met with a level of vilification only exceeded by net activists talking about Senator Exon. Why? Because it's inconvenient, and god knows you should never be the person to be inconvenienced. This nonsense isn't just unfortunate, it's petty and childish.

And if you get a group of people together who believe the avowed purpose of the gathering is to be "strange without penalty," as one person put it on alt.fan.furry, you will find some people who will go out of their way to be petty and childish in asserting their imagined "right" to inconvenience others.

But, for Pete's sake, what level of inconvenience are we really talking about?

Tales of elevator orgies that have achieved the status of urban legends, with serious doubt cast on them by people with first-hand experience?

Or seeing a group of people walking around a hotel lobby wearing spiked collars, or even an occasional leash?

If the first example were actually true--well, what do we propose to do about it? Does anyone seriously believe that the con staff would approve of something like that? Can we seriously suggest that con security is able to patrol all enclosed but publicly-accessible spaces? And if someone was idiotic enough to perform a sex act in the elevator, do you think an official announcement of "don't do that or we'll throw you out of the con" would have any effect? It's an illegal act. They'd have been thrown out of the con if they were caught anyway--by hotel security, or perhaps even local police.

The second example is true. It's also true of Necronomicon. I don't think first-time Necronomicon goers think, "Oh, all science fiction fans must be into bondage" when they walk into the lobby, and I don't think first-time CF goers will think that when they walk into the lobby, either.

If some fan goes up to them and shoves a bunch of pictures of anthropomorphic cats in bondage gear and says, "This is what furry art is all about," that's a problem. But that's a different issue. It's also one that can't be addressed by CF staff, unless it's CF staff that's making such a presentation.

And that's an important point to touch on, although it shouldn't be. Not because I think CF staff does that, but because some of the vitriol directed at CF is really vitriol directed at Mark Merlino. Mark has been a colorful, high-visibility figure in the fandom since the beginning, and there are a lot of people who don't like him. Some don't like him because he's bisexual. Some don't like him because they think he believes most furry fans are bisexual. (Such a belief would be silly, of course--most furry fans can't get a date with either sex. Sorry! I couldn't resist.) There's a long litany of supposed offenses, but are any of them particularly relevant to CF? If you believe that CF is just an extension of Mark, maybe, but that perception doesn't jibe with reality anymore. No con with over a thousand attendees is a reflection of just one person. It doesn't happen that way.

Enough already. Yes, there are aspects of CF that could be managed better with respect to minimizing neofen--and even established fen--shock. Yes, it'd be nice if, independent of management, some fen were willing to treat their "community" with more respect and consideration, to not assert an imaginary right to be shocking.

But for God's sake, it's a con. It'll be weird. Almost everyone will see things they don't like, and there won't be any amount of management that can eradicate that.

If you want to work to provide con staff with some constructive suggestions about how they might manage things better, and want to try to find ways to get across a basic message of "communities respect one another" to people on both sides of the fence, great. I'm hoping the FALF will be my way of doing that.

But stop whining. It's not just that the real problems were enumerated long ago--it's that they've been obscured. The problems being debated and denied now are problems with an imagined convention that's evolved from friend-of-a-friend stories and increasingly shrill rhetoric that fails to distinguish between "what ifs" and real occurrences.

If you're going to go to the con despite its supposed problems, go. I am. Just like I have every year starting with CF2. And if you don't want to go to the con, guess what? You don't have to. ZonieCon is having its first year in 1998, and I think Albany Anthrocon will return--and in some ways I thought 1997's AAC was a better convention than 1997's CF. (I suspect I'd have thought that even if I wasn't AAC's GOH, and even if I wasn't always put out that CF never lists me even as an attending writer in its program book, but I have to reveal the first in the interest of full disclosure.) DuckCon has a large furry contingent. And, hell, even though Necronomicon has no official "furry track," it's had quietly successful furry parties for years, frequently attracting furry guests from around the country. I'll live with CF. You'll live without CF.

But until you have something constructive to say, shut up about it, okay?