AN INTERVIEW WITH THE FOAL ASSOCIATION
You’re listening to Fresh Nair! I’m Geri Tross. This Neo-NPR program has been brought to you by ClearChannel media and our sponsor Nair Hair Remover Lotion!
Today we have with us Rochel Queensland, founder and President of The Fluffy Owners and Lovers Association, or FOAL. The FOAL Association and the shelters and fluffy control programs it sponsors have been gaining popularity with cities around the country due to their controversial approaches to fluffies in comparison to other fluffy pony welfare organizations.
Welcome to the Program miss Queensland.
Thanks for having me on.
To begin, what is the mission of The FOAL Association?
The FOAL Association advocates for a reasonable, realistic approach to fluffy ponies, such that they and we can co-exist.
How and Why did you form the FOAL Association?
It started when I became a fluffy owner at age 8. I received a fluffy I loved for my birthday, Artie. He was a good fluffy, and I was at least an OK owner. I got other fluffies after him, and came to love them. As I grew up I learned about the terrible things that happen to them and joined some fluffy advocacy groups. However, I learned later, as many other people did, that these types of organizations-- which I won’t name-- couldn’t really do much to fix the Fluffy Problem in general because they frequently denied that fluffies were a problem, and wouldn’t acknowledge the valid complaints of those who hated fluffies. It just wasn’t a realistic approach, and I and others got frustrated with constantly spinning our wheels. These fluffy organizations were often headed by extremists who couldn’t relate to the public or even members like me.
What was wrong with the way those organizations operated? They are often animal welfare groups or municipal shelters that already existed before fluffies, or are modeled on their principles.
Yes, the local shelters often had to take on fluffies out of necessity, and bless them for it, but even they know that their usual standards and practices wouldn’t work for fluffies in the same manner; that’s why some of them started rejecting responsibility for fluffies when the supreme court ruling legally freed them to do so.
Were those animal shelters being uncaring?
Oh, no no… it’s was a matter of necessity. I knew some people who were on executive boards at such places and they say they felt really defeated and sad about it, since they did care about fluffies, but everyone was so exasperated with them because no one knew how to deal with them. There wasn’t enough people and money to understand fluffies properly when the usual methods for animal welfare. Looking at them from a child welfare perspective failed terribly also.
Fluffy shelters and fluffy welfare organizations that grew after that used the same operating model and polices that others did. But after I saw disappointment after disappointment with these, particularly with their public outreach, myself and others began to realize that there needed to be a paradigm shift, a new organizational philosophy about fluffies, in order to succeed.
“The truth hurts,” as they say.
Yes, indeed! So myself and some others who had left fluffy welfare organizations formed a new non-profit of our own, and support came to us as word of mouth spread. In the colloquial sense, we’re not a “hugbox” organization, but a “neutralbox” one. You said earlier that we have “controversial approaches”, but the truth is that we’re not controversial; we just want to care for fluffies with consideration of all the hard facts and how humans relate to fluffies in reality. It only looks “controversial” because we are stating overtly in policy some harsh truths that are difficult to accept for both fluffy lovers and haters.
I suppose that would include fluffies’ more pestilential properties.
Right. Most fluffies are pretty good, but when they go bad it’s the worst. No reasonable person can endure them when it comes to that. And we now know better than to ask them to.
Speaking of that, One of the big issues that sets apart the FOAL Association is that you’re not contesting the results of the Supreme Court ruling that declared them “biotoys” and not animals.
No, we’re not advocating for any changes to that law at this time. We do think it’s a grave and cruel injustice that their minds and agency are denied by the state, while average people know the truth. The results of the Hasbio lawsuit and the precedent it has set is absurd. Everyone knows that. Of course fluffies have thoughts and feelings. They are obviously not just meat robots. Anyone can see that. Actually, abusers might know this more than anyone, since the pleasure of the abuse comes from having dominion over a lesser being-- in a very not-pretend manner. So we’re handling the issue in terms of what we wish to accomplish as an organization, which is promoting fluffy welfare in a tangible way.
We don’t think that criminalizing violence against fluffies would solve the overarching Fluffy Problem; It would be too difficult to discern the difference between eliminating a pest fluffy and what would be considered fluffy abuse. But we do advocate that law enforcement, principals, parents, etc. prevent fluffy abuse and monitor those who enjoy it, since, clearly, there’s something “off” about a person who likes to harm innocent creatures that speak English in baby voices and can tell you they’re in pain. After all, there are many legal activities that aren’t allowed in public places like schools and parks, so fluffy abuse is just one of those.
Thus we won’t spend our resources and effort on contesting the Supreme Court ruling-- even though we do disagree-- and will instead focus on state or municipal law that deal with more direct problems, like neutering laws, breeder regulations, and etc. Maybe in time we will be able to change the reality and perception of fluffy ponies in the public, and then that would lead to bigger legal change more naturally. In the end we need a legal classification that’s neither animal nor human. Which is part-way there: they are “biotoys,” but the question is, what does that mean.
But why not just classify them as animals?
Like I was saying before, trying to do Fluffy Welfare the same way as Animal Welfare didn’t work. The trouble with it is that they aren’t animals, and thinking of them as animals doesn’t solve the issue. They’re more than animals. Yet they’re also less than human. This is the same mistake that people can make with their animal pets: people humanize cats and dogs, thinking that their actions might be fueled by emotions like “revenge” or “jealousy,” and then judge them based on those assumptions, but those animals don’t think that way. Animals like Cows and cats and dogs and chickens all deserve some respect for what they are, but they’re just not humans and it’s a disservice to treat them as if they are.
Like Some people want to dress up their little dogs and put them in strollers…
Yes, yes exactly. Dogs and cats aren’t your kids. They’re animals and need to be respected for what they are and not what they aren’t. Animals do not know evil and good; they only know what brings a positive or negative reaction from a human. They lack a capacity for the social structures that form our morality. Fluffies do have rudimentary understanding of such things and a much more concrete sense of self, and so that means they’re responsible for their actions.
“With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility?”
Yes, indeed. They can’t get the free pass that animals get. To put a literal metaphor to it, it’s as though their kind ate fruit from the Tree of Life and gained enough knowledge of Good and Evil to be banished from Eden, but not enough to have any dominion over the Earth. They need us, but we don’t need them. And they’re subject to our Judgement.
And so they shall be judged! If you love fluffies so much, does that mean that you’re against any kind of violence towards them?
No, quite the opposite, actually! Some people are initially shocked by the harsh policies we have. We’re called “Fluffy Owners and Lovers” because we do love fluffies, but that love isn’t the kind of love that you have for Rocky Road ice cream, a love of enjoyment for oneself. The kind of love we’re talking about it real love, the sort of love you have for your children or when you love another person-- a whole person, taking together the good and the bad, truly understanding who that person is, instead of just loving the parts that you want for yourself. It’s like that. We have a realistic understanding of what fluffies can and can’t do, while also having expectations of them based on that understanding. What might be inhumane for a human or even a dog can be acceptable for a fluffy because it’s necessary.
Can you give us some examples?
Well… it’s unacceptable to execute stray dogs and cats on the street, or to euthanize them in shelters instantly for behavioral problems without rehabilitation. But you can do that with a fluffy. They still have a reputation as a public nuisance, and that’s not going to help them as individuals or as a species. Neither we nor local municipalities have enough funds and infrastructure to process all the ferals in the same way that Animal Control handles animals. Most places don’t have the luxury of a shelter with cages and death row period and a gas chamber. Like I was saying, Fluffies lead a cursed existence in a world which has no place for them. Hasbio made a mistake when they created these animals and PETA made a mistake when they freed them into the wild, but those mistakes have been made already. But we can’t just kick them around for being abominations; they’re here now and man has to take responsibility for that. Putting them down is one of the more unpalatable parts of that.
So you’re saying it’s OK to just murder fluffies?
Yes, but only if you just murder them. Don’t make it last long. Just step on their heads, or choke them manually. They’re fragile and not hard to kill. It’s hard to do sometimes, but that’s what I meant about “real love” earlier. Sometimes you have to do things are that difficult. But even if you stepped on only one mare, that would mean that she’d never have foals starving to death in an alleyway. You can try to explain your actions to the fluffy, but lying to it about giving it a home or “sketties” and then swiftly smashing its skull is the ideal way. It also minimizes their “scaredey poopies.” It’s not acceptable to outright abuse them, but just help control them and give them peace. Unless they’re Smarties, then a a little abuse is fine.
b A little abuse? OK, why an exception for smarties?[/b]
Because they’re awful! (laughs) Again, that’s what I mean about looking to deal with fluffies in a “reasonable” way: Nobody, not even Job himself, has the patience to suffer something as absolutely vile as a smarty! We’d be insane to expect anyone to tolerate it. So we do not waste our time rehabilitating “smarty” fluffies; as soon as they show signs of “Smarty Disease” they must be euthanized. It’s not known what causes Smarty-ism, but like I was saying before, fluffies have some rudimentary understanding of right and wrong and Smarties are subject to consequences. Dogs and cats do not know “hate,” even when they harm someone, it’s not hate.
But smarties do hate.
That’s right. So we don’t advocate prolonged abuse, but it’s OK to eliminate them with extreme prejudice. They are truly hateful little monsters, and that’s exactly why we don’t want them. They smear the public image of fluffies as a whole. If a person has terrible experience with a Smarty, they’ll never forget it, and it might make them less likely to adopt fluffies in the future, or even make them into hostile abusers. Really, smarties have done a lot of damage to fluffies.
So what about regular fluffy misbehavior?
We do not at all agree that it’s OK to beat a fluffy to death or cut off its legs because it missed the litterbox one day. Abusers love the satisfaction of an excuse. But we do need owners to take responsibility and make sure that their pets do not devolve into gremlins that terrorize everyone, so that we can co-exist. The same goes for dogs, but the teaching methods are different for fluffies, firstly because they need to learn morals like I said, and because it is necessary to use corporal punishment on fluffies even though it’s not acceptable at all for humans and dogs.
Spare the rod, spoil the fluffy?
Mmm-hmmm! Yet reward incentive training and praise for good behavior is very important, since maintaining a bond between owner and fluffy is key, like it is for other pets. They will behave well because they want your praise and approval, AKA “huggies an’ wub,” not because they’re afraid of you. There are even some very very good fluffies out there that never need to be hit-- but most of them will need to be beaten sometimes. They somehow need it in a way that other creatures don’t.
Why is that? Why won’t nonviolent approaches suffice?
It could be Hasbio’s programming, or it could be their emotional intelligence conflicting with the limitations of their intellectual intelligence. They want things. They want everything, just like we do. So they’ll test their boundaries to find out what they’re capable of getting for themselves. And if a simple ‘no’ isn’t enough to stop them, they’ll keep pushing those boundaries making their tiny zone of dominion bigger and bigger… until they smack hard into a brick wall.
b Figuratively and literally?[/b]
Heh, heh, yeah. So you have to flick them on the nose or get out the Sorry Stick or Sorry Box to let them know what isn’t allowed. They mature quickly, so there is no time in development to wait for behavior correction that isn’t instant. A fluffy is a fluffy. It’s not a kid. It’s not a dog. It’s a fluffy. Young humans and animals suffer ill effects from terrifying punishments and angry superiors. We have our own burdens; we have to learn who we are, how we can relate to others, and what our place in this world is. It’s a confusing process fraught with terror, so beatings from people who supposedly love us or are supposed to be mentoring us can be psychologically damaging in how we learn our roles and those of others.
Doesn’t that prove it’s harmful to hit fluffies too?
No, because the Hasbio engineering in the fluffies, however it works, has knowledge of the world pre-loaded into their minds. Animals have this type of knowledge to some degree, but not like this. The role between owner and fluffy has already been established in their heads. They know what humans are. They’ve been given basic rules of the world and behavior. So you can cause them pain without causing the same psychological distress. Outright abuse will ruin them, of course, but for regular behavior correction fluffies are surprisingly resilient. Their “huggies an’ wub” fixation actually does sustain them. So painful punishment later followed by affection for good behavior will fix your bond almost instantly.
Why even bother with punishment, though? Why not let put them in a saferoom and let them do whatever they want?
Because you can’t have a satisfying relationship with them if you do. When you’re raising a human child, your job is to make them into functioning adults in society, which is why you shouldn’t hit them. When you’re training a fluffy, your goal is similar-- to make them suitable for our human society. And the failure to do that has dire consequences. The fluffy might run away, or become a hellish shitting monster, and make a poor example of all fluffies with no place beyond a shelter and a garbage pail.
It’s like when people say that there are no bad dogs, only bad owners?
Almost, but not exactly. There are such things as bad fluffies, but a lot of them were created by lax discipline from owners who were too lazy or too timid to give them the beatings they needed to become good fluffies. Still, I’ll bet the same fools who can’t properly manage a dog and then dump it in a shelter because they say it’s “bad” are the same fools who are doing that with fluffies too.
What are some fluffy owner pet peeves of yours?
We implore absolutely everyone with a fluffy to please please get it spayed or neutered. This is the same problem as with cats and dogs, and owners who fail to fix any pet are going to cause more suffering. Dogs and cats do not much notice the loss of their genitals, but fluffies are more aware of their sex organs and that makes it harder, but it doesn’t matter-- we don’t need more foals to go unloved and uncared for. Using neutering as a punishment or threat is also a very bad idea, since we want fluffies to be less afraid of it. If more fluffies get fixed and it becomes normalized, fluffies in general will be less bothered by the procedure. Some people balk that they don’t want the extra expense, but I just won’t accept that, no matter what species of pet it is.
So owners sometimes dump off their mares at the shelter saying that it was a bad fluffy and got pregnant without permission. Yes the mare did wrong, but their owners are also at fault for not fixing the mare or letting her near an intact male. People expect too much of fluffies just because they can talk. Fluffies are self-aware enough to be judged for their actions, but they’re also not intelligent enough to be trusted with important or tough decisions. Owners must take responsibility for them. If they really love their fluffies, they’ll do it. Once a fluffy goes bad, it’ll often end tragically for everyone.
What makes a “bad” fluffy?
I suppose it’s a shame that in English we don’t have “to be” verb like Spanish’s ser and estar, indicating something nature versus a state of being. Any fluffy can be a temporarily “bad” fluffy, but a really Bad Fluffy is one that is inherently bad, the kind of bad that requires a major change to escape. That includes the aforementioned Smarties and some others, like mothers and other fluffies that discriminate against brown fluffies.
Can a truly bad fluffy be rehabilitated?
It’s tough, but it could be done. The first start is to give swift and grave, painful punishment for the infraction. Beating to death a bad mother who refuses to improve is OK in my book. They are corrupt and will poison their foals with their hateful rhetoric. If the fluffy wants to live badly enough, it will change and choose to do as its told. If a group of ferals accosts you in the street or tries to invade your home, go ahead and kill them if you want.
If you even want to quickly execute your own pet fluffy for something or other, do go ahead. You can get another fluffy and start over later. Don’t make it a hateful, awful experience. If you find yourself hating your fluffy more and more and boiling with rage, just end it as kindly as you can. Don’t let your hate fester. Some people dump fluffies that did nothing wrong simply because they don’t want them anymore. Never, never dump a live fluffy outside. It exacerbates the feral problem and you selfishly pass your problems to someone else. Have the courage to either take your fluffy to a shelter or snap its neck. Do not be irresponsible. You’re the one with the higher intellect. You’re the one who has to be the adult.
That’s rather harsh.
But necessary. And I’ll be frank about it-- Just making problem fluffies go away is a quick and easy, lazy, solution. But we need to fix the fluffy problem, and working together to clean them up is the only way to change public opinion about them. We can’t waste time on ones that are awful when so many fluffies are good and kind. I’ve euthanized-- killed-- many very good fluffies that didn’t deserve what life gave them. Fluffy lovers know that when they’re at their best, fluffies are wonderful, loving creatures that can give humans comfort and loyalty in a way that no other creature on earth can. And everyone can enjoy them and their love if we can get over the bitterness and hate that has piled up over the years.
But won’t fluffies be affected by being treated violently?
Yes, and that’s why it’s very important never to involve fluffies themselves in the destruction of other fluffies, beyond enforcement of basic fluffy social norms. Mummah mares should punish their foals for “bad poopies” or hurting its siblings, for example, but violent “tuffy” fluffies and smarties are absolutely not acceptable. Don’t murder fluffies in front of other fluffies in order to terrorize them, and don’t kill a mare’s foals without killing her as well. She won’t forget it. Ferals can be killed at any time since they live in the wild with danger all around anyway and they lead a miserable existence. But be quick about it, and don’t leave fluffy witnesses if possible.
Ferals do have the potential to be pets; all fluffies do. Domestic fluffy life means that there has to be some bond of trust and love, and the constant threat of death imperils that bond. So keeping the unsavory reality of fluffy control a secret from them as much as possible is critical. Sometimes you can explain the concept of “mercy” to a fluffy, when you have to, but they’re not as resilient as we are. Fluffies are ideally supposed to be docile, friendly, naive, loving creatures.
Fluffies need to be shielded from the darker aspects of the world like children?
Fluffies can bounce back from abuse or seeing abuse, but it’s easier on them and us to avoid that. Some owners will beat an invading feral in their front yard while their pet fluffy watches, or their fluffy might get upset when they see starving homeless fluffies on the street, and then the owner acts surprised or angry that their fluffy has concern for these other fluffies. That is not bad behavior. That’s exactly the kind of behavior you want to see from a fluffy. We can be cold and uncaring towards ferals, but our fluffies shouldn’t be. They should have compassion for others. That’s a good fluffy who loves his fluffy brethren. Trying to get your fluffy to harm or reject its own kind will only make that fluffy bratty, or even a smarty. Similarly, avoid hurting fluffies in front of human children and don’t encourage children to hurt fluffies beyond the normal punishments until they’re a bit older, maybe 13. For the same reason, you don’t want your child to do violent things to fluffies until they have a grown-up understanding of why it is done.
And for that matter, don’t assume that children can care for fluffies entirely on their own. They will need adult assistance at times.
You mentioned “love” earlier… Do you think the “wub” that fluffies offer to us is “real love”?
I absolutely do think it’s real. Their thoughts and feelings are just as real as ours, and when my current fluffies, Charlie and Rebecca, give me a hug and say that they love me, I believe they really do. So some of the more egregious abuses against fluffies do get to me. I sometimes imagine “what if it was my fluffy?” It’s a horrible feeling. Even ferals can be as nice as they are, so when they starve or freeze to death, it’s always sad. Let there be no mistake about it, I have a lot of compassion for fluffies.
That sounds like a good note to pause on while we take a short commercial break! We’ll be right back, with Fresh Nair.
…
Nair have been a trusted name for decades, removing unwanted hair from our bikini lines and legs. Now we’re bringing you something new: Nair for Fluffies! Nair Fluff Remover Lotion’s Sensitive Formula won’t irritate your fluffy’s skin and will leave it smooth and soft with Soothing Aloe & Lanolin. It’s great for behavioral adjustments, heat control in warm environments, surgery prep, and resetting severely soiled or damaged fluff to regrow. You can spot-treat problem areas on their behinds to prevent litterbox remnants sticking to fluff, or use it to make a creative custom fluff style!
(warning:donotusestandardtypesofNaironfluffies)
No matter what you need, Nair Fluff Remover Lotion has a place in every fluffy owner’s home!
We’re back, and you’re listening to Fresh Nair! I’m Gerry Tross. We now continue our conversation with Rochel Queensland, founder and President of The Fluffy Owners and Lovers Association, or FOAL.
What sorts of fluffy abuses is FOAL against?
We’re against the more obvious and needlessly cruel. Again, it’s more common sense thinking, and it’s not black and white. The FOAL Association has successfully gotten foal-in-a-can machines banned in several major cities, and we’ve shut down several ghastly breeding mills shut down, with other victories. We were able to do so by going in at an angle explaining the ways that these practices exacerbate bad fluffy behaviors and nuisance feral populations, and then present the abject cruelty as the excrement icing that goes on the horse hockey cake. In theory, foal-in-a-can wasn’t so bad but in practice everyone who saw could see what was wrong with it.
How do you feel about pillowing?
Oh, good Lord, we don’t even dignify amputation with that cutesy name. Amputation always makes fluffies miserable, and since they’re so fragile it’s really not uncommon for fluffies to lose legs or become paralyzed just by accident anyway. If you want an amputee fluffy you can probably just rescue one! Amputating for convenience or punishment is insane and we’ve had little trouble making that argument; most sane people understand that it’s wrong.
Amputation as punishment also has the added offense to handicapped humans, since the implication is that being bad means that you get your limbs taken away. If your child loses an arm to cancer, you don’t want fluffies telling him he’s a bad person because he’s missing an arm!
Buuuut… if you break your very bad fluffy’s leg off while punishing it? Weeeellll… I guess that’s just too bad for him! (laughs) But really, there are many alternative to try before that! Any fluffy that’s really truly so terrible that you have to break its legs to get it to behave probably isn’t worth keeping anyway. Seriously, just have mercy, break its neck, and start over.
OK, so what about milkbags?
Milkbagging is just as terrible, and it’s ugly enough that our undercover videos of them in breeding mills is enough to get anyone to say “no”, although again, most sane people know it’s wrong. Breeding mills use milkbags systematically, basically for their own convenience, with zero regard for the fluffies’ feelings. They are just milk-machines to these people, to be used up and discarded. However, milkbagging can be appropriate at times.
Well, if it’s so awful, how could that be?
Milkbagging an uncooperative or mean mare is reasonable. A fluffy should know that babies need to be cared for and that she needs to listen to her owner. If some other mare’s babies are starving and need milk and her owner tells her to feed them, a good mare will do it, even if she doesn’t like it. Even some of the more responsible breeders claim that milkbagging is the only way because they won’t feed foals, but that’s just an excuse and doesn’t give fluffies enough credit. Most of them will give milk to a baby.
But if a mare is willing to let babies die and disobey its human too, that’s a bad fluffy right there. If a mare harms surrogate foals in revenge, milkbag her straight away! Like I’ve been saying, there are lots and lots of good fluffies out there and not enough love in the world for them all, so love just can’t be wasted on vile and ungrateful fluffies.
Doesn’t that make the work of a breeder more difficult, to have to check each mare’s milk situation?
I don’t care. When so many unwanted fluffies languish in shelters and on the streets, I have next to zero sympathies for fluffy breeders, and I have sub-zero sympathies for breeding mills. Like all shelters imply, “When you buy, shelter pets die.” As for the market value of fluffies with different breeds and colors, that’s just irrelevant. Once an fluffy ends up in a shelter, it’s being thrown away like garbage, same as the rest. Breeders, I could care less! …ahem I mean, I couldn’t care less.
Oh, and before you mention “litterpals”, forced coprophagia is verboten! No fluffy, no matter how evil, could ever deserve that. I’m not even 100% sure if litterpals are even really sold by anyone. I’ve never seen one in person. That’s just unthinkable. I hope it’s just some abuser’s private fantasy and not a “thing.” No normal person would ever buy an animal identical to their own pet, cut away its legs, voice, and identity, and then have their pet force-feed it feces in their own home. What psycho would do that?
But is it OK when a fluffy mother employs forced coprophagia?
Nope. Designating a “poopie” baby or discriminating against foals based on color is not acceptable or normal behavior. It’s one of those behaviors that drives people to hate all fluffies, even though it’s not common. It should not be tolerated and I consider it to be a top offence that deserves savage beatings until the behavior stops.
“Savage” beating? You mean to death?
If it comes to that, yes. If a fluffy can’t accept that it’s wrong to choose a “bad” baby, hit it, and force it to eat excrement, then that fluffy probably deserves death or milkbagging. I’ll repeat that since it bears repeating: a mother arbitrarily decides its own baby is “bad” because of its color or smell, beats the baby away, and forces it to eat shhh—excrement instead of milk. A. BABY. No, no mercy. None.
How does such punishment compare to abuse? You were saying earlier that you don’t think abusers are criminals but also see guilt in them. How do you feel about abusers?
You may have noticed that all the corporal punishment and execution scenarios I’ve mentioned are very situational, in that what’s right and wrong depends on what the fluffy has or hasn’t done. I think that one of the kindest things to do for fluffies is to actually acknowledge that they are individuals. Take a moment to understand who they are. They’re not all the same. They’re not all evil gremlins from hell. They’re not all perfect angels, either.
But lazily saying “it’s a fluffy, therefore it’s an abomination which must suffer” doesn’t give them the dignity of recognizing their personhood-- or “fluffyhood”. People who actively harm fluffies to gain pleasure from that harm are abusers, but abusers are also those less-offensive people who blithely hate them and treat them like bio-garbage, in a “banality of evil” manner. There are hot and cold forms of abuse. The “cold” ones can abuse because they are ignorant of the fluffies’ feelings, denying that their minds even exist. The ones that are “hot” gain pleasure from hurting fluffies because they know its feelings are real and it gives them a rush of power to be 100% in control of another creature’s life.
Fluffies are stupid, but they can talk and express feelings, and they’re real feelings too. You don’t have to be a psycho to hate a smarty that actively assaults your home and family, but when a fluffy has done nothing wrong be simply exist, that’s something else.
But when it has done something wrong…?
Then punishment is in order. And that’s where I can understand the “hot” type abuser. I’m not saying that they’re right, but that I understand.
Seeing a terrible fluffy suffer can be satisfying. I’ll admit that I’ve had moments of pleasure when dispatching bad fluffies and smarties, the worst ones that have harmed their own foals or raped another fluffy (although it’s extremely rare). They’re just so terrible that when you crush their legs with a boot, it just feels so wonderful to know that even though bad things happen in the world, sometimes justice is served. You could be a good person all your life and never get anything in return, but knowing that not being good sometimes has grave consequences can be enough to validate everything. And since our organization is trying to promote fluffy welfare and “bad” fluffies harm our goals, it does feel personal when I’m fighting against a particularly bad fluffy. It’s an emotional reaction. I won’t deny it.
So when does fluffy “abuse” become bad?
When it’s about harming the innocent. Which it almost always is. The mixture of the power fantasy and wish fulfillment acted out in such a real way is dangerous. Yes I’m more lenient than a lot of fluffy fans when it comes to abuse, but I think most reasonable people would agree that it’s wrong to torture a creature that only wants hugs and love, one that can express demonstrably real emotions and say to you in English that it’s hurting. Even deer hunters and beaver trappers don’t treat their game like that. It takes an especially sick person to enjoy abusing an innocent fluffy. Or foal. Some people love to harm foals because they’re so helpless.
If making abuse outright illegal isn’t the answer, what is?
I think that in time it could become illegal in the manner that animal abuse is illegal, but with more responsibility laid upon the fluffy itself for their behavior. But just not yet. There’s too much grey in the area, like I was saying earlier. We have to change public opinion about fluffies in general first. The attitude towards them isn’t terrible and it’s better now than it used to be, but the feral population needs to be lessened. If a mare with babbehs on its back disturbs you at night, beating them to death with a shovel should be legal. That ends their suffering and stops she and her foals from multiplying. But taking the same mare and foals to your basement, putting fishooks in their flesh, and hanging them from the support beams isn’t OK. All that does is give an abuser perverse pleasure. But trying to get nuanced legislation isn’t easy. It’s more reasonable to let the social un-acceptability of such sadistic behavior keep these sickos and their activities at bay.
What should someone do if they know someone is abusing fluffies?
Report them to the police. They won’t arrest them (unless there are local laws against it), but they’ll keep an eye on them.
As for sexual abuse, the similarity of fluffies to children and animals certainly does raise alarms about pedophilia and zoophilia. Prosecuting people who abuse fluffies sexually should be mandatory. Maybe not as sex offenders but at the very least, have it on record.
But again, if a fluffy violently raped a foal and you want to stuff a pine cone up its asshole, I’d say go ahead! Like I say, it always depends on the context!
Does that happen a lot? --I mean the rape, not the pinecones!
It does happen, but it’s not common at all. Fluffy Stallions aren’t rape machines that try to mount everything they see, despite the abuser stereotype. Sure, intact stallions want the “good feels,” but it doesn’t take over. Overactive sexuality isn’t normal behavior or just a “boys will be boys” thing. Fluffies that get frequent erections and hump objects need a vet visit to check for hormone conditions. Then severe, merciless punishment should also be used if the fluffy wants to give “bad special huggies” even to another fluffy even when the victim fluffy says “no.” Fluffies are emotionally intelligent enough to know if they are hurting another, and that’s the worst part of rape. Preventing development of sexual issues is yet another reason why we advocate for neutering in fluffies. After all, you don’t want a pet like that in your own home, especially around children! So the overblown image of hordes of rapist fluffies hasn’t been good for fluffy PR, obviously.
But is the stereotype about mares wanting babies true?
It is, unfortunately. It was a part of their programming, but let’s be honest, we do program our human little girls from birth to be mothers, giving them baby dolls and expecting them to be nurturing, and there’s the physiological aspects to that also. Although the now can appeal to everyone, fluffies ironically were initially designed as toys for little girls to raise and nurture, as part of that girl toy tradition of emphasizing “cuteness” and non-violent, nurturing actions in preparation for their submissive mothering roles, so it shouldn’t be a surprise that this led to its logical conclusion. Fluffies were meant to be good mommies, just like the little girls they were made for. Hasbio couldn’t test their maternal drive properly before PETA released them, though, so the consequences weren’t considered enough. There was a lot of wrongdoing and mistakes at Hasbio too, but what’s done is done.
So what can we do about it?
If you have a mare, it’s going to want babies, and she’ll be unhappy to hear “no.” But you must train her not to whine about it too much-- but she will ask sometimes so don’t get too angry, or you can make compromises, perhaps adopting a foal it can mother. There are ways around it. Sometimes it’s easy enough to just let her keep asking and tell her “maybe later” over and over until the fluffy gets old and dies. It helps that they don’t fully grasp mortality.
As a woman, I can understand the conflict and pressure on a female to be good and chaste and high-achieving, but also to have sex and make babies, and then implied guilt for not having kids-- that a woman is selfish or cold if she doesn’t want children or broken if she physically can’t. You internalize that. So I get it. A mare has to be a good fluffy and listen to her owner, while inside she feels she has to have babies. But despite that, the owner’s wishes must be paramount. She must listen or be punished, for her welfare and her hypothetical babies. Like I keep saying, spaying the fluffy is extremely important, since it’ll reduce their desire for babies.
Once a mare gets an unpermitted or permitted pregnancy, it has to be handled for what it is. I’m all for reproductive rights in humans, but fluffies do not recover well from abortions at all, and it’ll never be her choice. So the option after that is to let the fluffy have her foals, raise them until they’re weanlings, and then tell her they’re all good babies and all going to new good homes. Then she’ll be happy to have been a good mother. But what you actually do with the foals is up to you. You can take them to the shelter, find homes yourself, or you can take them somewhere else and quickly kill them without her knowledge.
Goodness! More of that tough love, I see.
Yes, it is difficult to do, but it’s much kinder and more responsible than the more common cowardly solutions, including dumping them outside or in dumpsters to fend for themselves, unloved and abandoned. Or giving them away for an abuser to prey on. Taking them to a shelter is better, but we’re so full at the moment. It takes real courage to take responsibility for your mistakes-- not the fluffies’ mistakes, YOUR mistakes-- instead of passing it off, saying “this isn’t my problem anymore.” Fluffy life is hard. Life is not always a gift for them. I suppose that logic could be applied to humans too, but that’s another subject entirely.
Should owners ban their fluffies from watching FluffTV shows about foals?
No, it’s OK for fluffies to watch the “Babies!” shows. Some owners find them adorable! But as an owner you must take some time to explain the consequences of having babies. Her hypothetical babies need love and care, and if she runs away the babies won’t get enough food or a home. You can explain to her that there are some fluffies that don’t have homes and making more fluffies means that more of them might suffer. Owners who blame FluffTV for exacerbating their mare’s sex drive are absolutely correct that it makes them want babies even more, but when paired with education and spaying it’s not as harmful. But FluffTV did not properly inform owners of the risks before these programs were aired and failed to provide enough educational content, leading to a lot of runaways and unauthorized “special huggies.”
The PSAs The FOAL Association ran during those shows got a lot of attention!
Yep! We worked hard on those. We got undercover video of fluffy mills, poorly regulated shelters, and abuser snuff films. We didn’t make anything up; all of that was real. We hired the same production company that made the ASPCA TV spots. We’re really happy with how those turned out. They upset some people and their fluffies, but the complaints about it are exactly what I wanted to hear. People don’t want to accept that there are consequences for failing to fix fluffies or dumping unwanted ones. So we did get a statistical decrease in foals being brought to our shelters, as well as an increase in adoptions.
In a way those PSAs encapsulate The FOAL Association, in how they reveal the ugly side of fluffy ownership, but with the goal of doing good for them.
Yes, that’s it exactly. Before those PSAs not everyone had heard of us, so it was our introduction. I specifically mandated that the PSAs would be PSAs only and not ads, so we didn’t ask for donations. We just wanted to educate the public, and that alone gave us plenty of goodwill. I think the general public has responded well to our honesty, and speaking directly to the fluffies, telling them that their actions can have consequences, had an impact, I’m sure.
So what’s next for the FOAL Association?
We’re going to expand our reach in the US, and get some more fluffy-appropriate legislation on the books. Changing the public dialogue about fluffies and address the real issues fluffies present is part of that. I mean, gosh, we spent all this time talking about fluffies but we didn’t discuss hardly anything about what I love about them! They’re always being approached as a problem that has to be solved. Which is what they are now, but hopefully not forever. But as ever, our ultimate goal is to change both fluffies and humans such that we all can co-exist more peacefully.
I guess that’s what we’re all hoping for in the end.
That’s all the time we have for today. Thanks for being on the show, Miss Queensland.
It’s been a pleasure.
This has been Fresh Nair with Geri Tross. This Neo-NPR program has been brought to you by ClearChannel media and our sponsor Nair Hair Remover Lotion! Follow us on our website and on Amazon UltraPrime.
