Mask/hood bans: Haters love this excuse for war on fun and freedom.

by Patch O'Furr

RANT! Sometimes, you don’t know how good it is to have tolerance, until you see it taken away from others.

In Vermont, fursuiters were mingling with crowds at a Mardi Gras celebration.  They were high-fiving people and making them feel like they were in magical unicorn-land, like fursuiters do.  Then a town official with a Sequoia up his butt decided that fun should be illegal. Or they weren’t paying the Smile Tax. Or whatever.

Vermont town selectively bans fursuiters: Prejudice complaint and update.

Here’s what happened since:  The sad fursuiters patiently worked with the town, trying to jump through their hoops to get permits.  The town officials stroked their Hitler mustaches, and came up with this scheisse:

Vermont town selectively bans fursuiters: Prejudice complaint and update.

by Patch O'Furr

Public fursuiting with the Vermont Furs.

 

The Vermont Furs have an active online presence including Facebook and Twitter. I see many positive events such as BBQ’s, bowling, camping, and a walk to benefit Cystic Fibrosis patients. They look like a fantastic group- the kind that makes me love everything about furries. But their activities are being harmed by treatment they feel is unfair.

Fursuiters kicked out of Mardi Gras event in Burlington, Vermont – but not others dressed in masks.

Why were they being singled out, the furries wanted to know, when the streets were teeming with other strangely dressed revelers?

“It’s just different,” was the response, Owens said.

A thoughtful and well-written article in the independent alt-weekly Seven Days recently covered the February 28 incident, and following talks with the city.  The given reason was a lack of performer permits – (to be clear, none of them were busking or asking for money) – and child safety concerns.

For evidence, there was mention of a bad incident with a costumed “Elmo” Sesame Street character in New York’s Times Square.  I googled the incident as suggested, but it didn’t mention children- only a panhandling offense.  At the Seven Days article, I commented that it was quite a stretch to pick one sensationalized headline from hundreds of miles away, for a “think of the children” argument about people who weren’t hurting anybody.