Slop.

I don't generally throw around the word dialectic but "be normal" seems like one, and this same thing comes up again and again in mass-based politics. The end goal is to build a world that is - among a lot of other things - inclusive of people with all sorts of non-hegemonic sexual & gender identities. The people who most desire that world are specifically those people who are shut out of the current one. However, getting to the better world requires getting normies on board (questionable premise?). And many normies will be put off by things too far from their worldview. This is changeable (here's where the democrats lose the plot, they don't believe this)! But the process of change can only be started by meeting normies where they are & presenting yourself as near where they are, hence "be normal". But being normal requires a movement to be outwardly less inclusive of the people that are its most dedicated supporters. So it's a contradiction, but as we know here contradictions don't just make things disappear in a puff of logic. Things lurch forward unevenly in a way that is propelled by the contradiction. Running too far ahead or trailing too far behind the people, etc. People take you more seriously if you are conventionally attractive, successful, competent, articulate, calm, well-liked by others, and so on. Achieving these requires conforming to hegemonic norms while ultimately desiring to replace them. So it goes when you Live in a Society.

I feel like anti-furry stuff specifically in this post is pretty passe. Like maybe don't show up in your fursuit to the rally (or do? idk I'm not the ultimate authority) but it isn't the mid-2010s anymore, furry stuff is moderately mainstream at least in large coastal cities.