Hrmph!

I just got, out of the blue, an apparent spam e-mail containing a "casting call" for some sort of furry television thing. Since this doesn't particularly excite or interest me, and especially since it's television, I would normally just toss it. But I wondered where they got my e-mail so I read it. They claim to be making some sort of "documentary" about furry fandom. Except it's clear that they have no real grasp of the scope or basis of the fandom. They think being "furry" means 1) you wear a fursuit, 2) you think you are an animal trapped in a human body, and 3) you must "look like you are between the ages of 18 and 28." Now just how representative of the furry fandom or "community" can that possibly be? Talk about experimenter bias that shapes the outcome of the study! They don't want to talk to or interview anyone who doesn't meet those criteria? This is pretty offensive, actually. We really shouldn't allow the word "furry" to be defined by these people any more than we let CSI or Vanity Fair define it.

In other news, it's raining. We had just about gotten rid of most of the mosquitoes too, darn it. Weaving proceeds apace, I'm more than halfway through the third of ten squares. Tomorrow and Thursday taken off from work to allow me to work on that.