Debate and Discussion

Any Furries here?
Calbeck at 3:57AM, Feb. 26, 2008
(offline)
posts: 63
joined: 11-30-2007
The letter E
I may be a closet furry, but I wouldnÃ?´t dress up in a costume or claim that I have an animal spirit…

Me either.

I only dress up in costume when I LARP my unicorn character at NERO events.

'Cause, ya know, I'm a gamer geek too. -;)
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:35AM
The letter E at 3:04AM, Feb. 28, 2008
(offline)
posts: 80
joined: 1-17-2008
I just remembered, I have one of those “fursona” things!
(not really though, I just drew myself as a wolf on a whim since I draw anthro)

Closet furry go :D
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:14PM
The letter E at 2:41AM, March 7, 2008
(offline)
posts: 80
joined: 1-17-2008
I gotta say, people are pretty openminded here.
I have never, repeat NEVER, heard of a thread about furries which lasted more then one and a half pages before people started flaming each other. Drunkduck is awesome ^^ !
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:14PM
Kiruru at 5:24PM, Feb. 4, 2009
(online)
posts: 174
joined: 1-12-2008
I say the only reason furries really get a bad rap, is because some are really REALLY easy to troll, trust me, I've seen stuff like that happen. I've been a furry for a while, I joined in back when being a furry was to wish death upon your self, and you'd have to have pretty think skin to get past some of the name calling and crap, but eh its what ever.


people (not all people) use and still do hate us for the fanitic, nuts of the fandom, who if they get called something, need a whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaabulence five minutes later.


But being a furry isn't all theat bad, cool art, nice people, its like being a trecky, just alot fluffier

well thats my two cents ^_^
You say tomato, I say stfu no one says that!
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:16PM
Aurora Borealis at 4:26AM, Feb. 6, 2009
(online)
posts: 1,289
joined: 3-2-2008
mapaghimagsik
Wouldn't it be cool if all the Star Trek stories became a religion, just like Scientology, Mormonism, and Christianity? It would probably take a century or so…


It'd be really funny if it was the Kirk/Spock stories.



There's a Futurama episode with that idea.
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:08AM
bravo1102 at 7:45AM, Feb. 9, 2009
(online)
posts: 3,409
joined: 1-21-2008
I used to collaborate with someone who wrote mature “furry” stories. He also has a serious “furry” persona and was very involved in the “furry” lifestyle. I only did some ilustration. Doing anthropomorphic anatomically correct animals can get creepy. But as an artist it was challenging to do the illustrations. I even did a few stories with my own slant. (I treated it as an obcession that had to be reined in by other mages)

But when anyone takes anything waaaaaaay too seriously…

I remember the guy in the Rutgers University SF Association who lived Star Trek He owned several velour shirts with the insignia lovingly stitched on it. 20 years later he's an admiral in the offical Star Trek Fan Club (which is organized as ships and does the LARPS.)

I got out of Star Trek fandom around 1991 when I was promoted to sergeant in the army. At Star Trek cons Klingon groups usually do the Con security. So there I was fresh from my 100 hour joyride in the desert seeing the “Two Captains” speech tour (Shatner and Stewart on one stage) and at the water fountain when some girl in an ill-fitting Klingon prosthetic and the “Con Security” name tag come striding up and push her way to the water fountain saying “Make way for a thristy Klingon!”

I fixed her with my NCO glare and barked “AT EASE TROOP! MAKE WAY for a thristy tanker!” She deflated like a balloon and shrank back whimpering. For the rest of the con the other Klingon security geeks would turn and try to disappear whenever they saw me. lol!
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:33AM
bryan at 7:49PM, Feb. 9, 2009
(offline)
posts: 99
joined: 6-5-2007
I really don't know any ‘furries’… but I think my point will be in context none-the-less:

As long as a person doesn't hinder, nor impede upon another person's rights or abilities either by action or indifferent persuasions, I really don't care what they do, or how they act. They could dress-up like a hippo and go hump (pardon my vulgarity) a tree in central park, so long as they don't hurt anyone or the tree, and it would be fine by me. I don't believe I have any right to say what someone can or cannot do.

I mean… honestly, sure, I might think it a bit strange, but I don't really care that they're doing it. They may have to watch out for ozoneocean though, as he might put it on youtube :P
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:35AM
Orin J Master at 6:55PM, Feb. 10, 2009
(online)
posts: 437
joined: 12-16-2007
as there seems to be some confusion, let me just point out that a “furry” in this context refers to people with a sexual fetish towards the (the concept of) anthropomorphic animals. a cartoon animal that has human characteristics is an anthropomorphic character, not a furry. if you enjoy such characters but do not view said anthropomorphic characters in a sexual way (or arguably, you do despite the animal traits) then you don't count as a furry, you're just a fan of anthropomorphic art. i've seen a fair amount of threads turn into flamewars because of people not understanding this fact. people like to lump people into catagories to make fun of them on the internet, after all.

as for me, i tend to think that level of escapism is pretty sad. people that claim to feel a “spiritual kinship” to a “totem” animal as an explanation are mostly trying to make their sexual fetish into something bigger than it is.

bryan
As long as a person doesn't hinder, nor impede upon another person's rights or abilities either by action or indifferent persuasions, I really don't care what they do, or how they act. They could dress-up like a hippo and go hump (pardon my vulgarity) a tree in central park, so long as they don't hurt anyone or the tree, and it would be fine by me.

ah, but then you enter the realm of ‘emotional duress’. if someone sees them humping that tree and claims they were guilty of public indecency, how do you argue they're wrong? people can get hurt in a lot of ways that might not seem probable, and there's always going to be a certian level of conflict between what a person wants to do, and what they can do without troubling others. and really, any sexual fetish, no matter how small and harmless it might seem is going to be on the far side of that line if taken out in public.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:22PM
bryan at 7:56PM, Feb. 10, 2009
(offline)
posts: 99
joined: 6-5-2007
Orin J Master
ah, but then you enter the realm of ‘emotional duress’…

I never said someone saw it ;), cept Ozone of course… who would promptly put the incident on youtube… >.>

I never mentioned I didn't count duress as harm, but it *is* ridiculous to believe that the sight of someone in a furry costume, behaving ‘furry-like’, would cause true duress… getting into that part of the discussion, though, spurs a philosophical debate over what a person allows of their emotions and how much that person allows their emotions to control them.

The simple act of ‘furry-tree-humping’ didn't *make* you duress ed. You became duress ed. The act itself is not inherently forceful, nor could it be. You would have to allow for it to affect you.

Think of it this way: someone puts a gun to your head and says “pick your nose”. Did he force you? No. He coerced you, but he didn't physically put your hand in your finger in your nose. Emotions are one of the few aspects of a person that can not be physically changed by another… and in that regard, the emotional response to an activity you were to witness ('furry-tree-humping' for instance), would be yours and yours alone. Was the feeling coerced to emerge? Unintentionally, perhaps. But was it forced upon you? No.

That having been said, I know there is precedence for intentional duress, as well as unintentional duress, in law. While I agree with intentional duress' rulings, I think circumstance would have to dictate the the unintentional duress' true affluence.
*edit* Yet another way to think about it: Emotion is a choice, like the Vulcans of Star Trek… sure we have emotions and we're not some fictional species… but when emotions are taken out of the equation, it's very easy to see that they're choices we make just like opinions.
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:35AM
Ryuthehedgewolf at 9:46AM, Feb. 11, 2009
(offline)
posts: 1,340
joined: 9-2-2007
To be totally honest here, as much as you all probably want to say it. I'm not a furry. I'm an anthropomorphic artist. There's a difference.

But to me, it's all about what you're into. As long as you don't drag other people into it, there's no point in getting mad over it. It's kind of like everybody getting pissy over gay marriages. As long as they don't personally harass or bother you, then why is it a problem?
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:16PM
Hakoshen at 11:02AM, Feb. 16, 2009
(offline)
posts: 2,090
joined: 11-23-2008
I'm not what you'd call a furry. There are some anthropomorphic characters I DO like (Like VG cat's Aerith, cause she's so hatefully evil), but on the whole, I'm not really into it or turned off by it. However, in regards to fantasy universes and whatnot, I always find animal people more interesting than humans and the usual Tolkien types.
God needed the Devil, the Beatles needed the Rolling Stones, Hakoshen needs me.
I'm the enemy he requires to define him.
Soon or later, he'll bring me back to life again for another epic encounter of shouting about power levels and grimacing.
-Harkovast
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:40PM
Orin J Master at 3:40PM, Feb. 17, 2009
(online)
posts: 437
joined: 12-16-2007
Hakoshen
I'm not what you'd call a furry. There are some anthropomorphic characters I DO like (Like VG cat's Aerith, cause she's so hatefully evil), but on the whole, I'm not really into it or turned off by it. However, in regards to fantasy universes and whatnot, I always find animal people more interesting than humans and the usual Tolkien types.

that's more escapism. most people tend to lean at least slightly in the direction of of the less human characters in any fantasy/scifi series because there's more room to insert your own interests into their personality/culture/society/blablabla….
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:22PM
Soryko at 2:12PM, Feb. 24, 2009
(online)
posts: 94
joined: 1-5-2009
I totally know what your talking about. xwx
I think furries are cool, though, I'd never dress up as one in real life or do it with an animal. O.o;
Well, except a cat girl but I think that's a little different. >.>

Er anyway….People can like what they wanna like, just as long as it doesn't become an unhealthy obsession in my opinion.
><
Such as what someone said earlier about dressing up daily and acting/eating like the animal and such.
Annd, as far as the furry thing turning people on….Good for them, I'm sure people have been turned on by weirder things.
owo;
-Kinda read through random posts before writing this-
xD
Remember that you are unique! Just like everyone else! ^w^
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:50PM
Orin J Master at 10:23AM, Feb. 25, 2009
(online)
posts: 437
joined: 12-16-2007
Soryko
I totally know what your talking about. xwx
I think furries are cool, though, I'd never dress up as one in real life or do it with an animal. O.o;
Well, except a cat girl but I think that's a little different. >.>

no, that's a furry. sexual attraction with animal features. having sex with animals is beastality, something different. although they're hard to tell apart what with the furry community having blurry judgement at the best of times, and sheepfuckers wanting a ‘safe place’ to shield them from getting tossed in the clink.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:22PM
lastcall at 5:00PM, March 8, 2009
(offline)
posts: 1,358
joined: 11-3-2007
Look, I'm a squirrel!

last edited on July 14, 2011 1:28PM
Hakoshen at 11:01AM, March 9, 2009
(offline)
posts: 2,090
joined: 11-23-2008
Orin J Master
that's more escapism. most people tend to lean at least slightly in the direction of of the less human characters in any fantasy/scifi series because there's more room to insert your own interests into their personality/culture/society/blablabla….

For me I tend to like them because they're new. I get to spend more time learning about them than the others, and I get to satisfy my anthropological urges. Lets take World of Warcraft for example. Humans, elves, dwarves, and orcs. You pretty much know everything about what kind of people they are, what weapons they use, and what kind of architecture they have just by knowing the name.

Now take the furbolgs. Bear people. Or the murlocs. Fish people. Or even those damned kobolds. Rat people. These creatures all have relatively unestablished cultures and lifestyles, so everything that they do, or every bit of backstory is new and interesting. Hell, even the duck people from Suikoden were interesting in that way.

You do have a point though, since their being less established lets you create more content in your head. I just like them because the content is all new.

On a different note, isn't it somewhat interesting how furry art is almost always done exceptionally well?
God needed the Devil, the Beatles needed the Rolling Stones, Hakoshen needs me.
I'm the enemy he requires to define him.
Soon or later, he'll bring me back to life again for another epic encounter of shouting about power levels and grimacing.
-Harkovast
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:40PM
Custard Trout at 12:59PM, March 9, 2009
(offline)
posts: 4,566
joined: 2-22-2007
Hakoshen
On a different note, isn't it somewhat interesting how furry art is almost always done exceptionally well?

Um. . . you're joking, right?
Hey buddy, you should be a Russian Cosmonaut, and here's why.
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:01PM
Hakoshen at 1:15PM, March 9, 2009
(offline)
posts: 2,090
joined: 11-23-2008
Custard Trout
Hakoshen
On a different note, isn't it somewhat interesting how furry art is almost always done exceptionally well?

Um. . . you're joking, right?

No.

I haven't seen much of it, but all that I have seen was all done pretty damn well compared to some non furry things I've seen. Guess I should count myself lucky then.
God needed the Devil, the Beatles needed the Rolling Stones, Hakoshen needs me.
I'm the enemy he requires to define him.
Soon or later, he'll bring me back to life again for another epic encounter of shouting about power levels and grimacing.
-Harkovast
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:40PM
Orin J Master at 7:18PM, March 9, 2009
(online)
posts: 437
joined: 12-16-2007
SpANG
But getting back to furries. The difference I am trying to point out is one person saying “my spirit animal is a raccoon, and I dress up like one occasionally” and someone saying, “I AM a raccoon.”.

one gets you in an institutional facility, the other just gets you pity and headshaking?

honestly, i can't stand that “spirit animal” bullcraps. a spirit animal is something that reflects your personality and you take life lessons from, not something you want to be more like. these losers just latched onto it at some point probably after hearing in a movie where someone goes through one of those native american rituals. (i forget which tribe does that, or i'd have sat that instead of “native americans”, bleh) that is not a “spirit animal”, it's a damned fixation. deal with it.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:22PM
Orin J Master at 7:29PM, March 9, 2009
(online)
posts: 437
joined: 12-16-2007
Hakoshen
For me I tend to like them because they're new. I get to spend more time learning about them than the others, and I get to satisfy my anthropological urges. Lets take World of Warcraft for example. Humans, elves, dwarves, and orcs. You pretty much know everything about what kind of people they are, what weapons they use, and what kind of architecture they have just by knowing the name.

Now take the furbolgs. Bear people. Or the murlocs. Fish people. Or even those damned kobolds. Rat people. These creatures all have relatively unestablished cultures and lifestyles, so everything that they do, or every bit of backstory is new and interesting. Hell, even the duck people from Suikoden were interesting in that way.

the Furbolgs, Murlocs, and Kobolds in warcraft are actually pretty threadbare and cliche archetypes of fantasy writing. the animalistic protecters of the forest (druids, centars, ents), evil, greedy dwellers in the deep (gnomes & dwarves in most older mytholygies, the drow in D&D), and the inhuman, savage beasts (oh, come on- the morlocks? how about the fish people from lovecraftian mythos?) very little about them is new rather than freshly packaged from what i've seen. it's more a matter of them giving it new window dressing so you don't notice it.

i'll give you the duck people though, they were pretty interesting.

On a different note, isn't it somewhat interesting how furry art is almost always done exceptionally well?
Nyeeeheeehheheehehehehehe, good one!….oh, you actually meant that. no, not really. it's just easier to make something look “right” when it doesn't actually exist. there's a lot less nitpicking from your mind when it doesn't have something real to compare it with, so you notice problems in the design of anthromorphic characters less. unless you went overboard comparing human and animal anantomy trying to prove the concept of the dinosaurman actually was feasable as a kid….not that I did that,. i'm just saying you could have.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:22PM
Hakoshen at 10:50PM, March 9, 2009
(offline)
posts: 2,090
joined: 11-23-2008
Well, given the reactions to my comment, I assume I'm very fortunate indeed to have never seen a poorly drawn furry. However, I'm saying it looks right not because I don't discriminate on artistic principles because it's anthropomorphic peoples and not humans, I'm saying it was well done in terms of bodily proportion, layout, coloring, shading, etc. It was a well drawn series of pictures. I can tell the difference.

Perhpas I misspoke when I said they were new. A better way of saying what I meant is that these other cultures are not something you're almost guaranteed to see in almost every fantasy world out there. Perhaps they interest me more because of their comparative rarity. However, considering pretty much all of fantasy is recreations of somebody's old mythos, everything is bound to be tied to some character set in one way or another.

In an unrelated note, I wonder why warcraft decided to use the term kobold in reference to rat people and not dog people as has been common in other universes (though, to cite Suikoden again, kobolds actually referred to dog AND cat people) Considering they're more or less gremlins, I guess rats are closer to the actual germanic roots than dogs.
God needed the Devil, the Beatles needed the Rolling Stones, Hakoshen needs me.
I'm the enemy he requires to define him.
Soon or later, he'll bring me back to life again for another epic encounter of shouting about power levels and grimacing.
-Harkovast
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:40PM

Forgot Password
©2011 WOWIO, Inc. All Rights Reserved