9
« Last post by Rubystars on May 29, 2023, 03:48:39 PM »
That's a really bad definition of furry. I'm not part of that fandom myself but I have a couple of friends who are furries so I got a better understanding of it from them.
Basically a furry is someone who is a fan of anthropomorphic animals. Anthro animals would be something like Bugs Bunny, Mickey Mouse, or like the Disney Robin hood movie, Jungle Book, or Zootopia. It's animal characters with human-like features, animals that talk, etc. Most people are familiar with these types of animals in fiction. They go pretty far back even into things like Aesop's fables or the symbolism of a talking snake, etc.
Anyway the basic furry fandom isn't really a bad thing and most people like anthro animals to one degree or another anyway whether they're part of that fandom or not.
There's a lot of cool safe for work, non-vulgar art that's made and some of the mascot-like suits people make can be pretty cool too honestly depending on the quality.
Unfortunately the furry fandom does have a lot of problems with the fact that so many of its members are left wing so it ends up attracting a much larger percentage than average of LGBTQ+- ÷ types. I feel like that's one big source of why people on the outside generally view it badly. If you're a conservative Christian or Jewish person or even a Muslim person who follows the principles of your faith, you might not be able to really mesh with a lot of furry communities because they generally don't like things like "homophobia" or "transphobia" and will reject you for that.
There was one Christian lady who went by the name of LupusVulpes or @Humanloopis and she did art commissions for people, drawing their original anthro characters (aka fursonas) and someone asked her to draw their character holding a pride flag for an art commission. She said she could draw the character but she didn't want to include the pride flag due to her personal religious beliefs. That she respected the person but she wasn't able to really draw that part of it. The community treated her like she was evil and basically canceled her and ruined her business. She had to shut down all her social media accounts.
And like any other fandom there is a subset of people who make it sexual. Like they might be turned on by Lola Bunny from Space Jam or even by people role playing as an actual stallion or whatever. There's also not-safe for work art of humanized animals which is pretty nasty/gross. Think like a playboy bunny with ears on or Victoria's secret angel with wings on, but more like a bunny or whatever animal than just having the ears or wings, etc. but still humanized.
They don't generally like normal animals or feel attracted to actual animals. It's the humanization of them that makes them appealing to those people. They're not zoophiles and not interested in actual animals usually even if they're in to that.
I think it's important for people to know that it's only part of the fandom that's like that though. It's not every member of it and there's also a lot of "safe for work" furry art/content/comics/animations, etc. that don't have anything to do with anything perverted or unusual. Someone can be a furry and only consume safe for work content if they want.
There are "conservative furries" like the girl I mentioned but a lot of times they get heavily overshadowed by the leftists and perverts of the fandom and so people never know about them.
Recent Posts
