Do You Consider Yourself a Furry?

Post by **Sleet** » Sat Sep 12, 2015 3:57 pm

You generally want to avoid Facebook/YouTube/etc. comments. That's where the worst people go. Most people really don't seem to care if something is anthropomorphic.

Czukay · Post by **Czukay** » Fri Nov 27, 2015 12:16 am

Changed my vote to yes.

axelthefox · Post by **axelthefox** » Sat Nov 28, 2015 11:46 pm

This furry documentary seems good.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFtC07JfjG8

Amazee Dayzee · Post by **Amazee Dayzee** » Sat Nov 28, 2015 11:56 pm

From what I watched of it so far, it does seem very nicely done.

Mecklenburgball · Post by **Mecklenburgball** » Wed Dec 09, 2015 11:15 am

Nope. Definitly not. Although I was one about 2 years ago for a time of almoste 6 years. But after a while alot of things started bothering me in this community. Things I former denied nor did not believe they would be just untrue cliches. But I found out a lot of those things turned out to be reality. Also nearly all of my friends I made while being party of the community changed and became some kinde of cliché- furries, too. I realy thought about all that a realy long time. Asking myselfe the question "what does this all mean to me? Why do I often feel so uncomfortable being confronted with the term". I lost more and more the connection to all this stuff till I completely considered my self no more furry again.

Post by **Sleet** » Wed Dec 16, 2015 1:16 am

Any furry documentary seems troubling to me... I'd love to see a good one though!

axelthefox · Post by **axelthefox** » Thu Dec 17, 2015 12:39 am

Seems it was somewhat positive with many furs saying that the CSI episode isn't what furry is about.

Post by **Hlaoroo** » Thu Dec 17, 2015 1:15 am

Actually, I liked the documentary that Foxy linked. It didn't even mention the bad side of the fandom and everyone just focused on the positives which is how it should be.

CosmicCoyote · Post by **CosmicCoyote** » Sat Dec 19, 2015 3:32 am

Hlaoroo wrote:Actually, I liked the documentary that Foxy linked. It didn't even mention the bad side of the fandom and everyone just focused on the positives which is how it should be.

I dunno, it seems disingenuous to simply... ignore a side of equation, so to speak. You can't just pretend something doesn't exist and has no influence, even if it doesn't affect all (or even most) of the people involved. I won't talk too much on the documentary though, as I hate to judge something I haven't gotten around to watching in full yet.

The question 'do you consider yourself a furry?' is an interesting one for me in particular, as for a while I've been on the periphery of the fandom, somewhat outside looking in. It's only been lately that I've been pushing myself to tread the waters and see what the community is really like - not from a distance, but up close and personal. And I'll say it's been a bit of a unique experience to say the least. People have been definitely been nice and welcoming. But I can't deny that at times there's, I dunno, a palpable awkwardness to everything. So to try and answer the question... well, I still don't know, to be perfectly honest. I've been getting closer and closer as of late, though.

Post by **Hlaoroo** » Sat Dec 19, 2015 6:41 pm

CosmicCoyote wrote:I dunno, it seems disingenuous to simply... ignore a side of equation, so to speak. You can't just pretend something doesn't exist and has no influence, even if it doesn't affect all (or even most) of the people involved.

Well, you don't have to ignore it. You just don't have to make a big deal over it. I mean, the furry fandom is really no different to any other fandom. At its core it's a group of people sharing a common interest and being creative with each other. Every fandom has people that go overboard and has people they just don't talk about. The bad side of the furry fandom is no different to the bad side in any other fandom. It doesn't define us at all so why make a big deal out of it and why bring it up when we're talking about what the fandom is and what the fandom means to us?

If you say to someone "The furry fandom isn't just about sex!" then what's the first thing they're going to think? "Gee, these guys are obsessed with sex." of course. People will see and find what they want to find. If people expect the fandom to be about sex and other things that can't be mentioned here then that's exactly what they're going to find when they look into the fandom.

On the other paw, if you tell someone something along these lines: "The furry fandom is about sharing a mutual interest in cartoon animals and other animals with human characteristics like Bugs Bunny or Mickey Mouse. We make heaps of our own art, stories and music which relate to this interest. Sometimes we like to bring our characters to life by dressing up as them in costumes known as fursuits; we consider these wearable art since they can cost thousands of dollars to make. We go to conventions where we buy and sell art, attend lectures on a whole range of topics from how to perform, how to write stories and poetry, how to build self-confidence, to science and pseudoscience, watch comedy shows, circus shows, music shows, puppet shows and meet and hear talks from famous people like Jim Cummings, Rob Paulsen, Peter Laird, Stan Sakai, and Bill Holbrook. So we meet lots of great people, have a great time, and we get to really show off and express who we are and aside from that we raise a lot of money for animal-related charities at the conventions."
Then you'll find the reaction is a lot more positive. They'll be interested, they'll want to learn more, and they'll see a lot more good in the fandom because they'll be looking for that instead of for things to prove the fandom is about sex. What I wrote there is completely true. All those celebrities have attended furry conventions as guests of honour. If you show someone the positives first then they'll be far more interested and receptive. And with the bad rap furries have had because of the actions of a select few early on we need all the good publicity we can get. People know about the bad side so why do we need to keep bringing it up?

Besides, furries definitely aren't alone in liking things of a sexual nature. You get that in any fandom and outside of any fandom too. As Uncle Kage, founder of Anthrocon (the world's largest furry convention) likes to say "Many furries are young people. And here's a newsflash for you. Young people - sometimes - think about sex."

That being true, why bring it up when it doesn't define the fandom and when in that regard we're no different to anyone else?

CosmicCoyote · Post by **CosmicCoyote** » Sun Dec 20, 2015 3:31 am

True, I suppose the documentary isn't obligated to show every point of view. Not all things are intended to be a 360-degree critical analysis. Their job is to get their story across - I can't say as to how well they do that. (I still haven't gotten to watching it. >_>) And it's hard to disagree with your point. Without trying to push this past the PG-13 mark, human sexuality is indeed a thing, a natural thing, and it's pretty much an inevitability that it's going to pop up somewhere or another. That 'internet rule' didn't come from nowhere. You know which one I'm talking about. (And if you don't, this isn't the place to tell you.)

But to say that 'it should only focus on the positive things and leave out the negative' seems to me a gross oversimplification. 'It focuses on what makes the furry community special', yeah, sure. There's nothing wrong with focusing on what makes the furry community, well, furry, be that anthropomorphic art, writing, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. But, to try and further make a point... the fact that you even had to mention it within what was basically a sentence-long review is kind of telling, isn't it? Honestly, though, I think it's the wording that throws me off more than anything. I guess I just tend to bristle at simply labeling things good and bad and promoting or suppressing their inclusion in things based on that reaction. Appropriate and inappropriate is one thing, morality is another.

I don't want to drag this out or more off-topic though. You know where to find me if you want to talk more about it.

kurowolfe · Post by **kurowolfe** » Mon Dec 21, 2015 5:42 pm

So, my brother just attended Malaysia's first 'official' furry convention, or FURUM, which ran concurrently with the annual Comic Fiesta convention at Kuala Lumpur last weekend. He mentioned that it was a big success, with more participants than initially expected. There's even a special guest from California and also from neighbouring countries attending, which kinda surprises me. Since he's reeeeaaallly into the furry scene more than I do, he said that it's fun meet new friends and such.

It's great that Malaysian furs finally get a proper convention of their own, instead of only using the aforementioned Comic Fiesta as a meeting platform. Those in fursuits there are considered cosplayers, since the furry scene is an underground one here. Most others just saw fursuiters as 'those slightly weird and mostly cute animal mascot people'.

And recently, a famous local newspaper printed an introductory article on furry conventions and furmeets. I think it was focused on the ConFuzzled, detailing what happens there and who attends them. My brother, who is also one of the admins for one of the largest Malaysian furry groups in Facebook, recognized the author as another furry themselves. I'd link it, but I can't find the image.

Post by **Sleet** » Mon Dec 21, 2015 6:06 pm

That's awesome that it went so well! First time conventions are notorious for having rocky starts and small attendances. Guess y'all did it well!

Tue Dec 22, 2015 1:46 am

the upcoming local furry convention that apparently didn't get things together enough to feel confident booking the hotel they were going to run it in.
on the bad side, there won't be a full furry con in my school's area. on the good side, it's now become part of the "everything" con that the same company runs, which I am able to attend and work.

so now I'm working a semi-furry nerd con (which is being held the same weekend and in the same building as a wedding and a gun show, so that should be fun).
while I've been to a con with a lot of furries, I haven't yet been to one with any furry programming.

Douglas Collier · Post by **Douglas Collier** » Tue Dec 22, 2015 2:44 am

People wearing animal costumes and hunting rifles - what could go wrong?

Punchy · Post by **Punchy** » Tue Dec 22, 2015 4:47 am

kurowolfe wrote:Most others just saw fursuiters as 'those slightly weird and mostly cute animal mascot people'.

That's how I see fursuiters... kinda weird, mostly cute.

RandomGeekNamedBrent wrote:(which is being held the same weekend and in the same building as a wedding and a gun show, so that should be fun).

It's a shotgun wedding?

kurowolfe · Post by **kurowolfe** » Tue Dec 22, 2015 10:54 am

Punchy wrote:
kurowolfe wrote:Most others just saw fursuiters as 'those slightly weird and mostly cute animal mascot people'.
That's how I see fursuiters... kinda weird, mostly cute.

Eheh, yeah, they can be pretty uncanny at times when you're not used to it. I find myself liking the more realistic ones, with heads similar to their original species. Wonder how children would react to them though?

Punchy wrote:
RandomGeekNamedBrent wrote:(which is being held the same weekend and in the same building as a wedding and a gun show, so that should be fun).
It's a shotgun wedding?

A shotgun wedding, with a man in a wolf mascot suit.

Amazee Dayzee · Post by **Amazee Dayzee** » Tue Dec 22, 2015 1:27 pm

That joke is older than most fossils at a museum...

Post by **Sleet** » Thu Dec 24, 2015 1:48 am

How is a convention semi-furry? You gotta explain that. :3

Thu Dec 24, 2015 2:12 am

there are guests and a lot of programming which don't pertain to the fandom, but there's like one furry panel at all times. sort of a small furry convention within a larger more general nerd con.

Radio Blue Heart · Post by **Radio Blue Heart** » Sat Dec 26, 2015 2:28 am

In the past many have credited some piece of pop culture for turning them on to this fandom. I think the next big one is about to happen. Everyone is heavily anticipating "Zootopia" but take a look at this trailer for an new animated film from Russia coming out next year.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRa0N7n6jI0

"Sheep and Wolves/Волки и овцы" from Wizart Studios.

And I am happy to announce that a friend has invited me to FWA in Atlanta. This will be my first convention of the sort (not counting the horror conventions I have attended) and it will be the farthest that I have ever been from home.

Amazee Dayzee · Post by **Amazee Dayzee** » Sat Dec 26, 2015 4:50 pm

Well I hope that you have a good time at the convention then!

Post by **Sleet** » Sun Dec 27, 2015 1:17 am

My friends specifically mentioned, after the fact, finding the sloth trailer from Zootopia hilarious. So it's definitely got the appeal!

Fish Preferred · Post by **Fish Preferred** » Wed Dec 30, 2015 3:04 am

While I understand the rationale for keeping the definition open, it kind of ruins the whole point of taking a poll. If everyone votes based on a personal interpretation, there isn't much we can say about how many people actually fit into either category. Therefore, I shall withhold a difinitive response until a sufficiently unambiguous definition is provided.

To give an idea of where I stand, the black bear is apparently my fursona. I do not think of myself as one. It is in fact more by happenstance than by deliberate choice that I am thus represented. I don't particularly favour any one species; I just respect everything else more than I could ever respect humans.

In re. fursuiting: I am steadfastly against the very idea. If the attire is impeccably realistic and the wearer considerably skilled in pantomime, I can tolerate their presence. Otherwise I will regard it as extremely offensive.

In re. physical anthropomorphism: I am offended by any representation that is clearly more human than non-human. Anything else I tend to prefer over human characters, but not over fully zoomorphic ones.

In re. behavioural anthropomorphism: Hard to tell an "animal" story without it, and I generally enjoy seeing how writers choose to apply conventional "human" behaviours to distinctly non-human characters, so long as it doesn't raise the question of why they even bother casting them as non-humans.

In re. fandom: I couldn't possibly care in the least. Misanthropy and all that, you know.

I would also like to point out that "whatever definition suits you" is not a definition by any stretch of the imagination. It is more the diametric opposite of definition, really.

Post by **Obbl** » Wed Dec 30, 2015 4:37 am

I am quite surprised by your taking offense to fursuiting which is not intended to insult, is used to bring goodwill and joy to many, and does not personally harm you

I understand not having a personal taste for this, that, or the other, but I find this particular response rather curious

As for our definition of "furry", it has, on this forum, always been "one whose enjoyment of a piece is enhanced due to the presence of anthropomorphic animal characters." This, of course, necessitates personal bias in the response, and many have changed their mind in the past. Nevertheless, it has some rigor to which you may apply your own biases in order to come to a decision. There is ambiguity in what constitutes an anthropomorphic animal character, but we intend a broad scope on that classification so as to be as inclusive as possible given the definition. Based on your list of offenses, I see that likely would turn your decision toward the negative; though you could accept with the caveat of a stricter scope of anthropomorphic animal characters for the application of the definition to yourself. It's not a question of supreme importance, regardless, so even coming to no decision is understandable.

Fish Preferred · Post by **Fish Preferred** » Wed Dec 30, 2015 8:53 pm

Obbl wrote:I am quite surprised by your taking offense to fursuiting which is not intended to insult, is used to bring goodwill and joy to many, and does not personally harm you :| I understand not having a personal taste for this, that, or the other, but I find this particular response rather curious

It is essentially the same issue that people have with the Washington Redskins franchise, except in this case it's more a controversy over idolization vs. degradation than it is about honour vs. stereotype. I suppose I could say that I have too great a respect for the real thing to not be offended by any immitation short of the very best, if that makes any more sense.

Post by **Sleet** » Thu Dec 31, 2015 1:28 am

This is a silly thread in a forum about a funny talking animal comic. I don't think coming up with an airtight, rigid definition of "furry" is the goal here.

Radio Blue Heart · Post by **Radio Blue Heart** » Fri Jan 01, 2016 11:16 pm

Here are some more Furry-centric films to look forward too.

Ratchet and Clank
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2865120/

Guardians of Luna
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1748032/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

CHARACTERz
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt5046632/

Trouble Down Under
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1691344/

and once again,
Sheep and Wolves
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3746824/?ref_=rvi_tt

We won't know how good they really are until they become available but I am cautiously optimistic.

Amazee Dayzee · Post by **Amazee Dayzee** » Fri Jan 01, 2016 11:54 pm

I am very interested in the Ratchet and Clank one myself. Looks really nice.

CosmicCoyote · Post by **CosmicCoyote** » Sat Jan 02, 2016 2:16 am

While I do love that the trailer has the quirky Ratchet & Clank humor that pervades the series, I do wonder why they seem to have changed the plot from the original game. At least... from what the trailer seems to imply.

Punchy · Post by **Punchy** » Sat Jan 02, 2016 5:29 am

Really excited about the Ratchet & Clank movie, one of my favourite video game series.
Isn't there supposed to be a Sly Cooper movie coming out sometime this year as well?

Amazee Dayzee · Post by **Amazee Dayzee** » Sat Jan 02, 2016 4:17 pm

Sly Cooper is another one I really wouldn't mind seeing.

Post by **Sleet** » Mon Jan 04, 2016 12:24 am

Characterz looks terrible... As for the rest, animated movies are always questionable 'cause unless they come from a good studio, their probability of being terrible is pretty high.

I can always be optimistic though!

Mon Jan 04, 2016 3:12 am

I think Rainmaker is handling Sly Cooper. not sure if they've done anything good since they were called Mainframe Entertainment, though.

Amazee Dayzee · Post by **Amazee Dayzee** » Mon Jan 04, 2016 6:15 pm

They did the CGI show ReBoot which was on Toonami for a while so I would say they are pretty good. I loved that show as a kid.

Tue Jan 05, 2016 2:36 am

I accounted for that. that and Beast Wars was when they were still Mainframe Entertainment, so back then I know they were good. I don't know their track record after they became Rainmaker.

hopefully they do Sly Cooper justice... or not considering the character?

GreatKitsune · Post by **GreatKitsune** » Wed Jan 06, 2016 12:42 am

Honestly, I'm much more of an otaku than a furry.

Post by **Serence Frostbite** » Wed Jan 06, 2016 3:03 am

you can be both though

Amazee Dayzee · Post by **Amazee Dayzee** » Wed Jan 06, 2016 4:40 pm

Its been 8 years since I've heard the term and I still don't know it, so what the heck is an otaku?

Post by **Sleet** » Thu Jan 07, 2016 1:44 am

Basically a Japanese nerd. A slightly more broad term than an anime fan.