"CYD is full of people like him."

It's their article of faith. I lurk over there quite a bit, and I'm pretty sure that our Mr. Anonymous is one of the patients that got out of the asylum. I have a real good idea who it is, as well as I've seen that pompous psychologizing before.

*) "...oh and if you dont like yiff...DONT LOOK AT IT!"

You lifted this straight from my web site, I see. Congrats, you have removed all doubts that I may have had that you are one of Mitch's guys. You really didn't think I'd miss those two threads you filled up with twelve pages of bullshit dedicated to lil' ol' me spread across two threads in two different forums. "Someone isn't at all happy about us". Nice going there, linking to my site without ever mentioning either its name or mine so that a Google scan wouldn't reveal this. You didn't think I'd know about it? Ask Mitch about "referrer logs" sometimes, dumbass. Too bad that while you were lifting snappy quotes, you didn't actually read the articles. You might have actually learned something. Pity.

Do they think then that we are some anti-furry special forces? Training night and day to be the most lethal trolls on the internet...

Aren't we the smallest branch? We have how many active members? 20?

Simo, who the diligent reader will recall from this thread, is a little paranoical on the subject of CYD, to the extent of seeing our "agents" everywhere!

Yay, I managed to find the original thread. Very lacking in funny, there's just drama in there from what I can see.

These Furry haters come in a variety of types:
...

* ) Frustrated Elitists --
Here, you will find the "Burned Fur". Furry fan-dom started out as a "good ol' boys club" of anthropomorphic artists. Unfortunately for them, the fan-dom came into wider awareness, and new people joined up, bringing in new ideas. Furthermore, Furry-dom became very much a DYI (Do It Yourself) fan-dom. Instead of worshipping the Serious Artistes from afar, Furries began to create their own art. This is something that has stuck in their craw ever since. Here is the perfect example of that:
Quote:
Should the fandom have kept like this, I'd still consider myself a 'furry', I wouldn't be typing these words and you wouldn't be reading them; and I'd focus my efforts to draw more comics featuring my funny animals, knowing that the chances to have a viable career as a funny animal/anthropomorphics artist would be higher than they are now. Of course, my point of view is biased, since I am a cartoonist and love drawing funny animals. But, supposing you are on the fandom only to enjoy anthropomorphics, and not to 'create' them, I'd consider the number of professional-level artists drawing furry stuff would be higher because there would be a larger market willing to pay good money for good quality anthropomorphics, either comics (mainstream or not), literature, or roleplaying games...
A Furry "What If" by M. Estrugo

See? All you Furries who ever put pen to paper and drew your own anthopomorphics are stealing the food right off Estrugo's table. Don't you feel guilty right now? Of course, it never occurs to him that he may not have that "viable career" as a professional cartoonist because his art just isn't good enough. Oh, no! That couldn't possibly be the reason! It's those GD Furries; it's all their fault! This is the true motivation behind the Burned Furs. The so-called "pervert" take-over of the fan-dom was then, is now, and will always remain, a red herring to hide the real agenda. These are the folks whom you have to thank for: the MTV "documentary" on Furry-dom, THAT episode of ER, THE episode of CSI. All that crowing about "perverts" in the fan-dom, coming from inside the fan-dom, led all too many to believe that where there's smoke, there must be a fire. The failed elitist putsch has had repercussions that are still echoing through the fan-dom to this very day. You will find the frustrated elitists hanging out at CYD The best way to handle these folks is to ignore them completely. Denying them the attention and sympathy they seek is the sweetest revenge, by far.

Do they think then that we are some anti-furry special forces? Training night and day to be the most lethal trolls on the internet...

Crush! Yiff! Destroy! is the codename for the Internet's daring, highly trained, special mission force. Its purpose: To defend the information superhighway against the Furry, a senseless, terrorist, plushophilic organization determined to yiff the world.

you are one of Mitch's guys.

The first rule of CYD is YOU DO NOT TALK ABOUT CYD!

The first rule of CYD is YOU DO NOT TALK ABOUT CYD!

Well, with all the furries lurking here, waiting for us to post something that really pisses them off...

I figure that any post I put up regardless of its content, is likely to do just that.

Some energetic and heartfelt rants by 'Simo'. Generally good, though he does miss the point a couple of times and indulges in some wild and wooly hypenation along the way.

So "The Best Page in Furry-dom" has gotten a little bit better thanks to CYD.

Ironic, ain't it? :wink:

As for the troll, whoever he was, was doing an impersonation (and not a very good one) of ZenZhu. He was CYD's most prolific poster before leaving (if you came here after he left).

The furry/Maddox crossover site idea is old. Nothingkat beat you to it by like... 3 years.

Why are you and Computolio so fixated on what my web site looks like?

* ) Why does this site look so plain/lack-luster/shitty? Why the large fonts?

It's a bit of contrariness on my part. Oh sure, I could fill this site with all sorts of gew-gaws if I went crazy with the graphics, frames, Flash, Java script, etc., and make it look too much like every other site on the 'Net. See: Web Pages that Suck for inspiration, if you are designing a page. That's what I did. Furthermore, the text-based pages will download much faster without a bunch of crap getting in the way. Using the larger fonts on a black background is also quite easy on the eyes. Lastly, I want you here for the content, not the eye-candy. A web site that's about content: what a concept!

• KMFMS
  
• Void Main's Beautiful Site
  
• RH Design
  
  Would you call these "Maddox clones" too?
  
  I took a look at Maddox's site, and I highly doubt that he even knows about Furry fandom. He doesn't do Furries, and I don't do pop culture criticisms. If someone visiting my site had never heard about Maddox, then why would some superficial resemblance bother them? I myself had never heard of him until I saw one of your posts that mentioned it.
  
  As a web designer, I can assure you good design has nothing to do with what you call "Gew Gaws." If you want to go easy on the eyes I suggest removing the tiny, tiled animal backgrounds, create a clean consistency in your text styles and colors, and balance the content visually.
  
  OK, constructive criticism. I wondered about the background on the fox information page as well. I'll see about changing it. Thanks Iconoclastic.

I took a look at Maddox's site, and I highly doubt that he even knows about Furry fandom. He doesn't do Furries, and I don't do pop culture criticisms. If someone visiting my site had never heard about Maddox, then why would some superficial resemblance bother them? I myself had never heard of him until I saw one of your posts that mentioned it.

Are you looking for more laugh-a-minute drawings of animals in erotic poses? Well you're in luck, because the intrinsic humor of furry porn never goes stale!

Since I have just so many hours in a day, and RL keeps intruding on my 'Net time, and I'm already on these other forums, I didn't take a closer look once I saw what Maddox was about.

Since I have just so many hours in a day, and RL keeps intruding on my 'Net time, and I'm already on these other forums, I didn't take a closer look once I saw what Maddox was about.

Translation: "I was too busy fapping."

OK, AngryPuritan, I suspected that you were trying to provoke a flame war. Now I'm certain of it. It's not going to work. Believe whatever pleases you.

I'm through with this line of discussion, and putting you on defacto ignore.

Like most furries, you really need to grow a thicker skin.

Going on the defensive Kadius? I don't think so. What you don't realize is that I'm a veteran of the "tech wars". Get some Linux people and some Windows people on the same forum, and, let's just say that you haven't seen a real flame war here at CYD.

*) "How does our reaction to the insanity differ from any "mundane" you would find on the street?"

More insider knowledge. To the non-fan, every fandom, without exception, looks pretty strange. To the public at large, Star Trek is just a television show. Regardless of how much they like it, they will still look upon those Trekkie debates over who was the better Captain, Kirk or Picard, with a detached bemusement. They view Star Wars as an enjoyable movie, but will think anyone claiming to be a Jedi to be a bit "tetched". It is no different when it comes to Furry fandom: to be seen as interested in anthropomorphic animal characters once one has passed the age of twelve or so, is going to be seen as an age inappropriate interest. After all, Walter "Radar" O'Reilly, of MASH, sleeps with a teddy bear. This may make him an unsung hero to Furries, but it makes him a comedic figure to the non-Furfan. No amount of scholarly dissertations can reverse 45 years of conditioning to believe that this is kids' stuff.

Want to join a fandom? You are a "weirdo". Period. End of story.

I don't know why it is so welcoming to strange stuff, must fandoms resist change. You think by the way some furries respond to threats (OMG FURSECUTION) that they would also tell anyone who comes into the fandom saying they want "6 breasted hermaphrodite vixens" to fuck off. Maybe if more people did then the fandom would change. I really expected a fandom like furry to be a lot more purist.

Jerry Springer does not need freaky Furries to put on his television freak show.

So where are the "Burned Anime-niacs"?

Every Fur needs to get words like "Nazi", "Hitler", and "Fursecution" (unless in a humourous context) out of their vocabularies. (and other stuff I snipped)

Jerry Springer does not need freaky Furries to put on his television freak show.

*) "How does our reaction to the insanity differ from any "mundane" you would find on the street?"

More insider knowledge. To the non-fan, every fandom, without exception, looks pretty strange. To the public at large, Star Trek is just a television show. Regardless of how much they like it, they will still look upon those Trekkie debates over who was the better Captain, Kirk or Picard, with a detached bemusement. They view Star Wars as an enjoyable movie, but will think anyone claiming to be a Jedi to be a bit "tetched". It is no different when it comes to Furry fandom: to be seen as interested in anthropomorphic animal characters once one has passed the age of twelve or so, is going to be seen as an age inappropriate interest. After all, Walter "Radar" O'Reilly, of MASH, sleeps with a teddy bear. This may make him an unsung hero to Furries, but it makes him a comedic figure to the non-Furfan. No amount of scholarly dissertations can reverse 45 years of conditioning to believe that this is kids' stuff.

Want to join a fandom? You are a "weirdo". Period. End of story.

I don't know. The difference between star trek or star wars and "furry" is that the fandom of the scifi geeks doesn't attract near as many extreme fetishes from outside. The worst you get in star wars is a bit of slash. This is because star wars and star trek are fandoms revolving around the films, the attention of the participants has to be on the films for them to part of the fandom. If their interests deviate from the focus of attention then they cease to be part of the fandom by default.

Furry has the problems that come from being a fandom that focuses on a genre of media, but instead of being restricted into a small field, it's very broad. Big, unnoticed and unrestricted. I don't know why it is so welcoming to strange stuff, must fandoms resist change. You think by the way some furries respond to threats (OMG FURSECUTION) that they would also tell anyone who comes into the fandom saying they want "6 breasted hermaphrodite vixens" to fuck off. Maybe if more people did then the fandom would change. I really expected a fandom like furry to be a lot more purist. Maybe without a central focus like a film or series then a fandom can change into something furry.

Isn't it interesting that if people are fans of anime, Star Trek and other fictional media entertainments, they're part of a "fandom", and will, as Simo aptly observed, be regarded by the public at large as weirdos - while it's perfectly OK to be a fan of sports, Elvis or Beatles?

Furry like anime lacks focus on any one person. But the folks that furries fap over are 99% of the time anything but professionals. That's the magic of the furry fandom, anyone can be a star. And you don't have to be Carl Barks, Stan Sakai, or Albrecht Dürer. If you can draw tits and a cocks on a cartoon fox, then you'll have fans! So who do furries look up to? Kelly Price? Eric Schwartz? Mike Sherman? Inuki? 1000 other unknown amateur artists who will gladly draw lewd images of cartoon animals showcases all manner of fetishes?

BTW, Simo. You need to learn BBCode ... desperately.

EDIT: Just like to add that not all of the furry fandom/subculture/your choice of word is intrinsically fucked up; a webcomic like DMFA is indeed furry, but in a non-fetish'ed, "just making an in-jokey little comic with these characters" way. "Furry" is not a total train wreck, it's just that a surprisingly big part of it is.

Furthermore, Furry is not completely unique: meet the Clock Crew (url=http://www.newgrounds.com/collections/clockcrew.html). Here is another do it yourself fandom which is centered on Flash movies. "Private and inbred" could easily describe the majority of what they do. Some of their work isn't half-bad, some pretty good, a small percentage is outstanding. Not at all that much different from Furry.

I understand that furry not all bad, all I'm saying is that it appears (since there's no real way to prove) to be more messed up as a fandom than the other ones it can be compared to. Anime is bigger, anime has a lot of messed up stuff in it if you look deeper, but anime is still less than furry. Is this because the fetish stuff is deliberately kept out of the way where people can't see it?

Maybe it's the size of the fandom. Perhaps if furry gets very big, it will be forced to clean up it's image to the general public. But then again, how many sub-cultures accept a "Who cares what non furries think, they are just stupid hoomans" attitude?

Jerry Springer does not need freaky Furries to put on his television freak show.

Oh, but I think he does. In fact, if memory serves me right there was an episode of Jerry Springer where a woman was having an affair with another man who liked to dress and act like a dog while she dressed like a cat. Imagine a fat, unattractive man wearing nothing but his shorts, a dog nose-mask, fake ears, tail, and a collar on all fours barking at everyone. Now imagine a furry, but alas, I repeat myself.

Before I do, would anyone like to offer any advice or ideas about ways I can extend the study or make it more accurate?

Before I do, would anyone like to offer any advice or ideas about ways I can extend the study or make it more accurate?

It's never going to happen. There's no way to have a 'control' group with which to base your deviant vs. non-deviancy upon. Everyone in the fandom is either usurped into the idiocy, even if very lightly - or eventually leave it in disgust.

What if I focused on the rate of deviancy of the art on VCL and then compared to samples from other image boards of fan groupings, like Star Wars, Star Trek, anime, etc, image boards? That way there are control groups for comparison. Do you think that would work better?

One thing I will do is define 'sexual deviancy' and define 'furry'. I know that furry isn't necessarily deviant, which is why I want keep the two definitions exclusive. The study is supposed to find how sexually deviant 'furry' is, which indicates there is some degree of non-deviation. In doing this, I'll adpot more the "fandumb" definition of 'furry' ("It's not about the yiff") and merely mention other definitions, but I'll adopt the common definitions of 'sexually deviant' and 'perverted'. That way people know where the study stands. What do you think?

I'm going to do research into the "fandumb" and find out exactly how deviant it is. Then again, I'm just a stupid "hyooman", so I doubt the furry community will give my study much credit.

But it'd be interesting to see.

Before I do, would anyone like to offer any advice or ideas about ways I can extend the study or make it more accurate?

• Character drawn without genitalia shown.
  
• Character shows genitalia; no sexual activity depicted.
  
• Character masturbating.
  
• Character having "normal" (genital-to-genital) sex with own kind.
  
• Character having "normal" (genital-to-genital) sex with other kinds.
  
• Character doing anal sex.
  
• Character being raped.
  
  
  You could list percentages, and let people decide for themselves what's "deviant" or not.
  
  Of course, the next problem becomes where to go to do that study? Obviously, you won't get the same results at someplace like Yerf or Floofy Fur that you'd get at fchan, for example.

You can't. They're different. See, they're both things geeks are into, but some Trekkies are just hopeless losers who enjoy a very shitty TV show. Furries enjoy the concept of an anthropomorphic, sentient animal.. which most of them want to have sex with.

After all, Trekkies have been churning out raunchy fanfic (usually involving stories about homosexual liasons between Kirk, Spock, and Bones) way before Confurence 0 was a glimmer in Merlino's eye.

I have seen some freaky Anime porn (hentai, yaoi, yuri) that could curl your hair.

Isn't it interesting that if people are fans of anime, Star Trek and other fictional media entertainments, they're part of a "fandom", and will, as Simo aptly observed, be regarded by the public at large as weirdos - while it's perfectly OK to be a fan of sports, Elvis or Beatles?

Star Wars geeks have Lucas, Trekkies have Roddenberry, D&D players have Gygax, and Transformers fans have ... Hasbro.

Then you move onto fandoms where the focus is less on a work and more on a genre. I reffer to the anime fandom. Who do anime fans look up to? Leiji Matsumoto? Osamu Tezuka? Akira Toriyama? Rumiko Takahashi? Insert new face in anime here? A lot of big names stand out and most work admired by otakus is professional work.

Furry like anime lacks focus on any one person. But the folks that furries fap over are 99% of the time anything but professionals. That's the magic of the furry fandom, anyone can be a star. And you don't have to be Carl Barks, Stan Sakai, or Albrecht Dürer. If you can draw tits and a cocks on a cartoon fox, then you'll have fans! So who do furries look up to? Kelly Price? Eric Schwartz? Mike Sherman? Inuki? 1000 other unknown amateur artists who will gladly draw lewd images of cartoon animals showcases all manner of fetishes?

* Shawn Keller makes a comparison between "The Common Garden-Variety Furry" and "The Average Trekkie" in his book "A Horriyfing Look At Furries".

* Seababy also makes a comparison between Star Wars, Star Trek, and Furry fans in his article Dorkstorm: The Annihilation (http://www.thewavemag.com/pagegen.php?pagename=article&articleid=24184)


By the way, also it's interesting to note that you immediately say after your definition of a furry...



which most of them want to have sex with.



How do you know it's most? What are you using as a basis there? See, that's the purpose of such a study: To indicate the level of sexuality. What you're saying with the "most" has no real basis (no offence and all due respect to your opinion). At least with such a study, we can indicate levels of sexuality in furry "fandumb".



If you want to do it right, I would forget about using "deviant" as a characterization. This term gets pretty slippery, and is open to interpretation..



I'll try to include a number of general definitions, I think I'll just focus on "sexualised" art rather than using "deviantion" as a yardstick, mainly because we're talking about the amount of yiff in furry. But like I said, this also depends on how the study defines 'furry'.

This is one of the problems with content analyses anyway: How does the person conducting the study define what he sees? It's difficult to establish criteria and then analysing images with such criteria.

But way smarter people than me do them all the time.



Of course, the next problem becomes where to go to do that study? Obviously, you won't get the same results at someplace like Yerf or Floofy Fur that you'd get at fchan, for example.



VCL seems like a pretty average Furry picture depository. They have a good mix of "adults-only" and "general audience" stuff. I think I'll stick with that.

Keep in mind this isn't going to be a major study. It's just something I'll be doing in my own time. And my time, as it is, is pretty limited, so I don't want to make my area of study too big.

Does anyone know of VCL-like picture boards for Star Trek, Star Wars, and Anime?

I'll try to include a number of general definitions, I think I'll just focus on "sexualised" art rather than using "deviantion" as a yardstick, mainly because we're talking about the amount of yiff in furry. But like I said, this also depends on how the study defines 'furry'.

This is one of the problems with content analyses anyway: How does the person conducting the study define what he sees? It's difficult to establish criteria and then analysing images with such criteria.

Griphonix, mouse:

There is just so much that one can do. Tell someone who wants a pic of "6 breasted hermaphrodite vixens" hosted by furrydolphin.net to "fuck off"? Yeah, I can do that. Though I don't do art, I do write fanfic. If someone wants a story about "6 breasted hermaphrodite vixens" and their carrying-on, I can refuse. Host a Fur-con: you can set the rules of acceptable behaviour. Keep every Furfan in line, all the time? How?

Furry fans do question this behaviour.

So where are the "Burned Trekkies"? I have seen some freaky Anime porn (hentai, yaoi, yuri) that could curl your hair. So where are the "Burned Anime-niacs"?

Unforch, we've seen what happened when fans tried to tell "the freaks" to "fuck off": it brought the "freaks" into far greater prominance than they would otherwise have had. After two years of the Great Burned Fur Internet Flame War, we got Sex2K. We got that episode of CSI. And in the end, the freaks were still as firmly welded onto Furry-dom in the public mind as they were before, if not moreso.

That's the best I can do. In an ideal world, people would know to keep their bedroom behaviour behind closed doors, to keep their bullshit out of Live Journals, which are not your personal diaries. This goes beyond Furry-dom, since you see the same sort of freakishness paraded about outside the fandom. Jerry Springer does not need freaky Furries to put on his television freak show.

Tell me why this completely unbiased search is an incorrect image of furry.

* There might be a lot of images that use the word furry but have nothing to do with the actual furry subculture. This is a drawback because I'm focusing on the furry subculture in comparison to other subcultures

* Such images take a lot of hits from people not involved in furry. For example, an image might be linked via SomethingAwful or many various other SA-like websites.

But I still think it's a good method. I might do something like that after this first study (unless you want to do a Google study of furry, since it was your idea). I'll use my first one as a pilot study and then go from there.



For Anime, 4chan would be a good place to check out. They have a wide variety of different styles of fanart.



I might stay clear of chan boards for the moment. They are difficult because they're always changing and many of the images disappear if pushed to the bottom of the pile. Plus, there are many categories on 4chan, which makes things hard to follow, where as with VCL most of everything is pretty static. If I was looking at the frequency of certain images over a period of time, I might go with 4chan compared to fchan. For the moment, I might stick with something more static like VCL. At least with VCL and other VCL-like image boards, so I can keep better tabs on my progress and take more notice on updates, etc.



As for studying whether the majority of furry is about sex, just look at the revenue lines. Ask the ex-furry artists on these boards if they were more popular when they drew porn. Look at the memberships of Yerf and VCL, respectivley. Look on LJ and see how many people who have 'furry' or 'anthropomorphics' as an interest also have 'sex' 'yiff' or whathaveyou.



Revenue lines and commissions are a big part of the whole "furry is about yiff vs furry is not about yiff" debate. I guess, I just want to look at something more concrete.

I do like that idea of looking at LJs and see who shares 'sex' and 'furry' as common interests. It is very similar to the study that I propose with VCL and other image boards. And if you're not going to undertake it, I might make that my third study -- right after I do Griphonix's Google idea.



Saying "let's study this some more" is a time-waster cop out. No matter how much you study it; Furry is about sex, cigarettes kill people, and global warming is real. Let those poor scientists go back to smashing atoms now, please.



I'm no scientist. I'm just a guy who has an interest in media and popular culture. But I do have a degree in such an area, which makes me some kind of... smart... guy... person... :D

Someone can claim, "Furry is about sex end of story", but how well can that person back up that claim? I think if someone says "let's not study this some more", then I think that's the real cop out, because that person is reduced to making speculative generalisations based upon seeing a few yiffy artworks and stories. It's not a clear or accurate representation. And I think someone should study closer into it.

Sure, my study won't have any great ramifications. It won't rock the boat of the academic world. And I admit, I'm no Al Kinsey. But it might answer at least one or two questions people have. And I think that is at least beneficial.

Just to note to all: my mind's already made up about doing the study, and I'm not asking for reasons to disuade me from doing it. What I am asking is if anyone has any advice or ideas prior to doing the study. Are there any suggestions that might help the study? Anything I should be aware of?

My starting date is 15 June. I expect to end sometime in July.

I think if someone says "let's not study this some more", then I think that's the real cop out, because that person is reduced to making speculative generalisations based upon seeing a few yiffy artworks and stories. It's not a clear or accurate representation. And I think someone should study closer into it.

My starting date is 15 June. I expect to end sometime in July.

I think if someone says "let's not study this some more", then I think that's the real cop out, because that person is reduced to making speculative generalisations based upon seeing a few yiffy artworks and stories. It's not a clear or accurate representation. And I think someone should study closer into it.

I said no such thing.

Saying "let's study this some more" is a time-waster cop out.

I think this particular aspect has been done to hell, and based on internet research, money trails and personal accounts from furries themselves, we can know that furry is about sex.

We also know evolution exists, that doesn't mean we keep running studis to see if it exists, but ever finer details of how it works.

Understand that the summer is con filled, so you'll get periods of no furry acitivity followed by high as they scan their sketchboks and whatnot.

Just to note to all: my mind's already made up about doing the study, and I'm not asking for reasons to disuade me from doing it. What I am asking is if anyone has any advice or ideas prior to doing the study. Are there any suggestions that might help the study? Anything I should be aware of?

I'd also discount Garfield altogether, since Garfield sucks.

It also reminds me of one episode where a guy claimed he was a plushophile and brought his toy panda plush named "Pokey" along. He wanted to tell his girlfriend about his secret so they brought her out. She sat down, saw the Panda and said, "Aww! For me?" And she grabbed it and started hugging it. The guy then told her what he actually did with the panda.

The show ended with her ripping the head off the panda and him on the ground admist panda plush remains, crying and screaming, "Pokey! Pokey! What have you done to Pokey!"

I'm going to do research into the "fandumb" and find out exactly how deviant it is. Then again, I'm just a stupid "hyooman", so I doubt the furry community will give my study much credit.

But it'd be interesting to see.

Before I do, would anyone like to offer any advice or ideas about ways I can extend the study or make it more accurate?

That's why I need to find a fair definition(s) of what constitutes 'furry'. Does it include funny animals? Does it include Superheros with an animalish element in their character (Batman, The Tick)? Etc, etc?

That's why I want to focus on VCL for my source of furry material. It has a good mix of pictures. Plus it has a mix of well-known artists as well as general fans (and all in between). I'd like to branch to other sites after this study, if time permits.

I'd say the best way would be to include all the other furry archives out there because not all furry art is created equal. For example, VCL is the most mainstream and atrocity worthy, but Artvark is clean and of good quality. Side 7 is pretty tame but of poor quality mostly, Fur Affinity is much like VCL only less strict, then you have the Orlando Furry Archives which is like VCL but smaller, and the Jab Archives which features a lot of adult art of copyrighted characters. Then you have archives which cater to a particular interest or fetish like TransFUR, Furry Inflation and Pregfur. And finally, you have archives which are out of commission like Pure Yiff (formerly the best place to find adult furry art) anf Yerf (formerly the best place to find clean furry art). Even if Yerf comes back, it won't be the same seeing as how one of Yerf's charms was the fact that they had art dating back to 1996 from some artists who were no longer active. If it does come back, you can be sure as hell that artists won't want to upload their eight-year old art again.

Unless The Tick got turned on by Arthur's moth costume or Batman don his costume soley to get in touch with his inner bat, I'd say no.

Furry by technical definition reffers to either an anthropomorphic animal or an anthropomorphic animal fan. Just substitute the term "funny animal" which was coined by the comics industry. Furry is funny animals, but more speciffically it is funny animals made for furry fans.

Saying "let's study this some more" is a time-waster cop out.

What exactly did you mean by it? It sounded like a dissuasion, especially the "time-waster" bit. And how exact is it a cop out?

However, what internet research? Can you point me to the URLs of such prior studies?

And have you thoroughly examined furbid over a period of time to show such money trails?

I tried explaining this in the evolution comment, but you dismissed it.

If this site were focused on whales (real ones) and not furries, as a hypothetical situation. Can you see the difference between two members who said;

"We know whales are mammals, let's stop trying to debate if they are fish."

and

"Let's not study whales."

If you don't understand this example, I will not explain farther.

Just one of many.

http://www.visi.com/~phantos/furrysoc.html

Is your Google broken?

* "sexual encounters -while spoken of frequently- are far more rare than common." (Which disproves what you've said>

*Even the near-50% of Furries who are monogamous report a rather non-judgemental attitude towards the public behavior of Furry Fandom in general. (which was in reference to how displays of hugging, etc -- yet it's not a measure of how much public behaviour is happening within the Furry Fandom)

And that's about it...

Did you just pluck the first study you found off Google, or is your Google actually broken? I'm guessing the former, but you never know these days...



I'm speaking more like, in general, what sells at cons. Ask Random T. Furryartist what type of work they get the most requests for, and it's sexual.



See the bold? 'Nuff said. You're making generalisations without much basis. Your posing to me a hypothetical situation and then guessing the answer.

I could ask Random T. Furryartist what type of requests they get, but it wouldn't be enough to draw a Random T. Conclusion. I'd have to ask, say, 100 Random T. Furryartists to get something Random T. Tangible... And even then, there are still Random T. Limitations with doing that.

And I could do something like that, but a) I don't know many Random T. Furryartists, nor have ever gone to and nor will I ever go to a FurryCon, and b) I doubt many Random T. Furryartists would be happy to participate in a survey run by someone from CYD. I might get a Random T. LAWSUITE!

See the bold? 'Nuff said. You're making generalisations without much basis. Your posing to me a hypothetical situation and then guessing the answer.

I doubt many Random T. Furryartists would be happy to participate in a survey run by someone from CYD.

See the bold? 'Nuff said. You're making generalisations without much basis. Your posing to me a hypothetical situation and then guessing the answer.

If you are sincerely objective in this endeavor, and not just planning another Fur bash smear, I do believe that your results will parallel those of The Sociology of Furry Fandom, referenced here in a previous post.

I doubt many Random T. Furryartists would be happy to participate in a survey run by someone from CYD.

I get the impression that this is what certain someone's here fear: that a CYDer will do an objective analysis, and reach a conclusion that reinforces The Sociology of Furry Fandom. Especially if the CYDer in question (that means you, Goofy) actually has some idea of what he's doing.

Stop argueing about it; just do it.

Although I am somewhat biased against the whole furry subculture (and my position will be something I'll definately discuss briefly in my final report so there's no misgivings about where I stand), I do pride myself upon being able to look objectively at things very often.

Just to prove my Google isn't broken.

All you Furries who ever put pen to paper and drew your own anthopomorphics are stealing the food right off Estrugo's table. Don't you feel guilty right now? Of course, it never occurs to him that he may not have that "viable career" as a professional cartoonist because his art just isn't good enough.

Nowadays, furry fandom is a strange amalgamation of people who are there not only because of their fondness for anthropomorphic animals, but for many other reasons. Some angsty teens think it's a sort of contestatary movement, and join it simply to be different. Some socially handicapped people think it's a haven against the evil society that marginalizes them. Some perverts think it's the perfect cover-up for their fetishes. Some other people consider it the unique source of sex available for them. And, of course, there are those willing to use to their own benefits. I think there are many other reasons to belong to this fandom, other than the mere fondness for anthropomoprhized creatures.

However, I'm surprised at Simo's somewhat eccentric interpretation of my text, quoted on my earlier entry. My attempts to tell "this is just what I've gathered from my own experience, nothing else" became a sudden resistance to 'new ideas' from an elitistic, academical high-nosed pseudo-artist who lives from anthropomorphics, coupled with a sudden attack to my own skills as an artist.

Should the fandom have kept like this, I'd still consider myself a 'furry', I wouldn't be typing these words and you wouldn't be reading them; and I'd focus my efforts to draw more comics featuring my funny animals, knowing that the chances to have a viable career as a funny animal/anthropomorphics artist would be higher than they are now.

Of course, my point of view is biased, since I am a cartoonist and love drawing funny animals. But, supposing you are on the fandom only to enjoy anthropomorphics, and not to 'create' them, I'd consider the number of professional-level artists drawing furry stuff would be higher because there would be a larger market willing to pay good money for good quality anthropomorphics, either comics (mainstream or not), literature, or roleplaying games.

Note: Emphasis Added

Indeed it does, and, no, it does not involve intoxicants of any kind. First one question: is English your second language? The reason I ask is this: "...haven't participated on it because...". Now, you did this before: "...supposing you are on the fandom..." Confusing "on" for "in" is peculiar, to say the least.

I also think it would be a good idea if you would take a look at the entire article as it eventually developed, and not just a brief snippet from Fox Underground. A post to an on line forum has to be brief, and as a consequence, points are left undeveloped. See the whole thing here: This Judgemental Little Business.

Should the fandom have kept like this, I'd still consider myself a 'furry', I wouldn't be typing these words and you wouldn't be reading them; and I'd focus my efforts to draw more comics featuring my funny animals, knowing that the chances to have a viable career as a funny animal/anthropomorphics artist would be higher than they are now.

Of course, my point of view is biased, since I am a cartoonist and love drawing funny animals. But, supposing you are on the fandom only to enjoy anthropomorphics, and not to 'create' them, I'd consider the number of professional-level artists drawing furry stuff would be higher because there would be a larger market willing to pay good money for good quality anthropomorphics, either comics (mainstream or not), literature, or roleplaying games.

Note: Emphasis Added

I'm sorry, but I've done my damnedest to look at this from every angle, but I always come back to the same conclusion: this is a self pitying whine.

"But, supposing you are on the fandom only to enjoy anthropomorphics, and not to 'create' them, I'd consider the number of professional-level artists drawing furry stuff would be higher..." Translation: How dare those Furries presume to participate in the creative process of their fandom. How dare they compete with us! How else am I to understand this?

Got it? All righty?
Good boy!

Say WHAT!?

Did you really READ that?!

that pros run away from furrydom <...> but because the furrydom's reputation is so sickengly low on the industry that if -anybody- ever hears you've been somewhat involved with it you run a serious risk to end your career. Many, MANY of those artists around 50 by now regret what they did when they joined the furry fandom on its early days.

In case you were wondering, the character depicted on the Welcome Screen is a three-tailed Nogitsune. To those of us affiliated with Furry Fandom, it is known as a "Fursona" -- a type of alter ego/imaginary friend/on-line role-play character/subject of fan-pics and/or fan-fic, etc. Mr. XYZ has generously contributed use of this picture to the <...> Project.

I'm not trying to "win" anything. I can understand being tired of it all, and, finally, there comes a point when the only thing left to say is: "I agree to disagree".

But you knew that already. :wink:

Have I ever told you guys just how HUEG my penis is?

Have I ever told you guys just how HUEG my penis is?

One picture is worth a thousand words. :lol:

The internet is all about winning, isn't it?

Have I ever told you guys just how HUEG my penis is?

One picture is worth a thousand words. :lol:

..or in his case, ten pixels.