Crush...Yiff...Destroy!

m_estrugo · Prattler Joined: 13 Nov 2003 Posts: 189

I think furry fandom could have been a geeky fandom like any other, and could have enjoyed a much broader appeal to the outer world if it had been handled more efficiently.

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.

I’ve got reasons to think that the original petension from those who ‘created’ the fandom in the late 80s-early 90s was to have a place to talk about comics, games and movies featuring anthropomorphized animals, and have a chance to find people with similar interests to create and share all kinds of geeky merchandising around them, like roleplaying games, literature, animation movies, comics, and why not, erotic material.

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.

The furry fandom would be just a specialization of a mainstream interest -many people out there enjoy 'funny animals'-, and, therefore, there would be different degrees of implication on the fandom, from mildly interested people to those whose sole reason to live are anthropomorphized animals. It wouldn't be a niche market, nor it would attempt to be a world apart, as I perceive it is now. I also think many professionals could dedicate to drawing furry stuff without having to worry about their careers on the mainstream market, unlike what happens now.

Unfortunately for me and my interests as a cartoonist, things aren't like this. Why the fandom became into what it is now?

I'd say we can trace the problem back to the early 90s, when the furry fandom was still coalescing. I wasn't there to watch it, but I suppose the early components of the furry fandom failed to define it with precision. This is surprising, because as early as in 1992, a certain "Dr. Pepper" wrote an extremely deep and accurate definition of the fandom of the time, including furry fans, anthropomorphics, comics, roleplaying and furry literature.

That imprecision chases the fandom until the present, and allows people with, let's say, alternative interests to get in and use it for their own sake.

The process is similar to what would happen if we try to define a tomato field. A tomato field would be, originally, a field with tomato plants. However, an observer would say that, together with the tomato plants, there are traces of weeds, therefore, those should be included on a comprehensive definition. Some people would complain and say that weeds aren't a necessary part of a tomato field, some other would also say they ARE present on this tomato field, and so on. The final result is that a tomato field is a field of tomato plants with some weeds.

Now, let's do a little experiment. Copy the paragraph above on your text editor, replace all the "tomato" with "furry"; "field" with "fandom"; "plants" with "fans" and "weeds" with "sexual fetishes" and you'll understand how nonsensical and harmful for the fandom was this imprecision.

Continuing with my example, the weeds, knowing they're a component part of a 'tomato field', settled down and outgrew the tomato plants. For an outer observer, our original "tomato field" is now a... weed field with some weak traces of tomato plants!
The problem would have been easily solved on the beginning if those interested on the 'tomato field' would have been careful to take the weeds out before they settled down. In other words, if those caring about the fandom put a limit to the quirks, if they have said, "this is what the furry fandom is about, and this is not". But they didn't. Or, if they did, they hadn't enough strength to impose their criteria,until it was too late.

Unfortunately, the 'weeds' included several furry leaders, people whose opinion was respected, with defacto power on the fandom, but more interested on its sexual aspects than in anything else. The name "Mark Merlino" comes to my mind.

Mark Merlino was one of the most active early members of the furry fandom. He shared his house with other four roomates in what seemed to be a furry, gay version of a hippy commune. (I can't tell for sure, I've never been there and only have heard about this place thru second-hand comments). Merlino was active promoting the furry fandom on sci-fi conventions (the logical outlet for a fan of imaginary creatures?), kept one of the first 'furry BBS' around (BBS were a proto-internet back on the first half of the 90s) and he was the chairman of the ConFurence, the first independient furry convention. On pre-Google times, Merlino's weight on the early fandom is out of question.

Merlino was a roleplayer. In the early 80s, he frequently played at least one of such games, called "Other Suns", a roleplaying game about conquest and social relationships including human beings and several extraterrestrial species. (They may be extraterrestrial, but they SURE look like… anthropomorphized terrestrial animals). This game was uncommon since those social relationships would include sexual intercourse, probably one of the reasons why Merlino was so fond of it.

One of the species featured on the game were the 'skiltaires', extra-terrestrial mustelids with the ability to read people's minds or somesuch, Merlino’s claimed own creation, and thus his favorite species to roleplay that game with his friends. And the interest towards this species became an afition, and the afition became a vice, and the vice became an obsession that would end fagociting his own personality, to the point where he couldn't tell the difference between the role-playing universe and the real world. Through the 80s and early 90s, he gradually modified his behavior, like he was in an alternate reality where rules were totally different, taboos didn't exist and creatures only lived to satisfy every other's libido.

I don't know what made Mark Merlino lose his senses. Maybe it was because Merlino's real life was dull in comparison with the fantastic Shangri-la where his roleplaying character lived. Maybe it was the ambience within his home, surrounded by other people willing to play along. Or there were other factors I ignore. What it's true is that, on a certain moment, Merlino adopted the philosophy he created for the skiltaires to himself and his real life, and then used the relatively new furry fandom as a vehicle to find like-minded people. Hence the gradual sexualization of anthropomorphic characters, hence the increase on furry erotica on the early 90s, hence the strong emphasis on sex on the early FurryMuck (situation that would change on the second half of the 90s, under the fears for the then unpopular Communications’ Decency Act); Mark Merlino may have been the first person who saw something else than "funny animals" on the fandom, and, since he was in a predominant position as the chairman of the ConFurence, THE gathering convention for furries on those times, his philosophy and idiosincrasy were accepted as an integrant part of the fandom and the con itself. It's the birth of the concept of 'furry as a lifestyle'.

Those interested on the artsy side of the fandom didn't care too much at first. They had their quirks, too, and accepted Merlino's antics supposing all fandoms have a fringe side, and any kink was acceptable if kept indoors. Unfortunately to them, Merlino encouraged extravagant behaviors on his quest to find like-minded people and, well, lure them to his bed. Merlino is homosexual, and, in order to satisfy his libido according with his character's philosophy, he promoted ConFurence on Californian gay circles, veering away from usual sci-fi environments.

So then, we come to the point where 'weeds' start to outgrow tomato plants. Merlino attracted people to the early fandom’s pillars, ConFurence and FurryMuck, not for the art, or the roleplaying, or the comics, but because it was an open place for sex, according with his newly adapted philosophy, they were tolerant and open-minded (a.k.a. amoral), and, eventually, you could find people sharing your…sexual tastes, regardless of how twisted they were.

Professional (and amateur) artists weren't less than thrilled with this new situation. Some of them went out silently when they couldn't tolerate it anymore, like Dan Flahive, on a clever move that would save his professional career. Some others tried to adapt to the new circumstances but were overwhelmed by its consequences, like Daphne Lage. Some others decided to stick with it, but the decaying reputation of the furry fandom would close their doors outside the furry fandom, a TINY niche market.

I don't know when it happened, but one day, someone (...) decided that "furry" fandom had everything in the world with Sexuality. This assertion, when first stated, struck myself an many other fans, as ridiculous- laughable. So much so, in fact, that we didn't acknowledge the threat that this idea posed.... Starting with ConFurEnce 3 (...), fandom changed forever. A certain individual with a presence on (...) "furrymuck", decided to extend free invitations to ConFurEnce to anyone who had a character on FurryMuck... (...)
They were, for the most part, people whose presence on furrymuck was purely of a sexual nature. When these people came to CF3, they brought their interests with them- whips, dog collars, condoms, chains, and S&M relationships began to be more plentiful than comics at ConFurEnce.

This situation reached its summit on ConFurence 8, in 1997, probably the most advertised furry convention of all the times. Its consequences still chase the fandom. It was the final straw for some of the assistants, and a wake-up call for the most self-aware artists. The threat behind this new interpretation of the furry fandom was clear and defined. But things would soon get much worse. The media soon found a mine to be exploited on this bizarre side of the fandom, and teams of journalists visited furry conferences (Like ConFurence 9 and 10), and interviewed some furries that spread the image that furry fandom was lights years away from the notion of a mere gathering of people liking anthropomorphized animals.

The media didn't create any new problems on the fandom, but acted like a resonance box for those already present, growing in importance as the media's interest on the fandom grew from simple colums on the inner side of a page on newpapers to full articles with plenty of pictures and dedicated TV programs. This media coverage also had a calling effect, attracting people with 'alternative' sexualities (but not lifestyles, as they insist on calling their quirks) since they portrayed an 'anything goes' image about the fandom.

At this point, there were three groups or factions on the furry fandom. The "furry fans", who were in the fandom just because the art, the "lifestylers" (defined by alt.lifestyle.furry FAQ as a person with an important emotional/spiritual connection with an animal or animals), and people in the middle, who didn't care about factions or definitions and were there just for the fun.

As I've mentioned before, artists and fans of the furry fandom were outraged by the invasion of the 'lifestylers', and reacted differently, on a disorganized way. One of the most serious attempts to structuralize the artists' response to defend their interests was the Burned Furs.

The Burned Furs was a movement by anthropomorphic artists that wanted to go back to the pre-CF3 times (citing Blumrich's quote mentioned above), or at least try to make art the most important aspect of the fandom. Their purpose was certainly laudable, but their execution was awful. Instead of trying to, let's say, raise the fandom's standards by commiting to the creation of high-quality art, comics, literature and roleplaying games, they engaged on a dialectical war with those they clearly disliked, trying to pressure them to make them feel uncomfortable and force them to leave. Their original popularity, very high on the movement's first months of life, gradually faded away as some people wrapped around it and used it to throw their bile and insult other people.

As seen retrospectively, the Burned Fur's strategies were flawed from the beginning, and it's more than obvious that they could have used the sinergy they had on the movement's first moments to take better decisions to save the genre, like splitting away from the already tainted 'furry' name and define themselves with another name to put a prudent distance between them and the furries. However, some of them decided to stay and fight for the 'furry' tag, thus making any distinction between the genre and the 'fandom' impossible.

The battle was lost from the beginning. None of those artists had a noticeable reputation outside the furry fandom, so their words and actions lacked weight, and wouldn’t echoed outside the fandom’s tiny limits. In fact, it just served for some point-and-laugh websites (a new Internet phenomena) to, precisely, point and laugh at their futile attempts to “clean their fandom”.

It's sad to admit, but the current situation of the furry fandom and its isolation is rooted on the ineptitude of the early furries, who couldn't find a precise definition and direction for their fandom; on the behavior of people like Mark Merlino and his friends, who envisioned the fandom as a lustful world of fantasy; and on the lack of sense of many so-called lifestylers, unable to cope with reality, either because their own decision or because they are mentally handicapped people; and on the sensationalist media coverage, that put those two last groups on the limelight. The unability to solve the problem by those artists that saw a valid means of expression on anthropomorphic creatures is the final straw.

Whatever happens in the future with the genre and the fandom is something beyond my eyes, but it's interesting enough to analyze it on a future article.

The New Meat · Vociferator Joined: 03 Jun 2003 Posts: 403

Seems to me this is way too long and well-thought-out to be a mere forum post. Have you considered actually sending this to Mitch to post as an article?

Sean · Qualificator Joined: 05 Nov 2003 Posts: 26

Seems to me this is way too long and well-thought-out to be a mere forum post. Have you considered actually sending this to Mitch to post as an article?

I second that emotion.

Dogthing · Venter Joined: 26 Oct 2003 Posts: 257

I second that remotion.

DA · Vociferator Joined: 06 Jun 2003 Posts: 355

I agree, that would make an ace article.

ZenZhu · Vociferator Joined: 22 Mar 2004 Posts: 669

Nowadays, furry fandom is a strange amalgamation of people who are there not only because of their fondness for anthropomorphized animals, but because of many other reasons. Some angsty teens think it's a sort of contestatary movement. Some socially handicapped people think it's a haven against eeeevil hyooomans. Some perverts think it's the perfect cover-up for their fetishes, and some other people consider it the unique source of sex available for them. I think there are many other reasons to belong to this fandom, other than the mere fondness for anthropomoprhized creatures.

Probably the most succinct and comprehensive definition of furrydom from a non-or-former furry's view ever typed out.

I'd say the current situation of the fandom is this confusing because the early components of the furry fandom didn't agree on what the fandom was supposed to be.

I'd agree with this, coupled with the reluctance of a large number of furry fans to suggest anything might be unwelcome, for fear of being labeled as "intolerant." This reluctance probably comes from a variety of sources, but most of those reasons probably stemming back to the overwhelming need for acceptance. Even folks that would be inclined to disagree with the idea that a diaper fetish goes hand-in-hand with furrydom is silenced by the fear that those around him might turn on him or isolate him from the crowd if he dares to voice his opposition.

Unfortunately, the 'weeds' included several furry leaders, people whose opinion was respected, with defacto power on the fandom, but more interested on its sexual aspects than in anything else. The name "Mark Merlino" comes to my mind.

You know, the bit on Merlino and some of the furry superpowers over time lead to an interesting thought. When you think about the big movers and shakers in furrydom, it's actually small wonder it became what it is today.

On one hand, you have the folks that were talented artists that also enjoyed the genre of funny animals. What does it take to develop the skills these early folks had? Time. Dedication. Effort. These folks were typically people with steady jobs. Some were in animation (one I was familiar with worked as an animator on The Simpsons). Others were in military service or computer careers. All in all, they had jobs and lives that allowed them to attend the occasional con, or socialize online in the evenings or something. But, they didn't have lives that really allowed them to dedicate themselves to furrydom.

Many of the movers and shakers, however, like Merlino, had something the others lacked when it came to involvement with the fandom... the drive. I'm not talking about the drive to succeed in work, have a nice home, or anything like that. I'm talking about the drive to build furry up... the drive that comes when you live, eat, and breathe something that most would consider excessive. If pursuing personal excellence, like Tiger Woods and golf, or Bruce Lee and martial arts, it can be a phenomenal thing. But, people can also expend this kind of drive on things that don't amount to much, or are ultimately detrimental. Addicts go to great lengths to feed their addictions. People cheating on their spouses go through some pretty arduous measures to get a piece of ass without getting caught. In the case of the people who were/are obsessed with furrydom, the time, personal effort, and even expense required to organize a con that will ultimately fulfill their wishes to gather around people that reaffirm and fuel their lusts and delusions can be something they are willing to invest themselves in.

So, in a way, it's unsurprising that the deviants and the obsessed were able to take over furrydom. The people that were into it, but also heavily grounded in reality, simply didn't have the time or means available to become a furry superpower... as they had careers, family, etc. Only the furry freaks that would happily quit a job if it didn't allow them time off to go to a con..... the people for whom furry WAS practically career, family, etc.... had at their disposal the time and drive to put these things together. And, of course, they're going to serve their own interests in doing so.

To become a furry bigwig... to dedicate so much of yourself to maintaining a huge archive like VCL, or organizing a con, or keeping something like FurryMUCK running..... it's almost a prerequisite to have no life outside of furrydom.

IceCat · Coadjutor Joined: 31 Oct 2003 Posts: 87

Merlino was a roleplayer. In the early 80s he designed at least one of such games, called "Other Suns". He didn't only design the game, but the game's whole background universe, complete with several species of 'extra-terrestrial' creatures.

Having been a RPG player, and collector, for over 20 years.
I can tell you right now that "Other Suns" was not deseinged by Mark Merlino, it was actually designed by a astrophysicsist named Nikoli Shapero. The game was and still is noted for being almost unplayable, primarily to the overly complex mathematics needed to play the game.

Here's a link to the games offcial website:

http://www.macrophile.com/~ermine/html/other_suns.html

This game has somewhat of a fetish status withen the Furry fandom, and there are still people who actually play it. Also while you are looking though the site, take a look at the chacacter sheet, and look for the "Arts of Love" skills.
http://www.macrophile.com/~ermine/html/os_char_sheet.html
Now you know whay the game has that reputation as being a fetish these days.

As for the Skiltaire, they were created by Merlino, as a race of telepathic, mustilids with anteni. The first known one was created as a mascot for the now defunct Cartoon Fantasy Orginization, a anime club of the late 80s-early 90's, also known as the CFO, she was known as Fanta.
However over time the skiltaire evolved into the inevitable fuckable furry species that we all know today.

Here a pic of what they look like: http://us.vclart.net/vcl/Artists/Mark-Merlino/swimsuitS.jpg

Later.

IceCat

m_estrugo · Prattler Joined: 13 Nov 2003 Posts: 189

Having been a RPG player, and collector, for over 20 years.
I can tell you right now that "Other Suns" was not deseinged by Mark Merlino, it was actually designed by a astrophysicsist named Nikoli Shapero. The game was and still is noted for being almost unplayable, primarily to the overly complex mathematics needed to play the game.

I stand corrected. I'll correct that on the final version of this article.

Also while you are looking though the site, take a look at the chacacter sheet, and look for the "Arts of Love" skills.
http://www.macrophile.com/~ermine/html/os_char_sheet.html

Do I read....

ARTS OF LOVE SKILLS
Cunnilingus
Fellatio
Flirtation
Foreplay
Simple Copulation
Seduction

....as an -integrant- part of this sheet, as important as combat or stealth skills?
No wonder why Merlino and his roommates would get so engaged on this game.

Kadius · Venter Joined: 10 Feb 2004 Posts: 254

Do I read....

ARTS OF LOVE SKILLS
Cunnilingus
Fellatio
Flirtation
Foreplay
Simple Copulation
Seduction

Secret Ancient Supreme Technique: Premature ejaculation!

Sorry, couldn't help myself. :(

m_estrugo · Prattler Joined: 13 Nov 2003 Posts: 189

Just a quick message to say I've reviewed the original article and sent it to Mitch to be published on the 'Articles' section of CYD.

Rangifer · Recusant Joined: 10 Jul 2004 Posts: 9

Nowadays, furry fandom is a strange amalgamation of people who are there not only because of their fondness for anthropomorphized animals, but because of many other reasons. Some angsty teens think it's a sort of contestatary movement. Some socially handicapped people think it's a haven against eeeevil hyooomans. Some perverts think it's the perfect cover-up for their fetishes, and some other people consider it the unique source of sex available for them. I think there are many other reasons to belong to this fandom, other than the mere fondness for anthropomoprhized creatures.

Probably the most succinct and comprehensive definition of furrydom from a non-or-former furry's view ever typed out.

Agreed. And note that the sort of mass hysteria that packs all those things together in one "furry fandom" named packaged is cause mostly by the constant bashing of the fandom, for either good or bad reasons. Everybody is so busy laughing that nobody stops to ask what are they actually laughing at. :-)
But I've red many times before the theory that furry lacked a good initial definition, and it still makes little sense: it cannot be first noticed 20 years after the movement was born that it lacks a manifesto. If nobody defined it, it's because nobody could. We're talking of something which is born from the people chatting about their favourite toons, not in some art academy where one master can say "now let's take a sheet and write down our agenda to create a new genre of art".
To be more clear: I think there was not an intention to create something which would grow to the actual size, not even in the wildest dreams of the "old guard" fans. Furry was supposed to be just an entertaining evening meeting topic, perhaps with the occasional exchange of pictures between fans... who would have bet it could become a community of thousands of people, with huge art archives like Yerf or the VCL and thousands of $ flowing around at conventions?
Estrugo seems to suggest that first generation furries should have organized themselves expecting the future growth, but I think this was simply impossible. All the odd people poured in before actual furry fans understood how much powerful the concept of "adult-oriented anthro animal" was.
If all those sick people became attracted by this strange concept of "anthros for adults" right at the same time, and in such a deep way, there ought to be something in anthro animals which makes them really suitable, as a genre, to feed illusions (of being another species, being misunderstood geniuses, being persecuted, etc. etc.).

Later,
Scale

ZenZhu · Vociferator Joined: 22 Mar 2004 Posts: 669

We're talking of something which is born from the people chatting about their favourite toons, not in some art academy where one master can say "now let's take a sheet and write down our agenda to create a new genre of art".

To be more clear: I think there was not an intention to create something which would grow to the actual size, not even in the wildest dreams of the "old guard" fans. Furry was supposed to be just an entertaining evening meeting topic, perhaps with the occasional exchange of pictures between fans... who would have bet it could become a community of thousands of people, with huge art archives like Yerf or the VCL and thousands of $ flowing around at conventions?

That much is obvious. When the first person wrote a book about people having adventures on some distant planet with all kinds of weird lifeforms, they didn't figure it would pave the way for what sci fi is today. No one thought rock music would last long. These things just evolve on their own.

Estrugo seems to suggest that first generation furries should have organized themselves expecting the future growth, but I think this was simply impossible. All the odd people poured in before actual furry fans understood how much powerful the concept of "adult-oriented anthro animal" was.

I think what Estrugo was getting at.. at least how I interpreted it... was that there was never a point at which the furry community in its early stages.. not its infancy.. but even 10 years ago.. failed to take a look at what was starting to take shape and set at least a few limits. No one could have laid out a groundwork saying "this will be furry.. this will be to... this won't be." But, as the rise in furry=diapers, furry=gay attachments came about, furrydom never stepped back and said "Okay, folks... office meeting here. We've been getting a lot of folks into diapers and a lot of very openly gay folks in our fold. Nothing wrong with that, people. What you do or how you live is your business. But, let's set a few guidelines here. While you may like wearing diapers, or while you may be gay, those have nothing to do with fuzzy animals. Okay? We'll draft up a memo just to make sure everyone gets the word."

Think of furrydom like a city park. There's lots of different reasons people go there, and lots of things to do. Everyone there, though, has some sense of general standards... what you do and don't do at the park. Now, say the furry freaks are like a biker gang. They come to the park, do donuts on the basketball court with their bikes, use the play center as a make-out area, hold a kegger on the picnic grounds, and hold chain fights in the sand box. In this analogy, no one ever went up to the bikers and said "Guys, if you want to play by these rules, you're welcome here. If not, then leave."

If the bikers want to down brewskis, do donuts, and hold chain fights.... they can do it elsewhere more appropriate. But, when anyone comes to the park, they're expected to abide by the rules.

As Furry Park became more and more known as a place for the biker gangs to congregate and party, no one stepped up to suggest that what they were doing was inappropriate. Furry City Police showed up and tried to break up the party, but were booed out of the park by not only the bikers, but by the citizens of Furry City that had become passe to their presence. Then, when the Channel 5 news started doing segments on how Furry City Park had become overrun with bikers, and how folks might want to stay away from the park, everyone was shocked. Property values around the park started dropping, and all of the citizens were mystified as to why.

No one could have predicted what furrydom would become. It would have been impossible to lay a groundwork that prevented what has happened. BUT..... it would have been possible to reel things in and do a little damage control at some point as it became evident where things were going. (i.e., Lola Bunny is furry.... sticking your dick in a Lola Bunny plush..... not so much)

Overall, though, it would have been like fighting the tide. Since furrydom tends to define virtually anything with an animal as furry.... humping a Gund can slip in. Cartoons with animals, books with animals, stuffed animals, screwing stuffed animals, screwing real animals..... of it's got TEH AM1NAL5, it's furry. And there's just not enough people with the cajones to say "You, with the crotchless hot pants and fake tail.... go put on some jockey shorts, or get the hell out of our con." No.. that would be intolerant.

If all those sick people became attracted by this strange concept of "anthros for adults" right at the same time, and in such a deep way, there ought to be something in anthro animals which makes them really suitable, as a genre, to feed illusions (of being another species, being misunderstood geniuses, being persecuted, etc. etc.).

But, see, all of the furry freaks didn't flux in at the same time. If they had, things might have been a marked enough change to have caught more attention and been dealt with. The furry freaks have trickled in under the radar, steadily claiming more territory as the non-freaks leave.

Let's face it... you have to be a bit of a freak... not a deviant one, but at the very least kind of a geek-freak... to be 40 years old and devoting a lot of time to going to cons, roleplaying, and such. Not that that's inherently bad. But, when you have a large group of adults dressing up in animal costumes, scritching each other, and gushing over The Lion King...... you're not exactly looking at a cross section of your average adult population. So, one one side, you have some of the younger furries that enjoy the genre.. but, as they grow older and take on more responsibilities... they find they are unable, and, often, unwilling to devote as much time to furry pursuits in the past. They start thinking about careers, family... life outside of the fandom. On the other hand, you have the folks that are, in a way, stuck in Neverland. Now, not all older adult furries are inherently bad or anything. But, as you go up the age ladder in furry fandom, I wouldn't be surprised to find you get a lot more people that a bit more on your freak side of the spectrum.. simply because, to some degree, I figure you have to be a little abnormal to be a 45 or 50 year old avid furry. Not that anyone must conform to social norms..... I'm just saying that your more "normal" furry fans will ebb away as they grow up. The "less normal" ones will remain in furrydom.... and be a lot more inclined to accept others that are less-than-normal to downright deviant.

So, as furrydom has taken on more and more freakish elements, what was a fandom consisting largely of geeks has, over time, shifted in its geek-to-freak ratio. With the freaks starting to outnumber and overpower the geeks, it becomes a more freak-friendly place which opens the doors more and more to fresh, new freaks.

Furry apartheid? :)

South Africa was colonized by the English and Dutch in the seventeenth century. English domination of the Dutch descendents (known as Boers or Afrikaners) resulted in the Dutch establishing the new colonies of Orange Free State and Transvaal. The discovery of diamonds in these lands around 1900 resulted in an English invasion which sparked the Boer War. Following independence from England, an uneasy power-sharing between the two groups held sway until the 1940's, when the Afrikaner National Party was able to gain a strong majority. Strategists in the National Party invented apartheid as a means to cement their control over the economic and social system. Initially, aim of the apartheid was to maintain white domination while extending racial separation. Starting in the 60's, a plan of ``Grand Apartheid'' was executed, emphasizing territorial separation and police repression.

Furry Fandom was colonized by the Geeks and the Freaks in the twentieth century. Early Geek domination of the Freak descendents (known as Otherkin or Yiffy) resulted in the Freaks establishing the new colonies of the Purple Nurple and Tapestries. The discovery of shared sexual fetishes in these lands around 1990 resulted in an Freak invasion which sparked the Burned Furs. Following independence from the Geeks, an uneasy power-sharing between the two groups held sway until the 1995, when the Internet was able to make the Freaks seem like they had a strong majority. Strategists in the Freaks invented "tolerance" as a means to cement their control over the economic and social system. Initially, aim of tolerance was to maintain Freak domination while extending mundane separation. Starting in the 2000's, a plan of "Grand Tolreance'' was executed, emphasizing sensibility separation and repression of standards.

Wayd Wolf · Vociferator Joined: 06 Oct 2003 Posts: 522

We can argue this all we want but what it boils down to is the following:

1. All things not forbidden are compulsory especially if it pisses off the so-called mundanes.

2. Familiarity breeds contempt so feel free to keep coming up with ever more inane pasttimes and fetishes.

3. Only the mundane world is up for criticism and all others of kindred spirit may do whatever the fuck they wish and that's cool.

Self-righteous, I'm a victim, you can't judge me, yadda fucking yadda.

We all know this.

Granted we've got two excellent writers here capable of more verbage than I've ever managed to do coherently and without severe amounts of whiskey.

But we all know how far things have gone. Question becomes, can we ever salvage anything of furry, reclaim it and make it the fun, trippy, eccentric group of anthropomorphics fiction appreciation that it once was for oh-so-short a time?

I think not.

Not that it stops me from writing altogether, but it's not anything to do with furry anymore.

ZenZhu · Vociferator Joined: 22 Mar 2004 Posts: 669

I agree that furrydom is beyond saving. By the time the Little Dutch Boy gets his finger in the dike (no, not dyke), the wall has sprung several more leaks. To top it off, someone keeps grabbing the Dutch Boy and pulling him away from the wall, telling him trying to stop the water is intolerant. (And then luring him to their hotel room with promises of candy and funny stories.)

Personally, I don't even think furrydom is worth saving. Let the freaks have it. I'm not here at CYD in a sense of "Har har.. lookit teh furry gooberz!" or "The fandom's a mess! What can we do?" But, it's just such an interesting phenomenon that it's hard to look away.. like a car crash or something. It's simply fascinating to ponder what happened, what is happening, what will most likely happen, and how it all happened.

It's also interesting to watch the furries piss and moan about the image furydom has, and then either a)not do anything about it, or b)turn around and do something that contributes to its bad image. There's a certain morbidly comedic value to someone dressed in a horse costume with a fake phallus in bondage gear carrying a Meeko plushie with an SPH saying "Why are you calling me a freak????"

The really interesting thing is the answer is right under their nose. They could turn things around.. but they don't want to.

m_estrugo · Prattler Joined: 13 Nov 2003 Posts: 189

But I've red many times before the theory that furry lacked a good initial definition, and it still makes little sense: it cannot be first noticed 20 years after the movement was born that it lacks a manifesto. If nobody defined it, it's because nobody could. We're talking of something which is born from the people chatting about their favourite toons, not in some art academy where one master can say "now let's take a sheet and write down our agenda to create a new genre of art".
To be more clear: I think there was not an intention to create something which would grow to the actual size, not even in the wildest dreams of the "old guard" fans. Furry was supposed to be just an entertaining evening meeting topic, perhaps with the occasional exchange of pictures between fans... who would have bet it could become a community of thousands of people, with huge art archives like Yerf or the VCL and thousands of $ flowing around at conventions?

Manifesto?
Is it necessary to subscribe a manifesto to be part of a model railroad club?
"The Denver HO Model Railroad Club is an organization whose
members share an interest in model railroading." Is that a manifesto?
Does that manifesto include those who secretly believe they are the reincarnation of a LMS Midland Compound 4-4-0? Or those who actively engage on sexual behaviors with a vapor engine? Or those who would love to see a Northern 4-8-4 getting intimate with a Baldwin 1050? Or those who -dress- like a "Consolidated" 2-8-0?
If you approach ANY railroading club, model or not, claiming any of the above, and you seem to be serious... in the best of the cases, you will be referenced to a psychiatrist. And in the worst of the cases, they'll kick you off with a 'get lost, you pervert' as a farewell.
Was that so hard to achieve on the early furry fandom?

Rangifer · Recusant Joined: 10 Jul 2004 Posts: 9

Manifesto?
Is it necessary to subscribe a manifesto to be part of a model railroad club?

I reverse your question. Why everybody still pretends that furry is a mere hobby, and should be like any hobbyists group, and should not host perverts because no other hobby has them... when it is obvious by now that furry is not a hobby?

It ceased to be so the moment somebody thought "let's see if I can use anthros to deal with adult-oriented subjects" and discovered it worked incredibly well. Then you no longer had a hobby, but the spark of a cultural movement, and there is no turning back. It's all a matter of how much powerful the media is: you can't use your model trains to state that you hate the society and want to have nothing to do with humans, but the concept of anthro animal, well, seems designed to fit that message perfectly. So, people wil use it, and will use it to state right that.
That's why I mentioned a manifesto, but it wouldn't have worked still, as well as any attempt to set limits like those mentioned. What does it mean to set limits in such a situation? It's a void idea. Neither hobbies nor subcultures have a central authority. Why it is still repeated over and over that, if the mayority of furries doesn't do anything against the presence of "freaks" then the mayority is wrong?
Both the moralism of the past and - with all respect - the mocking attitude of this forum are wasted time, like they have been for the last 30 years. It is a visible fact that furry hasn't died and won't die anywhere in the visible future, whatever its fame. If you - and I'm speaking for artists, like Estrugo and others - really want something more respected, the only event which could really shake the situation is furry artists getting serious and rational about all the freaky topics instead of ranting about them. It is easy to laugh of zoophilia, theriantropy, cluelessness etc., but what about making art about the social reasons which lead to them? Or what about picturing societies where such things are accepted, like satyrical artists of the past did whn they wanted to point out stupid things? Why nobody does that, say, in a comic strip, even in a single picture?
It is too easy to just tell that some people are losers and that furry "should" be a family-friendly hobby. It is not, the fact prove it. So demonstrate why it should be so.
You could bet any sum that people will keep using furry to tell they are not humans unless the freaky topics are dealt with and dissected by serious furry art. They will keep doing so because inside the fandom there is literally no better message than that at the moment, no other message which uses anthro animals so deeply. So it's up to furry artists to find a better one if they really want to dignify the fandom, but the way leads through the freaky topics, not backwards or around them. Dont' wait in hope to see furry revert to a hobby or disintegrate in public loathing, for neither will ever happen...

Later,
Scale

m_estrugo · Prattler Joined: 13 Nov 2003 Posts: 189

I reverse your question. Why everybody still pretends that furry is a mere hobby, and should be like any hobbyists group, and should not host perverts because no other hobby has them... when it is obvious by now that furry is not a hobby?

Because it's that obvious now. I don't know if it was so obvious when this fandom started to take form, in the mid 80s. Or at least, that's the way I perceive it.

I've already said on an earlier article which were the factors that led to the birth of the furry fandom, at least from my point of view:

1) Fondness of animals, always present on the mankind.
2) "Funny animals" as popular culture icons, as seen on the XXth century.
3) Deconstruction of the "funny Animals" genre, as seen on the underground comics movement from the 60s-70s.
4) Evolution of "funny animals" into vehicles of mature, deep expression by some artists in the 80s.
5) Explosion of comics featuring funny animals, liberated from their 'kids only' tag, thanks to the TMNT.
5) Creation of the 'furry fandom' as a fandom devoted to those funny animals, from the silliest classic cartoons to the most sophisticated creations.
7) Popularization of the fandom, based on its presence on the Internet.

It ceased to be so the moment somebody thought "let's see if I can use anthros to deal with adult-oriented subjects" and discovered it worked incredibly well. Then you no longer had a hobby, but the spark of a cultural movement, and there is no turning back.

I disagree with this statement.
I don't think that the usage of anthropomorphic animals on mature themes AUTOMATICALLY means there's a cultural movement behind.
I don't think Mr. Art Spiegelman wanted to start a revolution with Maus. He just wanted to express himself and found the animals he used on his comic worked well enough as a metaphor.
Nor I don't think there's any revolution behind the work of some European artists, very fond of funny animals, like Ben Radis & Dodo, Jano, or the most recent Juan Garrido and Juanjo Díaz Casales. All those authors have been producing comics featuring anthropomorphic animals on mature themes time after time for the last 25 years and there hasn't been any signs of a 'cultural revolution' or the stuff. They're just artists, they enjoy working with anthropomorphics, and in Europe, they're widely recognized. In fact, Blacksad, the creation of the two latter artists, won two awards on Angouleme, the most important comics convention in Europe, concretely the award to the best comic series (by jury) and the award to the best comic book (voted by the public).

When I wrote that article, I only wanted to say that the furry fandom could have become the ideal launching ramp for a literary genre (or subgenre, or whatever) able to create equally bright creations; a support network to attract artists and writers and help them to climb higher and further, to put them on a better position within the mainstream market; a talent factory.

Being a fan of this genre myself, and a creator, too, I'd LOVE to see more high quality stuff. But the fandom didn't evolve that way, even if it seems evident to me that the fandom was created with that purpose, "an organization whose members share an interest in anthropomorphic characters."

So then I asked to myself why things changed. And thought, and analyzed, and searched for references, and read early newsgroup posts, and thought why people said those things, and why those others acted like that, etc, etc. And thew final result is a lament for something that could have been and wasn't.

You may consider my attempts to understand the fandom's evolution a waste of time, but I don't, because I'm curious and I like to understand why things go wrong, to avoid falling on the same mistakes in the future.

Paul · Venter Joined: 01 Feb 2004 Posts: 215

It's all a matter of how much powerful the media is: you can't use your model trains to state that you hate the society and want to have nothing to do with humans, but the concept of anthro animal, well, seems designed to fit that message perfectly. So, people wil use it, and will use it to state right that.

You seem to say that people "using furry to tell they are not humans" is somehow inherent in anthropomorphics? Frankly, that's bollocks. "Furry" did not degenerate to it's current sad and sorry state because a lot of people found a much needed outlet for societal frustration. It's a result of a lot of twisted wankers appropriating "furry", running amok and reinforcing one another, because no one ever said stop. Had they not found "furry", something else might very well have suffered from their fucked-up-ness, which would then have found another outlet and thus another shape.

Estrugo has already mentioned some European artists who make funny animal comics more or less aimed at adults - there are plenty more. The French comics tradition holds numerous examples, from 1950s classics by Raymond Macherot to contemporary adult-oriented comics by Lewis Trondheim. And yet, France has no such thing as a furry fandom. If some humans simply needed to use anthropomorphics to express their percieved non-human-ness, there would be a furry fandom anywhere where "funny animal comics for adults" are found.

I suspect the lack of a furry fandom (or any other comics-related fandom) in France might be the fact that comics, as a medium, are an accepted part of the cultural mainstream there. Fandoms tend do be created where there is no wide acceptance of it's subject. (Case in point: science fiction seems to have a fandom almost everywhere, and it just happens to be a litterary genre that is often reviled and neglected by "serious" litterateurs.) And in the US, comics, cartoons etc, are generally still considered "kid's stuff". Hence the fandom, and hence the fandom's initial need to say "this vehicle can carry adult themes".

For the record, I couldn't care less if furry fandom reforms, reverts or disappears up it's own spooge-filled arse. I do share Estrugo's annoyance that something that could have been a vehicle for constructive development of a genre or artform is now just a big atrocity parade, but ultimately I don't think furrydom is anyway powerful or influential enough to do any real damage to "ordinary" people's enjoyment of a comic, cartoon or video game that features anthropomorphic characters. "Furry" is not a cultural movement, at most it's a small, itchy pimple on the behind of popular culture featuring anthropomorphic animals.

Both the moralism of the past and - with all respect - the mocking attitude of this forum are wasted time, like they have been for the last 30 years.

Like Estrugo, I don't think being on this forum or reading the articles on CYD is "wasted time". I'll repeat myself from another thread: Observing furry fandom is like watching a car crash that the victims enjoy being in - it's just so fucking bizarre, I want to find out why, and this place is very helpful. Incidentally, this is also probably the funniest forum I've yet encountered. The LMAO-factor alone is enough to justify the time spent here.

Rangifer · Recusant Joined: 10 Jul 2004 Posts: 9

I've already said on an earlier article which were the factors that led to the birth of the furry fandom, at least from my point of view:

And I agree about all of them. But I think the present is, in spite of appearences, a 100% logical consequence of that past. The silly and immature part of the fandom exploded over controversial topics, but instead of being erased by deeper thoughts over the same topics, it rules, because there is not a serious part of the fandom willing to touch them or even consider they might be natural topics for furry.

I don't think that the usage of anthropomorphic animals on mature themes AUTOMATICALLY means there's a cultural movement behind.

That's right the problem: there should be one. Instead there's only its half-aborted embryo. There is an extremely powerful tool on the loose, free for stupid people to employ, only because nobody sets a standard by using it in better ways. Neither Maus nor Blacksad nor even Fritz the Cat wished a "revolution" - but neither of them touched topics so "untouchable" as those the furry fandom shows today. Such topics cannot be left into the hands of fanboys.

So then I asked to myself why things changed. And thought, and analyzed, and searched for references, and read early newsgroup posts, and thought why people said those things, and why those others acted like that, etc, etc. And thew final result is a lament for something that could have been and wasn't.
You may consider my attempts to understand the fandom's evolution a waste of time, but I don't, because I'm curious and I like to understand why things go wrong, to avoid falling on the same mistakes in the future.

No no, I never meant that: I did exactly the same thing, and for exactly the same reason. What I wanted to point out is that that's only half of the story. I reconstructed the story of the other side of the fence - that of weird people and clueless fanboys attempting to state what they wanted from furry - and thought what, after all those flamewars, is still unattempted.
My own final result was pure astonishment seeing that all attempts to explore and break down rationally the controversial topics, from teenage angst to perversions, came to a sudden end in 1998. The year in which they were wiped out exactly by that mass lament, the idea that they were not things the pursuers of a "simple hobby" should be concerned about...
Then everybody may draw his own conclusions.

Later,
Scale

Rangifer · Recusant Joined: 10 Jul 2004 Posts: 9

You seem to say that people "using furry to tell they are not humans" is somehow inherent in anthropomorphics?

Inherent, not; but possible and fully in-topic, yes. It's not a new idea if you think of "The Jungle Book". If one can draw an anthro and say "that's my real self" and you don't agree, then counter-state it with other art. So far, from artists which wanted to critique the fandom, I have seen only easy retoric instead of rational counter-statements.

"Furry" did not degenerate to it's current sad and sorry state because a lot of people found a much needed outlet for societal frustration. It's a result of a lot of twisted wankers appropriating "furry", running amok and reinforcing one another, because no one ever said stop.

Such explaination has been given for years and never proven, but it cannot be proven in fact. Time to try a different approach.

And yet, France has no such thing as a furry fandom. If some humans simply needed to use anthropomorphics to express their percieved non-human-ness, there would be a furry fandom anywhere where "funny animal comics for adults" are found.

Not all societies have the same ups and downs. If furry is mostly an USA phenomenon, as it seems, then I see a lot of reasons to look at the USA society to find out why furry has degenerated right there. It might be a symptom of something important.

I do share Estrugo's annoyance that something that could have been a vehicle for constructive development of a genre or artform is now just a big atrocity parade,

I sure understand, but I feel pretty weird seeing many artists share this view. I miss to see what else is needed to produce that missing good art, besides of the will to do so right now.

Later,
Scale

Quantum Coyote · Coadjutor Joined: 12 May 2004 Posts: 89

To: nobody in particular

For christsake, just keep fighting the good fight. Good anthropomorphic art works (I'm not saying clean, I'm saying good, which could be clean or not) have and still do exist, as I hope you know. Just stay the fuck out of the furball. Don't use a furry alias for your art. Don't publish in furry-only circles even if that means chopping your market in half. But it doesn't seem likely that things will turn around? It didn't seem likely that we would defeat Hitler or survive the Cold War, and those were much harder battles. I believe that anthropomorphics have a valid and ongoing place in our global society.

Rankin · Vociferator Joined: 03 Jan 2004 Posts: 727

You are all forgetting the importance, and the cultural balance brought to us by Kit and Kay Boodle.

Kadius · Venter Joined: 10 Feb 2004 Posts: 254

You are all forgetting the importance, and the cultural balance brought to us by Kit and Kay Boodle.

*clicks the link... utterly speechless*

Tailgunner · Prattler Joined: 28 Oct 2003 Posts: 175

Page does not seem to be loading for me.

EDIT: Nevermind, my firewall was blocking it. I made the mistake of disabling it to view that page. My trust into that firewall program will never be shaken again.

Rangifer · Recusant Joined: 10 Jul 2004 Posts: 9

You are all forgetting the importance, and the cultural balance brought to us by Kit and Kay Boodle.

Which, if you look at Gene Catlow too, makes you scream with fury: "This guy is willing to spend thousands of hours and draw hundreds of pages of such stuff? :shock: And no better artist cares his own work enough to do so? What the fuck are the other waiting for!! :x Where are they? Why aren't they answering the classy way? Why in the heck they aren't drawing twice that much pages of their own comic? Why there is not a furry comic which offers reflections over sex in our days so deep and new that it makes this hideous stuff burn by self-combustion??"

Paul · Venter Joined: 01 Feb 2004 Posts: 215

"Furry" did not degenerate to it's current sad and sorry state because a lot of people found a much needed outlet for societal frustration. It's a result of a lot of twisted wankers appropriating "furry", running amok and reinforcing one another, because no one ever said stop.

Such explaination has been given for years and never proven, but it cannot be proven in fact. Time to try a different approach.

Well no, it can't be proven. It's just one of several theories... but it's the one that IMHO seems most apt. OK, so a lot of people have problems with society and other human beings... no news there. And some of those people now gather on internet forums and profess to each other that they're really not humans, but animal spirits or somesuch, and complain to each other about TEH EVIL HYOOMANS. But I think it only took this form by coincidence. They could have found another outlet, declared themselves to be, oh, Amish or something, renouncing evil modern society and go to live peacefully without participating in the society they claim to hate. It's just that the "I'm an animal" thing is so easy... they obviously aren't animals, but it's something they can claim while sitting in front of their computer eating crisps and drinking cola... there is no demand from their "brethren" that they actually go and live like animals... whereas, say, converting to the Amish faith would require a lot of psychological and physical effort and a true faith in what they do. "Furry" is the responsibility-free, easy way... perfect for people who want instant gratification without effort. (Well there is no gratification really, but they get to bitch about the rest of humanity to someone who's willing to lap up their bitching.)

I do share Estrugo's annoyance that something that could have been a vehicle for constructive development of a genre or artform is now just a big atrocity parade,

I sure understand, but I feel pretty weird seeing many artists share this view. I miss to see what else is needed to produce that missing good art, besides of the will to do so right now.

I see your point, but I don't think there's any good art missing.

The "problem" is that good artists adressing the issues furry fandom want adressed - the evil humans - very likely won't happen. An artist will get an idea, then choose a means of expression... be it a statue, a poem, a film, a comic, a funny animal comic... there are a lot of talented people making good funny animal comics, ranging from professionals who get their works published in book form by big publishers and who sell huge amounts of books, to amateurs who make self-published zines or webcomics... they make crime stories, romance, satire, whatever... but hardly anyone but the diehard furries are interested in the themes that abound in furrydom.

Ultimately, the good artists can't "save" furry fandom and aren't supposed to, either. Most of them have nothing to do with it in the first place. Furry fandom is probably the only fandom which has succeded in alienating the very people whose works it was built upon. Quite a feat, really.

m_estrugo · Prattler Joined: 13 Nov 2003 Posts: 189

...if you look at Gene Catlow too, makes you scream with fury: "This guy is willing to spend thousands of hours and draw hundreds of pages of such stuff? And no better artist cares his own work enough to do so? What the fuck are the other waiting for!! Where are they?

Well.... In my opinion... it's all a matter of perspective. Furry fandom fails to attract, or keep, professional level artists because it's not an attractive market.

Given my own style's quirks, drawing a standard comic page takes me about 9 or 10 hours of careful work, and I can draw one of my strips on 4 hours. That's a LOT of time. Of course, I could do things much easier and draw faster, but I prefer not to do it, 'cause that's the way I like to do things... and, actually, that's one of the basements of my actual style. Whether if my style is better or worse than other people's is beyond the purpose of this message.

Now, drawing so much is pretty cool when you do it 'just because', but I'm on a moment of my life where I have to take care of myself, feed myself, buy clothes, etc. One of the reasons why I don't have a stable relationship on this moment it because they're expensive to keep, and my incomes are barely enough to survive.

It's been told that comics pay bad, and that's true, but furry comics are EXCEPTIONALLY badly paid, WHEN they are paid, because they cater a DIMINUTE market.

I can tell you because RadioComix published a comic by me a few years ago on Furrlough, the only decent level comics anthology, and they paid me $12 per page a 10-pager comic. So I got $120 for approximately 80 hours of work. Yes, that's 1.50 per hour, and the check arrived several months after the comic was published. And, unfortunately, I can't afford losing that much time anymore. So it's either investing that time doing other stuff that gives me ten times that money per hour or drawing furry comics. With these rates, if I wanted to pay the rent drawing furry comics, I'd have to work 375 hours, or 23 days, Monday to Sunday, from the moment I wake up until I go to bed. Food, clothes and other goodies (I'm a smoker) would come apart.

In my case, I can't invest as much time as Mr. Albert Temple to draw comics. The only things I can do is stuff like the aforementioned Alice Otter, that appears once per week. Anything beyond that, and I lose.

ZenZhu · Vociferator Joined: 22 Mar 2004 Posts: 669

But I think it only took this form by coincidence. They could have found another outlet, declared themselves to be, oh, Amish or something, renouncing evil modern society and go to live peacefully without participating in the society they claim to hate. It's just that the "I'm an animal" thing is so easy... they obviously aren't animals, but it's something they can claim while sitting in front of their computer eating crisps and drinking cola... there is no demand from their "brethren" that they actually go and live like animals... whereas, say, converting to the Amish faith would require a lot of psychological and physical effort and a true faith in what they do. "Furry" is the responsibility-free, easy way... perfect for people who want instant gratification without effort. (Well there is no gratification really, but they get to bitch about the rest of humanity to someone who's willing to lap up their bitching.)

I think there's several things at work with this phenomenon. First of all, it's easy to "beautify" one's self mentally as an animal. With a few exceptions, almost all animals, even the "ugly" ones like warthogs, have a certain appeal. This appeal is further enhanced when depicted in a cartoony style. Disney's Puumba is a fair bit more appealing than a genuine warthog. So, even if you fancy yourself as a warthog-esque person, making it cartoony can make even that look appealing. This doesn't even begin to factor in the appeal of your typical self-proclaimed avatars of wolves, foxes, felines, and other animals that are considered ultra-appealing/cute/cool/etc.

If you don't consider yourself reasonably attractive, it's pretty hard to liken yourself to a fictional human character. You could make yourself up to be some anime-type bishounen (pretty boys, usually with silver hair) for EverQuest or something, but you'll never really relate to that character as anything other than an imaginary character if you're 38, balding, and about 350 minus your standard-issue geek fanny pack/utility belt.

But, make yourself to be a wolf out in your mind, and it's so foreign that it's much easier to convince yourself that it is an extension of yourself. Even a fat wolf morph, when drawn right, can have a certain appeal. And since these things don't really exist, it's hard to look at a wolf morph that's maybe based on someone's body type and say "Nahh.. that doesn't look a thing like them." On top of this, there is the already existing shamanistic concept of animal totems. Of course, in furrydom, they go in the face of every shamanistic tradition I've encountered. Typically, the idea is the animal chooses you, not vice versa. But, furries convince themselves they've always had a connection with wolves, foxes, horses, etc. No one has ever felt they had a lifelong connection with an earthworm, a sea cucumber, or a basalisk lizard. Just because you've always thought a certain animal was cool doesn't mean that animal has "chosen" you.

On top of this, new age pseudo-religions have taken the concepts of spirit animal guides and oversimplified the concepts of how one determines what those animals are. Forget fasting and physical effort intended to push one's body until the mind reaches out beyond it. Forget soul-searching and facing one's inner demons. In the modern age of 6-second sound bytes and 30-second pizzas, effort and time are the bunk. Faux shamanistic religions that have evolved in the past couple of decades tell you to just look around your living space and see if there are any animals you see as a recurring theme in your decorating choices. With this approach, it's no wonder everyone's spirit animal is a wolf, or fox, or mustang, or dolphin. Not too many people are going to decorate their living room with wildlife paintings of naked mole rats. Obviously, that means there aren't too many naked mole rat spirit guides out there. Even the spirit world operates on the ideas of what's cool and attractive. Yup. Yup. Yup.

On the other side of the coin, you have what Paul brought up... folks looking for something easy to believe in that sets them apart from the crowd. "Furry religion" is basically like the modern bastardization of Wicca. To your die-hard, serious Wiccans, it's not about dressing gothy, acting bitchy, and wearing a vial of bat's blood on your charm bracelet. Serious Wiccans will even acknowledge that Wicca developed around 1950, I think, as a conglomeration of philosophies and ideals from witchcraft, Druidism, and the like......rather than insisting it predates Christianity. Modern, bastardized Wicca, however, just takes a jumbled mix of philosophies and ideals from other religions and dumps them together in a way that a person following the bastard form can feel potent and superior to the "mindless sheep" following more traditional organized religions.

"Furry religion".. or philosophy.. or whatever name you want to assign to the idea that Paul described... is really just kind of a mishmash of Native American religion, other shamanistic traditions, Druidism, and a few other things sprinkeled in to perpetuate this idea that one is "more in touch with nature" and/or more "awakened" or "enlightened" than us mere hy00mans. With any of the genuine religions, there are certain "rewards" to be reaped by pursuing its ideals.. heaven, nirvana, being surrounded by virgins, etc. But.. there are also great responsibilities that the follower is called upon to bear. Love thy neighbor. Do unto others. The Eightfold Path. Fasting for Ramadan. All kinds of things.

As Paul mentioned, with furry philosophy/religion, one is not really called to the carpet to account for their ideals. They can sit around on the 'net, enjoying the fruits of humanity's achievements, and talking about how evil humanity is. Since one cannot really prove or disprove whether or not one is wolf soul that got derailed into a human body.. and somewhere there's a wolf with a human's soul.. like some kind of Animal Planet production of Freaky Friday.... oh.. wait.. they called that Brother Bear... anyway, since that cannot be proven or disproven, really, beyond the context of arguing philosophies and theologies, it's an easy philosophical gig to play. One can sit back and feel smug and superior to the rest of the human species, because they're oh-so-enlightened as to how evil hy00mans are a disease on the planet... but without really being called upon to do anything other than drink Yoo Hoo and bitch.

If you'll recall the thread where Ebon threw his two cents in, I cited how the whole "Only I and a handful of others understand how terrible hy00mans are" is an ego trip. He responded by denying it reflected any kind of superiority complex, stating he felt lowlier than maggot. Really, this is an ego trip. It's the approach of "I am superior to others because I realize how inferior we are." Any way you slice it, it's still claiming that one is more awakened to an idea than those around them. By "recognizing" the "inferiority" of humanity, one has special insight and superiority over the rest of humanity. It's the same kind of tactic gothy punks use to say "No one else understands how tragic and dark life is.... only I see it." and feel smug and superior to everyone.

As Paul said, this sort of rebellion and seeking a haven from the mental assaults of daily living could have just as easily taken another form in a lot of people.. becoming Wiccan or Amish or Hindu or Emo or something. But, furry offers a mental boost without a lot of responsibility to account for one's beliefs. It's easier to rebel against one's predicaments in life by saying one is above the fray, humans are bad, and living off of the fruits of the human world than to submit to a philosophy that would suggest they have no room to bitch if they're not doing something about it.... a philosophy that dictates action is better than words. You can't convert to Judaism without some committments from yourself. You can't call yourself Hindu and really believe your own words if all you've done is buy a statue of Shiva for your entertainment center. But, you can call yourself a wolf in human's clothing and then sit back and do little more than bitch about your lot in life.. since you're misunderstood and trapped in a human husk from which death is the only escape. And animals fuck around in real life... so, bedding anything that moves is just "acting on your inner animal." No one is going to suggest that you and your misplaced tiger soul should go and live in the jungles with your tiger kin. That's just crazy talk.

As far as furrydom, though- bane of humanity, or pathway to utopia?

Insignificant little cross-section of geeks and pervs, or cultural revolution?

My vote?

Cartoon animals.

Wayd Wolf · Vociferator Joined: 06 Oct 2003 Posts: 522

If you don't consider yourself reasonably attractive, it's pretty hard to liken yourself to a fictional human character. You could make yourself up to be some anime-type bishounen (pretty boys, usually with silver hair) for EverQuest or something, but you'll never really relate to that character as anything other than an imaginary character if you're 38, balding, and about 350 minus your standard-issue geek fanny pack/utility belt.

Well, this forum has a habit of expressing some pretty silly ideas of beauty that are right in line with the mass culture furries complain of. So there's not a lot of innocence right here.

Furries need to understand that beauty is inside, in their actions, not their words, and their actions are ugly and just as fucked as most everyone else these days in society.

I am so fucking sick of hearing how ugly people think they are, and that being used as a reason for acting the way they do. Most people are baseline average. Get used to it. So what?

"Furry religion".. or philosophy.. or whatever name you want to assign to the idea that Paul described... is really just kind of a mishmash of Native American religion, other shamanistic traditions, Druidism, and a few other things sprinkeled in to perpetuate this idea that one is "more in touch with nature" and/or more "awakened" or "enlightened" than us mere hy00mans. With any of the genuine religions, there are certain "rewards" to be reaped by pursuing its ideals.. heaven, nirvana, being surrounded by virgins, etc. But.. there are also great responsibilities that the follower is called upon to bear. Love thy neighbor. Do unto others. The Eightfold Path. Fasting for Ramadan. All kinds of things.

Furries are not possessed of beliefs. They are possessed of UNBELIEF.

If you'll recall the thread where Ebon threw his two cents in, I cited how the whole "Only I and a handful of others understand how terrible hy00mans are" is an ego trip. He responded by denying it reflected any kind of superiority complex, stating he felt lowlier than maggot. Really, this is an ego trip. It's the approach of "I am superior to others because I realize how inferior we are." Any way you slice it, it's still claiming that one is more awakened to an idea than those around them. By "recognizing" the "inferiority" of humanity, one has special insight and superiority over the rest of humanity. It's the same kind of tactic gothy punks use to say "No one else understands how tragic and dark life is.... only I see it." and feel smug and superior to everyone.

Humans DO suck. They are bad generally. To quote Quinn, the lost and crazy alien leader of the 1953 invasion in War of the Worlds: The Series, "I have nothing really against humans, but as a group they stink. I say, kill them all."

Well, not really. But some days things can make you wonder. The recent targeting of children by Chechen rebels anyone?

The point is that to get along with human society you need to understand the following:

1. When your only tool is a hammer, all problems appear to be nails.

2. The nail which sticks up gets pounded down.

3. The only tool in the box of human society is a hammer.

Now, furries spend much time fretting about all this and instead of getting tough and carrying themselves as if they understood this, they fucking stick up and beg to be pounded down.

And worse, they talk of rights and whatever, but have not the slightest backbone to back it up.

They never do learn that being tough means never having to whine for anybody to protect you, to get people to treat you like a sainted victim, etc. If you are perceived as tough, tough people having a bad day generally will not fuck with you. Too much trouble.

Furries never seem to grasp that they act like bully bait and when they inevitably draw notice, they merely retrench like total fanatics, getting ever worse, sticking up more and more, untill... here comes the hammer of society.

No, they certainly don't understand what every animal already inately grasps and goes by their entire existance. Well, grasps, if you let that cover instinctive behaviours.

As far as furrydom, though- bane of humanity, or pathway to utopia?

Insignificant little cross-section of geeks and pervs, or cultural revolution?

My vote?

Cartoon animals.

Furrydom is a time killer and guaranteed pass to social oblivion. It distracts from taking one's life seriously, and from dealing with the everyday problems of life. It magnifies those problems in the minds of its participants, it reinforces weak-kneed whiny behaviour, it encourages lazy thinking and gross negligence in one's own life. It keeps its own with jealous determination and makes those who try to grow and leave feel bad and wrong.

But the alternative is, in a clear mind, much preferable. Easy dealing with life. The same sort of acceptance of the day as others have. Ho hum, SSDD, whatever, DILLIGAF attitude so many manage. No, life's not perfect, but furry is not a solution. It's a deranged shelter from dealing with reality.

SLaitila · Prattler Joined: 03 Jun 2003 Posts: 165

In my opinion, Furry is an appendix to the wide range of artistry. Not a market nor a fandom. As a fetish, it's just a form of xenophilia, as is preferring sexually people of different race, while considering their own dull or bland. Or wanking to Bridget the Midget films. My point is, that furry is not That Important. The name is only a mere justification for feeling different because of small quirks. The religious/spiritual side of furry is fubar, as are skinny long-haired norwegian black metal fans who think they are vikings, while being just as annoying, self-centered and sensitive as the worst part of furry.

dead-skunk · Recusant Joined: 08 Sep 2004 Posts: 2

So, I take it you're all really unhappy.

I used to help run a Furry BBS. It was a part of Fidonet, as well as Furnet and Purrnet. We had different message areas for the role plays and only a few were open to sexual situations. At one point I was playiing 26 characters simultaneaously (but I had a day or two to think up responses then) and those plays went in all directions, with characters in different areas doing what was appropriate to that area. If I have a point here, it's that that BBS, much like Furry, was not run by a dictator, it was run by the users as much as the sysop, and as such, attracted a good crowd (the bad ones being thrown off pretty quickly). It was maybe nort democratic, so much as anarchic, but people took responsibility for their actions.

Furry has the same, and they've tried to keep the underage out of places where... Umm... There are some things I don't want to see, and I use my freedom to choose _not_ to visit, or not to visit again.

Are some of you nice people proposing to reform the fandom? Do you think kinks are unique to Furry fandom? Should we stick to reruns of Care Bears? Things appropriate for those zoned out on anti-depressants? I don't think you've said that... But...

So far all I've seen are words spilled all over the place, but I have no idea what your collective message is. I think I did see something about wanting a diaper change, though?

Against my better judgement, I'll submit this.

Paul · Venter Joined: 01 Feb 2004 Posts: 215

So far all I've seen are words spilled all over the place, but I have no idea what your collective message is.

Collective message? Surely you jest, sir. This a forum for debate, not a politbureau. We're doing the internet equivalent of having a chat over a pint down the pub.

And for the record, I'm a happy camper. This place is fun!

dead-skunk · Recusant Joined: 08 Sep 2004 Posts: 2

I was told by a couple of people that this is where all the red blooded 'normal' types (like them) congregated to goose step and hold out their final solution to cleansing the fandom of all but pure care bear centaur love (no innapropriate touching now, Hugs and Tugs).

I thought it was physically impossible to walk that way, so I came to see.

Maybe this isn't as bad as it at first seemed (and I did have two remarkable sales furs convince me to come here, after all).

As you can tell from my name, I'm rather a middle of the road person.

Rankin · Vociferator Joined: 03 Jan 2004 Posts: 727

Nah, d-s. They'll let any freaks in here. Hirtes, Donny, myself... ;)

Dogthing · Venter Joined: 26 Oct 2003 Posts: 257

I'm always a pretty happy guy and I think my fellows here will agree with me, will they not? :)

Paul · Venter Joined: 01 Feb 2004 Posts: 215

I was told by a couple of people that this is where all the red blooded 'normal' types (like them) congregated to goose step and hold out their final solution to cleansing the fandom of all but pure care bear centaur love (no innapropriate touching now, Hugs and Tugs).

It sounds like an idea, but that's not really what's happening. There are as many opinions here as there are forum members. BTW, if you haven't already, I recommend you read the articles and other material, especially the "About" text, on CYD's main page.

Um, I'll try to answer the questions you asked in your first post:

Are some of you nice people proposing to reform the fandom?

I'm not. And IIRC, no one on the forum are. I think we overall regard furry reform as impossible or at least improbable. That's not to say some here wouldn't like to see it.

Do you think kinks are unique to Furry fandom?

No, of course not. But furrydumb seems to be pretty unique in that A) the percentage of weird and twisted is much, much higher than anywhere else; B) the fucked-up-stuff that would be fine in private is often paraded around in public; and C) the fandom as a whole has a wholesale acceptance of anything and everything that goes on. At least, that's the general take on things here. If there's any collective message at all to be found here, it's probably that we're trying to find out what went wrong. And have a few laughs.

Should we stick to reruns of Care Bears?

Not unless you personally want to. There are many good adult-oriented anthropomorphic comics, games, films etc out there, they just very rarely have anything to do with the fandom. They're made by people who aren't furries for people who aren't furries.

Well, I could go on, but there's lots of articles and posts here that say it better than I can. Have a look around the place.

ZenZhu · Vociferator Joined: 22 Mar 2004 Posts: 669

If there's any grand message here from the sentiment that permeates these threads is that furrydom really can't be saved. Therefore, there is no master plan for reforming furrydom. It does, however, provide a fasicnating topic to explore and try and figure out just where things took a turn for the worst - especially to those of us who have been familiar with it in one way or another since it really started congealing into something more than a few folks on BBSs and swapping drawings. Think of us as morbidly curious and probably more than a little masochistic historians, rather than the furry reform party.

The furries would like to think of us as goose-stepping around and claiming for the genocide of anyone that looks at a picture of Minerva Mink for more than 5 seconds, but we're really not. We just have the audacity to point out that the emperor has no clothes, or that the emperor needs to take a few more art lessons before claiming to be an art god, or that the emperor attained his status as an art god by basically pandering to the diapered macro hermtaur crowd. We just call it like we see it, and that's just not tolerant enough for the furries.

Kinks aren't unique to furrydom. Trekkies have their green slave girls and Klingon BDSM. Star Wars nuts have their Leia in slave gear fantasies. Furry is unique, however, in that it has blurred the line between kinks and what the "fandom" is centered around. With Trekkies, green women and kinky Klingons are on the periphery. It's not something you'll see displayed openly and proudly at conventions. Trekkies can agree that, while there may be some crossover between BDSM and the imaginary Klingon culture that suits those Trekkies into BDSM, the BDSM really has nothing to do with Star Trek. Furries, on the other hand, get all sortf of kinks and personal issues wrapped up in furrydom, so that you have things like "furry pride" (being gay, furry, and proud of both). There's nothing wrong with being gay, furry, or proud of either fact... but, in reality, being gay has nothing to do with being furry. So, furries are not unique in having kinks. They are unique in associating those kinks so closely with their furry hobbies that they come to consider the two inseperable.

Though it may be obscured by all of the sarcasm here, most of us, I think, take a "live and let live" approach. As long as no one's getting hurt or abused or whatever, we really don't care greatly what freakishness the furries indulge in on their side of the fence. That doesn't mean we can't sit on our side and laugh at their antics, however.

Don't think of us as Nazis. Think of us as these guys....

Rankin · Vociferator Joined: 03 Jan 2004 Posts: 727

Don't think of us as Nazis. Think of us as these guys....

I love those guys. :)

GoManVanGogh · Prattler Joined: 18 Nov 2003 Posts: 194

"There's nothing like good, clean, wholesome family entertainment at a furry-con."

"You're right, at a furry con, there's NOTHING LIKE good, clean, wholesome family entertainment!"

*CHORTLE!*

Rankin · Vociferator Joined: 03 Jan 2004 Posts: 727

"There's nothing like good, clean, wholesome family entertainment at a furry-con."

"You're right, at a furry con, there's NOTHING LIKE good, clean, wholesome family entertainment!"

*CHORTLE!*

:? :x :P :lol: :lol: :oops: :lol: :lol: :wink:

Wayd Wolf · Vociferator Joined: 06 Oct 2003 Posts: 522

Don't think of us as Nazis. Think of us as these guys....

"Why do we always come here?"
"I guess we'll never know."
"It's like some kind of torture,
to have to watch this show!"

Amazing how well that applies to furry.

m_estrugo · Prattler Joined: 13 Nov 2003 Posts: 189

Those two chars from the muppets really reflect my own position with furry fandom nowadays.
And, if you want to know how was my own relationship with it while I was INSIDE it, hear this little dialogue from them I found on my version of Mahna Mahna.

Ebonyleopard · Coadjutor Joined: 15 Sep 2004 Posts: 92

My thoughts on the furry fandom. I honestly have no thoughts about the furry fandom. I discovered "furry" (from my first time using the net and Webcrawler, yeah, that old thing, curious to see if I could find art on this internet thing that was similar to my own, and typed the most generic word I could think of to maybe get some hits, furry, and was blown away) back in 1996. By that time I had already drawn a total of 5 Extinctionors (spelled that way at the time) comics and was selling them in local comic shops for a buck.

So basically, the fandom itself doesn't motivate me on the whys of why I draw what I do, because I feel I would still be drawing the stories and characters I do with or without the knowledge of it. It is an interesting collection of people, I do gotta give you that. You got your really average normal people and you got your really freaky people. I suppose since I have such a short history with the fandom (and a very fortunate limited exposure with West Coast culture, where all the problems reported in the fandom seem to take place) I guess I don't get as worked up over how it's persceived since it never, to me, seems to be that way here on the East Coast.

My main concern with those that complain about the fandom, in the past tense with the rational that "If you forget the past you're doomed to repeat it", is it seems some get so stuck IN the past they are never able to move forward or become connected with the present.

Frankly, past issues of what furry was, I can care less. It's more to me about what, or how I can influence they way it is seen TODAY, so that it will have the positive effects I want it to in the future.. I think if some would spend as much time doing things today to create a positive attention getting image for furry related material, as they do rehashing past events and talking about people who are current none factors, save for the fact they are brought up by those who knew about the past, the fandom would have as negative image as it is perceived to have.

Think about it. If there were more artist using their talents to create more positive, more writers doing stories that don't have to resort to sex to make it interesting, and more sites spotlighting the GOOD things in furry, then the image would probably change, because more people would start seeing the good stuff and want to copy that, rather than the negative.

Frankly, and no offense to those that live out there, but I think it's got something to do more with the way Western US culture is lived, (and since that's where most of the early cons started due to the animation industry drawing more cartoonist out there), that's what influenced furry fandom the most. Living on the East Coast and only going to east coast cons, I honestly can say I've hardly ever personally witnessed any of the horror stories I've heard about old cons like Confurence (My first con was in 96). I'd say that if anything, the East cons seem to be becoming more and more tame and much like Anime/Sci Fi cons than the wild dens of sin I used to hear about on the West.

Of course, I could just have East Coast bias.

m_estrugo · Prattler Joined: 13 Nov 2003 Posts: 189

My thoughts on the furry fandom. I honestly have no thoughts about the furry fandom. I discovered "furry" (from my first time using the net and Webcrawler, yeah, that old thing, curious to see if I could find art on this internet thing that was similar to my own, and typed the most generic word I could think of to maybe get some hits, furry, and was blown away) back in 1996. By that time I had already drawn a total of 5 Extinctionors (spelled that way at the time) comics and was selling them in local comic shops for a buck.
So basically, the fandom itself doesn't motivate me on the whys of why I draw what I do, because I feel I would still be drawing the stories and characters I do with or without the knowledge of it.

Then, your motivations were the same than mine. I just like drawing animals, and searched for 'animals comics' on the web on 1995. And thus I found Furry Muck, and went there, and found about the SCFA. I thought furry fandom was the ideal place to find an audience for my funny animals, but not the main reason behind them.

Myself, I just like drawing funny animals and hope to do so for many more years, regardless of the fate of the furry fandom.

It is an interesting collection of people, I do gotta give you that. You got your really average normal people and you got your really freaky people. I suppose since I have such a short history with the fandom (and a very fortunate limited exposure with West Coast culture, where all the problems reported in the fandom seem to take place) I guess I don't get as worked up over how it's persceived since it never, to me, seems to be that way here on the East Coast.

On a recent chat I had with another poster of this forum, I heard the theory that furries tend to emulate the behavior and attitude of, let's say, their local pack leader, since it's their closest reference to the collective we call furrydom; those leaders act like modulators between the collective and the local furs.

Following this theory, it should mean that the attitude of a local group would depend on the local leader's quirks and tastes. Those groups that are led around a... quirky leader will grow on their quirkiness, while those around stable people will be more stable.

It's an interesting theory that needs more research, but it would help to understand why some zones are more prone to be warped than others.

My main concern with those that complain about the fandom, in the past tense with the rational that "If you forget the past you're doomed to repeat it", is it seems some get so stuck IN the past they are never able to move forward or become connected with the present.

I've noticed it too. Some people seem to be stuck in 1998, and picture the fandom as it was in that year. Things have changed, and, undoubtely, the fandom has changed too. There's lots of things to do before recovering the prestige this genre lost, but, so far, the results are encouraging.

Frankly, past issues of what furry was, I can care less. It's more to me about what, or how I can influence they way it is seen TODAY, so that it will have the positive effects I want it to in the future.. I think if some would spend as much time doing things today to create a positive attention getting image for furry related material, as they do rehashing past events and talking about people who are current none factors, save for the fact they are brought up by those who knew about the past, the fandom would have as negative image as it is perceived to have.

That's precisely one of my purposes. And am trying to do positive things. For instance, I don't know if you remember that, a few months ago, a folk showed up in this forum with a rather chopped English and accused CYD to be tha KKK. And that I had to act as a translator for both sides to explain both sides what they were saying to each other. :)
Well, believe it or not, I've befriended this person, and am now one of the administrators of the site he meant, probably one of the biggest furry communities around where English isn't the main language. And my thoughts and position about the fandom and which should be its purposes is influencing not only him, but all the people on that community, where... well... some are starting to believe I'm a folk with ideas worthy to be heard.

And, apart of that, I do my stuff, my piccies and my comics, though they hardly worth a mention, since they're more funny animal stuff than anything else. And my production is relatively scarce and has little audience, after all.

And I like it that way. :)

Ebonyleopard · Coadjutor Joined: 15 Sep 2004 Posts: 92

I don't consider myself a "furry" artist because, to me, it implies the only thing I can draw are like, foxes or wolves or something. I like to think of myself as a guy that can pretty much humanize any type of critter, be it mammal, bird, whatever, and to me, it's the challenge of doing that which makes drawing them so interesting.

As to 'saving' the fandom, I don't think you can save something that doesn't have a tangable body to save. It only becomes a fandom when you have a bunch of people with similar interest that chose to freely participate in doing things in a group of some type, be it by posting on image archives, gatherings, etc. The idea that it can be destoryed is silly to me because, what is there really to destroy. History alone has proven that there will always be an interest in humanized animals. There had been religions that used them. We read our children bed time stories about them. We are sold goods with them "I mean, how many peolpe had that "We are tiGGERS, mighty mighty tigers" them from Frosted Flakes in your head for a week?" Pro teams use furry suit mascots (which frankly, some fursuiters could teach them a thing or two about design).

So, I don't think the interest in it will ever go away. It's just a matter of what do we choose to focus on in it. If we spend more time focusing on the negative crazy stuff, then that's what is going to get the spotlight. The media though, will always focus on the crazy. it's what gets rating.

ZenZhu · Vociferator Joined: 22 Mar 2004 Posts: 669

My main concern with those that complain about the fandom, in the past tense with the rational that "If you forget the past you're doomed to repeat it", is it seems some get so stuck IN the past they are never able to move forward or become connected with the present.

I think you might be confusing their complaints as clinging to the past, when it's really comparing to the past. In it's youth in the 80s, furrydom was more centered around funny animals. If you had taken a camera crew to a con, you would have seen little more than fuzzy Trekkies. Over time, however, it transformed into what it is today at the hands of a growing number of fans that attach their personal agendas and kinks to furrydom to the point where they all seem too hard to separate. On top of which, furrydom as an entity has little desire to control these elements that give it a bad name.. even to the point of actively defending it. I would think very few people harbor the delusion that furrydom can ever return to the relative innocence it enjoyed in its infancy, so they don't pine for the good old days. But, those days do serve as a good contrast to what furrydom is today.

Think about it. If there were more artist using their talents to create more positive, more writers doing stories that don't have to resort to sex to make it interesting, and more sites spotlighting the GOOD things in furry, then the image would probably change, because more people would start seeing the good stuff and want to copy that, rather than the negative.

I applaud you for your idealistic view, but I don't think it's very practical. Sure, if there were more artists and writers with talent wanting to invest time in producing quality furry works, then things might clean up. But, the future of furrydom isn't largely in the hands of the artists and writers. Furrydom is interesting when compared to something like Star Trek fandom or Star Wars fandom in that the latter two are driven largely by the professionally produced works that folks are fans of. Much of furrydom, however, is fan-driven. Where as Star Trek is more by pros for fans, furrydom has a lot of its works done by fans for fans. As such, you get a wide array of fans.. from ones with professional-level skill to the downright talentless. But, if the talentless fans can scrape enough skill together to make a semi-coherent picture of Tails taking Sonic up the butt, the fellow fans will hail them as a hero. The closest thing is probably anime fandom and the whole doujinshi scene where fans produce works, but even the doujinshi seem to hold artists to some level of skill.

There's no real division between the producers and the fans. With Star Trek, you can point to Shatner, Nimoy, Takei, Stewart, Spiner, and company and say "Those are the guys we're fans of." There's a sense of division... "us" and "them." They stand apart in the minds of the fans. With furrydom, however, even the "stars" like Terrie Smith, Steve Gallacci, and Jim Groat are just kind of in the "us" crowd. There isn't a truly distinct mark by which everything is measured. With something like Star Wars, you can hold someone's fanfic in comparison to, say, Empire Strikes Back. In furrydom, however, the measure for fan works is basically other fan works. If furrydom could attract more folks to its cons, like Disney animators, character designers for Pixar, Don Bluth, etc... it might have a better chance of raising the bar.

But, then, fellow fans usually get shot down when they even suggest the bar needs to be raised. That would be "intolerant." This whole "tolerance" thing is one of the ways furrydom drags itself down. To even offer constructive criticism like, "Nice use of color, but the picture would benefit from a better balance of light and dark." is shot down by the masses as being unsupportive of someone's attempts to draw. Artists can have pretty thin skins, but many furries seem to be the worst of the lot, unable to accept anything other than sheer adoration of their first attempts at drawing. Since many of them these days are teens, they haven't matured enough to realize constructive criticism is what helps you see the shortcomings in your work, and help to overcome them.

Frankly, and no offense to those that live out there, but I think it's got something to do more with the way Western US culture is lived, (and since that's where most of the early cons started due to the animation industry drawing more cartoonist out there), that's what influenced furry fandom the most.

You know, I had never really thought of that. You may be on to something there.

mouse · Vociferator Joined: 13 Jul 2003 Posts: 740

There's no real division between the producers and the fans. With Star Trek, you can point to Shatner, Nimoy, Takei, Stewart, Spiner, and company and say "Those are the guys we're fans of." There's a sense of division... "us" and "them." They stand apart in the minds of the fans. With furrydom, however, even the "stars" like Terrie Smith, Steve Gallacci, and Jim Groat are just kind of in the "us" crowd. There isn't a truly distinct mark by which everything is measured. With something like Star Wars, you can hold someone's fanfic in comparison to, say, Empire Strikes Back. In furrydom, however, the measure for fan works is basically other fan works. If furrydom could attract more folks to its cons, like Disney animators, character designers for Pixar, Don Bluth, etc... it might have a better chance of raising the bar.

Well fans of mainstream shows, especially when talking about more specific like Star Trek or Star Wars..there is no creative outlet other than fan-fiction. So, in something like comic fandom or furry fandom you are going to see more fan-based stuff that the fandom is ..uh fans of. Thats the only reason I dont like comparing Furry fandom to say star trek fandom - one is a broad range of things, and the other is VERY specific.

Furry fandom is more like being a fan of a genre. You can actually create new things. Comic book fans dabble in drawing comicbooks and comic strips. People who like cinema may try writing scripts and doing short films. Same thing. Furry fandom has also had the line blurred (in the past) between fans and pro's because of the subject drew people who liked regardless of what they did. Thats why you DID have all these professional animators and comic people in furry fandom. They were involved in the fandom because they themselves liked funny animals - not just because the fans liked only thier works.

Furry fandom's main problem more than anything else is incompetence and laziness. I only know of two high-quality animated projects going on in furry fandom that will be worthwhile (so it seems) when they are finished and they are both being largely directed by individuals (Dean "Noogy" Dodrill and Adam Wan).... and its going to be probably years before they are even close to completion - and thats only if they arn't abandoned at some point.

ZenZhu · Vociferator Joined: 22 Mar 2004 Posts: 669

I think you boiled it down really well. I'd dare say that between incompetence and laziness, the laziness is the bigger factor. A lack of artistic talent can be overcome with enough desire and practice. IMO, anyone can learn to draw competently. Talent just makes it easier to learn, gives you a better eye for the whole artistic process, and separates those who can do it competently, and those who can do really well.

One of the biggest handicaps to furry art, I guess, is the number of folks that want to be able to pick up a pencil and get instant acclaim. With fans of something specific like Boris Vallejo's work or Art Leonardi's, people have a distinct measure for wanting to emulate their idols. Most people know artistic ability takes practice, practice, practice. Shawnte didn't attain his skill overnight.

Maybe it's not even laziness so much as a desire for instant gratification.

A lot of people take up some creative endeavor.. like art, music, writing, etc. When they're not good at it, and realize they have to work if they want to obtain the skill, they give up on it. Maybe many of the wannabe furry fan artists are the kind that aren't instantly good, and would normally be inclined to throw down their markers in despair. But.. some furry tells them they're very good... because that's what furries do.. they protect each other from the trials and tribulations of the real world.. like realizing you can't draw like Masamune Shirow the first time you ever hold a pen.

Ebonyleopard · Coadjutor Joined: 15 Sep 2004 Posts: 92

Well fans of mainstream shows, especially when talking about more specific like Star Trek or Star Wars..there is no creative outlet other than fan-fiction. So, in something like comic fandom or furry fandom you are going to see more fan-based stuff that the fandom is ..uh fans of. Thats the only reason I dont like comparing Furry fandom to say star trek fandom - one is a broad range of things, and the other is VERY specific.

Furry fandom is more like being a fan of a genre. You can actually create new things. Comic book fans dabble in drawing comicbooks and comic strips. People who like cinema may try writing scripts and doing short films. Same thing. Furry fandom has also had the line blurred (in the past) between fans and pro's because of the subject drew people who liked regardless of what they did. Thats why you DID have all these professional animators and comic people in furry fandom. They were involved in the fandom because they themselves liked funny animals - not just because the fans liked only thier works.

Furry fandom's main problem more than anything else is incompetence and laziness. I only know of two high-quality animated projects going on in furry fandom that will be worthwhile (so it seems) when they are finished and they are both being largely directed by individuals (Dean "Noogy" Dodrill and Adam Wan).... and its going to be probably years before they are even close to completion - and thats only if they arn't abandoned at some point.

I wish I had knowledge about animation. My schooling actually had nothing to do with the production of art really. Most of what I know and do is basically from self-teaching, disipline, and constant practice.

I wish I knew what it took to make an animation. Well, that and the patience.

Ebonyleopard · Coadjutor Joined: 15 Sep 2004 Posts: 92

I think you boiled it down really well. I'd dare say that between incompetence and laziness, the laziness is the bigger factor. A lack of artistic talent can be overcome with enough desire and practice. IMO, anyone can learn to draw competently. Talent just makes it easier to learn, gives you a better eye for the whole artistic process, and separates those who can do it competently, and those who can do really well.

One of the biggest handicaps to furry art, I guess, is the number of folks that want to be able to pick up a pencil and get instant acclaim. With fans of something specific like Boris Vallejo's work or Art Leonardi's, people have a distinct measure for wanting to emulate their idols. Most people know artistic ability takes practice, practice, practice. Shawnte didn't attain his skill overnight.

Maybe it's not even laziness so much as a desire for instant gratification.

A lot of people take up some creative endeavor.. like art, music, writing, etc. When they're not good at it, and realize they have to work if they want to obtain the skill, they give up on it. Maybe many of the wannabe furry fan artists are the kind that aren't instantly good, and would normally be inclined to throw down their markers in despair. But.. some furry tells them they're very good... because that's what furries do.. they protect each other from the trials and tribulations of the real world.. like realizing you can't draw like Masamune Shirow the first time you ever hold a pen.

This is true and something I, myself, made comment on awhile ago. I've started an annual with the sole intent of showcasing other writers and artists work to at least give others a publishing 'credit'. Often, I find it hard to get submissions because the process of doing comic work is far more time consuming than doing something like a pin-up or comic strip.

ZenZhu · Vociferator Joined: 22 Mar 2004 Posts: 669

In a moment of insight, something dawned on me that makes the "You can't say nuffin' bad 'bout my furiend's art" (yes, spelling intentional) kind of unsurprising in online forums.

When you get fellow artists together to draw, discuss, and critique, you have a number of like-minded people that are actually trying to discuss the work from an artistic standpoint. In a setting like that, you're more apt to get intelligent discussion on the strengths and weaknesses of a person's artistic ability.

On the 'net, however, any Tom, Dick or Furry can join a forum where people are posting their art. So, you are much more likely to get people who don't understand anything about the artistic process, and are just there to bash someone's images in a Beavis and Butthead-esque fashion. "UR art is t3h suxx0rz!" is about all they can say, and about all they're interested in saying. They may save the picture and use it as their new backdrop, and still do nothing but trash it for the sake of entertainment.

With feedback like this being much more likely to occur on the 'net- where you don't have to defend your position- it's unsurprising people are going to become more likely to tune such criticism out.

The unfortunate side effect of this is when someone actually does provide constructive criticism by commenting on color use, anatomy, or even the occasional very forthright suggestion that the person shows potential- but needs much more practice, the person is flamed as if they were saying little more than "It sux!" The other side of this coin is that, on the 'net, where you don't have to defend your position or justify yourself, the person whose work is being critiqued might be more apt to react poorly. They don't want to be told they need to improve. They just want the accolades they know they can get in the right circles.

Furthermore, in the real art world, artists have two choices when faced with critiques. On one hand, they can develop thicker skins against the mindless comments, and learn to put their ego aside and see when someone is making valid comments. Or, they can burst into tears, tear up their portfolio, and swear to never pick up a paintbrush again. I knew one of these tempermental types in art school. Once a guy passed by her while she was doing a portrait in charcoal. The fellow commented that it looked like... I forget.. Meatloaf, Tommy Tune... someone. She tore the picture to shreds, burst into tears, and ran from the room.

There's something about taking comments in person that gives it more impact. On the 'net, it's easier to pass off the comments of someone for whom you cannot pin a face and a real name to as the mindless ramblings of one of the unwashed masses.

So, it's unfortunate that much of the furry artist population has developed this support program wherein any comments that don't amount to mindless accolades are flamed. But, given the need to develop defenses against the equally mindless criticisms, it's really unsurprising.

Big Evil Ogre · Apocrisiary Joined: 08 Sep 2004 Posts: 44

Amen and amen.

In a moment of insight, something dawned on me that makes the "You can't say nuffin' bad 'bout my furiend's art" (yes, spelling intentional) kind of unsurprising in online forums.

When you get fellow artists together to draw, discuss, and critique, you have a number of like-minded people that are actually trying to discuss the work from an artistic standpoint. In a setting like that, you're more apt to get intelligent discussion on the strengths and weaknesses of a person's artistic ability.

On the 'net, however, any Tom, Dick or Furry can join a forum where people are posting their art. So, you are much more likely to get people who don't understand anything about the artistic process, and are just there to bash someone's images in a Beavis and Butthead-esque fashion. "UR art is t3h suxx0rz!" is about all they can say, and about all they're interested in saying. They may save the picture and use it as their new backdrop, and still do nothing but trash it for the sake of entertainment.

With feedback like this being much more likely to occur on the 'net- where you don't have to defend your position- it's unsurprising people are going to become more likely to tune such criticism out.

The unfortunate side effect of this is when someone actually does provide constructive criticism by commenting on color use, anatomy, or even the occasional very forthright suggestion that the person shows potential- but needs much more practice, the person is flamed as if they were saying little more than "It sux!" The other side of this coin is that, on the 'net, where you don't have to defend your position or justify yourself, the person whose work is being critiqued might be more apt to react poorly. They don't want to be told they need to improve. They just want the accolades they know they can get in the right circles.

Furthermore, in the real art world, artists have two choices when faced with critiques. On one hand, they can develop thicker skins against the mindless comments, and learn to put their ego aside and see when someone is making valid comments. Or, they can burst into tears, tear up their portfolio, and swear to never pick up a paintbrush again. I knew one of these tempermental types in art school. Once a guy passed by her while she was doing a portrait in charcoal. The fellow commented that it looked like... I forget.. Meatloaf, Tommy Tune... someone. She tore the picture to shreds, burst into tears, and ran from the room.

There's something about taking comments in person that gives it more impact. On the 'net, it's easier to pass off the comments of someone for whom you cannot pin a face and a real name to as the mindless ramblings of one of the unwashed masses.

So, it's unfortunate that much of the furry artist population has developed this support program wherein any comments that don't amount to mindless accolades are flamed. But, given the need to develop defenses against the equally mindless criticisms, it's really unsurprising.