Interesting, thanks for the reply. Now I have another question. Wouldn’t it make sense to have a seperate term to destinguish people who llike Bugs Bunny and anthromorphicized art from those who actually believe that they are animals or those whose sex lives consist of fucking stuffed sheep? The former is harmless fandom and hobby (and I’ll even include people who like to dress up for sex with other people, after all, why is dressing as a dog quantitatively any different than dressing as a slut? Whatever floats the old boat(as long as nobody’s hurt ) is my motto), while I have no problem classifying the latter two as actual disorders, or, to be frank, those people are nuggin’ futs.
Interesting, thanks for the reply. Now I have another question. Wouldn’t it make sense to have a separate term to distinguish people who like Bugs Bunny and anthropomorphic art from those who actually believe that they are animals or those whose sex lives consist of fucking stuffed sheep? The former is harmless fandom and hobby (and I’ll even include people who like to dress up for sex with other people, after all, why is dressing as a dog quantitatively any different than dressing as a slut? Whatever floats the old boat(as long as nobody’s hurt ) is my motto), while I have no problem classifying the latter two as actual disorders, or, to be frank, those people are nuggin’ futs.
Why did that post before I proof read it? That is damn odd.
There is a term for these people: Plushie.
That’s rather unfortunate, since it’s also a perfectly innocent term for stuffed animals, but I’m not the one who coined the term.
I don’t think a new term is needed for a person who imagines themselves to in fact be an animal. Either it’s a harmless quirk, and I have no problem with them, personally, or they’re easily lumped into ‘crazy’.
A little expansion: Another, better term, ‘Plushophile’, was also coined, and sees some usage, but ‘plushy’ seems to have become the main term, inexplicably.