[My underlining and fiddling about.]
I know I shouldn’t laugh but… 
Maybe I misread posts such as this:
It seemed to me the implication is: cute furry animals in movies = everyone is sort of a furry.
I dunno. People wear shoes. That doesn’t make them shoe fetishists.
Them folks is out there. They’re what most people seem to mean when they call someone a “furry”. I’m just saying that a lot of furries probably don’t think of themselves as this variety.
Yeh, no. Liking movies with anthropomorphized animals in them (shit, what children’s story doesn’t have them?) among other things, is not the same thing as being a furry. Being a furry must have a more profound and deeper mindset going on. It goes beyond thinking ‘that’s so cute – so, what’s for dinner?’
Furries identify with these characters in a much deeper way. I’d say it starts with the identity, in the mildest form, otherwise, why draw a distinction?
Of course there’s a spectrum: just as there is a spectrum for anything.
“You’re buying a bottle of wine? That must mean you’re an alcoholic.”
“You’re heterosexual? That means you must be into that Internet pornography.”
“You’re American? That means you must love George W. Bush.”
Of course there’s a spectrum. Why would anybody suggest otherwise?
People tend to talk about furries with this tone of repulsiveness, like it’s an absolutely disgusting thing to be interested in. My point was that being interested in anthropomorphic animals is not necessarily the horrible perversion it’s made out to be.
And sure, wearing shoes doesn’t make one a ‘fetishist’ (you do insist on using that loaded word), but there’s plenty of people for whom shoes are a significant portion of their clothing budget. They like shoes, they like to talk about shoes.
Going to see Kung Fu Panda doesn’t necessarily make one a furry, but if movies featuring anthros make up a significant portion of your library, that’s an indicator of what you like.
- wipes brow * Phew, that’s mighty relieving.
It is. I have no anthro movies in my library. I do, however, identify very strongly with Badger. Not because he is a badger, but because he is Badger. If this makes me a furry, well, shit.
Beats me, but cmyk certain seems to be doing so.
This is only objectionable to me if the song “Muskrat Love” is involved.
The whole idea doesn’t do anything for me, but whatever floats your boat, you know. I don’t find it any more or less weird than any other fetish. Actually, you could get into an interesting study of correlation with totemistic cults or worship and shamanistic practices.
Ah, but how many of those think (or at least enjoy pretending) that they are a shoe?
I came into this thread to ask a very basic question.
But from reading it, it appears that the answer is a matter of some debate; there is no general agreement on what makes a “furry.”
There are several terms used here that I don’t understand. “Cosplay?”
I do. They’re actually more of attached blankets and occasional parachutes. (Or would be, if, y’know, any of this was real)
It didn’t start as a condescending label, just like Trekkie didn’t start as one. You’re a furry if you think you are, just like you’re a geek if you think you are.
I haven’t seen it, but from reports from people who did, it doesn’t accurately describe furry fandom AT ALL. I have a feeling that none of the subcultures CSI uses are accurately described.
For those of you who have no idea what I’m talking about, they portrayed furries as a bunch of people who wear fursuits and have sex in them. If you’ve ever worn a costume, you know how hot you can get. Now imagine you’re wearing a sports mascot suit or a Disney character suit. And having sex. And somehow not passing out from heat exhaustion. Also, fursuits are very very expensive and I really can’t see anyone intentional getting hard to clean out body fluids all over one.
The vast majority of furries don’t have fursuits. I doubt most are even interested in having one.
I think that’s close. I can’t speak for all furries, of course, but I don’t know of a furry without a fursona (I’m not going to do the whole ‘stick fur in any word you can’ thing, because it’s just silly, but fursona is a nice portmanteau). I know of Star Trek fans with alien online personas (and offline). It can go way too far (look up otakukin sometime), but I think it’s a natural part of a fandom - pretending you’re actually PART of it.
It kind of depends on how you define anthro (I’m not trying to be difficult here). Do talking animals count as anthro? Babe is furry. Secret of Nimh is furry. An American Tale is furry. Bugs Bunny is furry. Thundercats is, well, borderline furry (besides the coloring they don’t actually have a lot of animal traits.) It’s all of those things, and sci-fi like the Chanur Tales or Niven’s Kzin.
I have heard that people don’t consider monkeys furry enough and I’ll admit I’ve never seen a monkey fursona. Lemurs sure. I’ve seen weird hybrid fursonas, like mine. I’ve seen people with a couple of them (someone was a rabbit and a cat, I think).
Abie is a Thundercats fan. Bebe and her partner are furry perverts. Cecil is an odd Star Wars fan. Deedee might be a furry. Edie is probably a furry. Effie is probably a furry. It’s mostly a self-identification thing, but there are common behaviors. Just my two cents.
Meenie you’re a furry if you want to be. And those pictures are CUTE.
Zeriel you sound like a furry (or scaley) to me, although I really can’t blame you for wanting to avoid it. Honestly, it seems you have a lot in common with me. I get along well with cats, even shy ones. I do cat things naturally. I just got into furry fandom and despite not being deep in it, chose to stick with the label (and try to dispel myths about it.)
Kinda of. Most catgirls are just generally cute. Damn, Tvtropes used to have a good picture, but it seems they took it down. Actually their Furry Fandom page is REALLY good. Ah, there it is. It’s on the discussion page. The newspaper article they link too is really fair too. I’m continually amazed at how awesome TVTropes is, but I’ve off on a tangent now.
I don’t wear shoes. That doesn’t make me have a foot fetish either. 
Joking aside, I think a lot of it is, furries are defensive. It’s like casual Star Trek fans have to seperate themselves from the people who teach Klingon to their children, and casual Star Wars fans have to seperate themselves from the people who waited a week in line in Jedi robes for the new movies, and casual anime fans have to seperate themselves from the people who are into hentai. And we do it by saying ‘you’re not that different. You’re not the same, but you enjoyed Robin Hood or Bugs Bunny or…’ We’re just trying to establish common ground. We’re just saying that movies with furry themes are abundant. I’m of the camp that you’re a furry if you say you are, and you aren’t if you say you aren’t.
I hope I haven’t rambled too long and I hope I’m not monopolizing the thread. This is just something I feel very strongly about. I’m trying very very hard to avoid any stupid comparisions, because, well that’s stupid (‘Furries are the new gays!’ No, they aren’t. And you’re an idiot. I have seen this comparison made.) Thanks everybody who’s asking questions, keeping an open mind, and to you fellow furs.
Well, sure…but isn’t it a little unusual for adults to be so attached to something that’s clearly meant for children? I mean, sure, I watch this kind of stuff with my daughter, and I find it mildly amusing. Some of them are certainly well-done enough to get some real entertainment from (Robin Hood is a good example…that is a great movie, although more for the music, IMO, than the animation or the characterizations). But to have as my most preferred form of entertainment? That seems…strange, for lack of a better word.
Not that I’m picking on furries in particular…I think fandom in general is something most folks grow out of, and when I encounter people my age who are so invested in Star Wars or whatever, it just seems to me that there’s a part of them that is afraid to grow up…a sort of Peter Pan syndrome, if you will.
Costume play. Dressing up. In this thread it means putting on a suit to look like an anthropomorphic fox. People also get dressed up as stormtroopers or Japanese schoolgirls.
It’s worth noting most of this is done for conventions, which are a collection of the strange anyway. I should think even those folks who put on costumes for conventions look askance at those who dress up like their favorite fictional character every day. Not because there’s something wrong with the fictional character, but because that person has some issues if they can’t act normal in their every day life.
Okay, I’m sorry if “fetishist” is loaded or offensive, but you used “anthros.” Your community has its own jargon for things!
Nothing wrong with that. Every field has its own jargon, but if you’re specialized enough you’ve got jargon, then you’re not me.
Well, hey, I’m all for spectrums and areas of gray, but if we’re going to talk about a particular slice of human behavior, we need to know where to slice it – especially if we want a label for it.
All of this is completely new to me as well. I had never heard of cosplay, so I looked it up.
Distinctions and degrees appear to be quite important. Among other things:
I am trying to get what you are saying, but I’m kind of lost. You, and others, say there is a spectrum, and that I totally get. What I’m not understanding is the analogy here to a casual Star Wars fan vs. an over-the-top person who wears costumes. In your OP, you said “I’m a tiger.” Now, would a casual Star Wars fan say “I’m a Jedi Knight?” Identifying yourself as such seems to me to be an indicator that you’ve gone way beyond just casual fandom. Or am I still missing something here?
Not…really. I’ve been using anthro as shorthand for anthropomorphic, which has a wider range of applicability than just the furry fandom. It specifically refers to anything non-human that’s been granted human characteristics. Mickey Mouse is an anthropomorphic mouse. The characters in Brave Little Toaster are anthropomorphic household gadgets. The wiki link for anthropomorphism even talks about the Greek and Roman deities being anthropomorphic, as they’re gods who have the qualities of humans. It’s not just furry jargon, and I’ve been using it specifically to try to maintain a level of detachedness about the discussion.