FA+
Shop
About scalies and breasts, round 2
16 years ago
General
Well, what do I have to say...
About a year ago I posted the journal “About scalies and breasts...” which can be found here:
http://www.furaffinity.net/journal/413451/
where I listed a few reasons why I think drawing reptilians (or other species that don't have breasts) with boobs isn't such a big issue as some make it. Of course most important “if you want to just do it, so much is drawn physically or biologically incorrect so why nag about THAT point”.
But now I want to add point 5. it IS biologically possible.
Well after checking out some things on reptiles I found something interesting mentioned. Currently it's most commonly believed that mammals stem from a branch of reptiles which developed to give live births and mammary glands.
Now you'd say at that point they'd already be mammals but from what I read there actually was a step between that. Reptiles that didn't have nipples or direct mammary glands where able to secrete a nutrient substance from some areas of their skin.
Now what does that mean of scalies? Well you could go that way and say during their life female reptiles can produce that nutrient substance and it starts soaking up into tissue around the spots it secretes out making that areas swell. Taking the anthropomorphic aspect in account, which also gives mammals, that DON'T have anything comparable, human boobs, you could very well say that such swellings could be in the chest area giving female reptiles something breasts.
There's even a possibility to develop something like a very simple nipple when the nutrient substance always secretes out the same area so less of it goes to waste and can be “rationed” more effectively causing more swelling there, forming a slight bulge or even a primitive nipple.
Anyway make of it what you like, as mentioned I'd be perfectly happy if I didn't have to find points of defense and just go on with it but there still are people who wont shut up without being given a reason why.
While this still doesn't cover ALL fields it's at least something to counter the “it's biologically incorrect” statement, while reptiles today don't have breasts there where ones that had something like very primitive breasts in the past.
http://www.furaffinity.net/journal/413451/
where I listed a few reasons why I think drawing reptilians (or other species that don't have breasts) with boobs isn't such a big issue as some make it. Of course most important “if you want to just do it, so much is drawn physically or biologically incorrect so why nag about THAT point”.
But now I want to add point 5. it IS biologically possible.
Well after checking out some things on reptiles I found something interesting mentioned. Currently it's most commonly believed that mammals stem from a branch of reptiles which developed to give live births and mammary glands.
Now you'd say at that point they'd already be mammals but from what I read there actually was a step between that. Reptiles that didn't have nipples or direct mammary glands where able to secrete a nutrient substance from some areas of their skin.
Now what does that mean of scalies? Well you could go that way and say during their life female reptiles can produce that nutrient substance and it starts soaking up into tissue around the spots it secretes out making that areas swell. Taking the anthropomorphic aspect in account, which also gives mammals, that DON'T have anything comparable, human boobs, you could very well say that such swellings could be in the chest area giving female reptiles something breasts.
There's even a possibility to develop something like a very simple nipple when the nutrient substance always secretes out the same area so less of it goes to waste and can be “rationed” more effectively causing more swelling there, forming a slight bulge or even a primitive nipple.
Anyway make of it what you like, as mentioned I'd be perfectly happy if I didn't have to find points of defense and just go on with it but there still are people who wont shut up without being given a reason why.
While this still doesn't cover ALL fields it's at least something to counter the “it's biologically incorrect” statement, while reptiles today don't have breasts there where ones that had something like very primitive breasts in the past.
If people nag about that stuff, they just take it way too seriously.
If people whine about reptiles with boobs, heaven forbid them looking at multi-shitting-dick-nipple'd-huskies, or whatever.
Besides, saying female reptiles can't have breast is kind of like saying that male reptiles can't have exposed genitalia, considering they're supposed to be internal (as far as I know) like most. It all depends on a person's view on such a subject, but when it comes to the Furry Fandom, you can pretty much give any features to your character(s) since he/she/shi will belong to you. I mean, most reptiles here have hair, right?
There aren't currently any bipedal reptiles in nature that I know of, so if one wanted to argue that a female scalie shouldn't have breasts because they aren't seen in nature, then the bipedal aspect should be taken away too.
Some people just look for things that are "wrong".
It's fantasy, why shouldn't scalies be mamals, if even some insects are "mamals" of sorts. And even if they're not mamals, and the artist just likes his/her female scalies "ta haf boobies", let them have it. That's everyone's personal taste. Why's everyone making such a fuss about this anyway? They accept herms, dickgirls, cuntboys, mythologic creatures, alies, mixed breeds of all kinds of animals that go as far as combining big cats and tiny rodents. And nobody complains about THAT. If scalies can have huge human penises and balls, or human genitals in general, why can't they have breasts? Seriously, whoever complains about that is being rather inconsequent.
You shouldn't let everything ruffle your feathers--er, uh, scales so much.
It's also not that i WANT that to boil down to such arguments, it's just that it still comes up now and then and saying "i just want it that way" is either not accepted or replied with "yea typical" or the like.
And now i just wanted to say with that argument it is actually "realistic" to say reptile characters can have breasts since it does have a biological basis.
As far as I'm concerned lovely one.. Ive seen your huge busty, wonderfully thick nippled and generously areola topped mountains of lovely breast on your scaily creations..
you keep right on ahead doing it.. its deligtful! (and yes, especially this one.. really do love this piece.. its an older piece, yes, but still, in my eyes, has FANTASTIC CHARM..)
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/724277/
It has never failed.
Dan welcome to the cool club *hugs Dan, her huge reptilian chest smushing against him. ^^*
(note this is a comment for both parts of this journal. )
...aber verdammt, es sieht einfach zu geil aus <3
^^ Inflation und der ganze Kram ist ja eigentlich auch Schwachsinn, aber darüber regt sich keiner auf..
Not that I object to such bragging, heheh.
It sets them apart from the males.
The alternate method I toyed with in this regard was to give all my female characters finned ears while the males only retained horns, but in practice this didn't work all that well because they still looked androgynous. So I went with the 'eyelash' method, which just means one extra curved mark over the eyes to give them that mild feminine appeal.
In the end, drawing the breasts simply made it easier to pose the female into more interesting positions because of how I'm able to draw the midsection and hips, to which I later went and modified my concept of how my lizardfolk family structures work.
I have no interest in the massive, backbreaking, swollen, throbbing, slutty looking uber boobs in reptiles because such excess is far more attractive to see in real life humans than in reptilians... and even then there's a limit... which works for me because every other feature of reptiles appeal to me... glistening, shining, reflective scales, smooth, sleek texture, flitting tongue, elaborate colors and long, waggily tails... boobs add nothing to reptilian beauty, and Hyper is pure turn off for me to begin with.
The few times I have drawn boobs on a reptile I tried very hard to keep them looking 'normal', such as this picture.
http://kaliak.deviantart.com/art/Se.....ildren-6119798
Matter of opinion yes, but let this dispute end in the idea that if we apply some correct anatomy to a create that in no way in hell could exist due to hundreds of reason, and is so human the only thing it is missing is a license, then go ahead. Lavish the females with boobs, give these males scaled exposed genitals and an broken sex drive. So, that is about it, imagination can meet anatomy, and if it is taken into question just know what you draw is fake.
Done- Again
I prefer them without because I like my furries to be as close to the original species as possible while maintaining their anthropomorphic form. An example of this is a recent TF commission I had done by amun (check my favs), the reptile part of the character is as close to lizards as possible. Amun has a second picture in the works progressing this TF for me.
http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a2.....g?t=1246494074
The second image removes the characters breasts as they become more reptile, I feel part of the fun of a human to animal/anthro TF is the contrast between the human and animal traits. The bigger the contrast the more significant the transformation, I feel scalies without breasts can add to that loss of physical humanity and highlight the differences between reptiles and mammals.
So with that commission I asked for an attractive human and stripped away the female aspects that are consistent between anthro species. She's got a reptile chest and reptile vagina, if she remains sexy as an anthro it will be on the merits unique to the species she is becoming; and not simply because she has the attractive parts of humans.
Now that second image has been completed I can understand the lack of breasts can make the chest area look uninteresting, but this forces you to look elsewhere; and quite frankly I think the clearly scalie orientated lower body is quite murry.
The first image scalified her crotch area and then the second one her chest, the 3rd one will rob her of her face and turn her completely reptile. It will be interesting to see if she can remain seductive looking like that without the aid of human traits, I'm still trying to think of a pose to take full advantage of that body in the final image; if you have any suggestions feel free.
Personally i gotta say i find breastles females a bit less attractive, blame being human on that :P
But i think a big point there are the people who kept annoying me with "doing them without is more realistic", you know having to take the defensive position again... in fact back in VCL times i did save a few pics of breastles amphibians and found them quite attractive but now it doens't really work... there are some other factors too but i dont wanna talk about them too open
1 > You're -really- reaching, beyond the limits of science to try and shore up your personal opinion and personal insecurity about your decision to draw dragons with tits. There is no scientific fact whatsoever to support the 'swelling' you're talking about. If it was going to happen, it simply would have happened some time during the evolutionary process. Mammals secrete milk, and as a result a defining characteristic is the presence of mammary glands and the nipples that accompany them. But its a delusional leap of faith to equate nutrients > swelling > nipples, science simply doesn't work this way. Remember that even among mammals there are many species that don't have breasts, in fact the number of species that do have 'breasts' are probably outnumbered ten-thousand to one in favor of animals that have nipples and mammary glands, but don't develop breasts in the way that primates do.
2 > Draw it however you want it, you don't need to justify it. If it looks good and you're happy with it, then tell people to shut the hell up and draw whatever you want... But don't try to justify it with some say 5th grade pseudo-science, that just makes it look like you're unhappy with your choice or busy crusading with bullshit as your weapon of choice.