FA+
Shop
Furries - Discussion
3 years ago
There’s no easy way to put this, but I’m going to be straight forward as possible about this topic. I know it kind of puts me a bit under a microscope too for my views on this matter, but I want an open discussion and I realize any responses from my followers are not a direct spokesperson for the furry community. I spent the past hour looking up the definition and reading up on the general idea of what “furry” means. It was a basic description while also giving the repetitive trait of that of a furry being a self-proclaimed title to oneself and their representation/association within the furry community. So, which brings me to that previous statement that individuals make the decision to claim themselves as a furry and live whatever lifestyle around it. It’s not for anyone else to decide to call you a furry. Which ultimately brings me to a frustration of mine that I’m having as of late and this journal is not meant to put any disdain or discourse towards furries.
I’m just frustrated at the lack of perspective or ignorance in the terminology or rather the generalization that has manifested over time and this pseudo-ownership that some furries feel that they have claim over anything anthromorphic/animal and label it despite what the creator/artist says or claims their affiliations with the community. I’m not popular by any means, but recently a friend has been drawing certain species in a setting and yet their art was relogged and tagged as furry. They made a statement after that they do not want their art tagged as furry and have explained their reasoning yet also received a comment that anything anthromorphic is furry.
Furry is already a subjective term enough where even the community in on itself argues what’s considered furry or not, but now it’s spread to the point where anything remotely animal is called furry and anthromorphic is automatically labelled furry. This comes to the issue that I have not only as an artist, but creator as well. I take pride in myself for worldbuilding from monsters and aliens, but even sometimes indulge in some anthromorphic stuff too, but not as often because of the labelling. I am not a furry. I do not associate myself in the lifestyle or create characters to be sonas and act through them. The only involvement I have has solely been commissions and having wonderful friends who are furries. I don’t mean to pull the “I have furry friends” card, but I’m just stating my point that I have nothing against furries as I know it’s a great community and just like any community there are going to be flaws. I only dislike certain attitudes/views within the community in how some members treat things a certain way such as freely and wildly labelling anything animalistic as furry. It’s abusive and a bit intimidating when it’s such a huge dominant factor in the online art world especially commissions.
It's a subject that this friend and I have discussed and vented a lot of our frustrations that any time someone makes something like a werewolf or dragon it’s stamped as furry related or reblogged then tagged as furry. Anthromorphism has been around longer before it became this mainstream trend to humanize them and implement a fandom to coincide with it while the other side of the coin is not the furry side. I don’t consider anything furry unless the owner/creator says it is and that’s how it should be. We artists/creators deserve the same amount of respect when creating things and should be treated what the artist requests them to be as furry or not. It also coincides with thievery too, but this journal isn’t about that.
I’m glad in a way I’m not all that engaging sometimes, and it’s also sort of hurt me a bit as an artist, but I’m sometimes grateful that I don’t get as much flack or people being problematic towards me or my art in whatever form. Probably after this journal I’ll probably get flack anyways, but honestly, I don’t care enough to let it affect me because I have a life and I also have my own goals as an artist to do one day and I’ve just never been really part of any group of people but myself and friends.
I’m asking more or less of how everyone reacts to this and their perspective if they agree or not. It’s subjective to begin with or at least the term and how one views oneself since there’s no set rules as a furry, but common traits. Which I feel like a line needs to be drawn where there’s an established understanding that not everything anthromorphic/animalistic belongs to the furry fandom unless stated otherwise by the creator/artist.
This is an open discussion and all views welcome. Just be nice and not accusatory or rude in any way. This is just my view and sort of vent.
(No I will not accept the phrase I’m furry adjacent either or scaley. It’s still labeling.)
(I’m also not here to offend anyone. If I have that was not my intention. I just post here to have an open discussion since it’s one of the most popular sites for the furry community)
I’m just frustrated at the lack of perspective or ignorance in the terminology or rather the generalization that has manifested over time and this pseudo-ownership that some furries feel that they have claim over anything anthromorphic/animal and label it despite what the creator/artist says or claims their affiliations with the community. I’m not popular by any means, but recently a friend has been drawing certain species in a setting and yet their art was relogged and tagged as furry. They made a statement after that they do not want their art tagged as furry and have explained their reasoning yet also received a comment that anything anthromorphic is furry.
Furry is already a subjective term enough where even the community in on itself argues what’s considered furry or not, but now it’s spread to the point where anything remotely animal is called furry and anthromorphic is automatically labelled furry. This comes to the issue that I have not only as an artist, but creator as well. I take pride in myself for worldbuilding from monsters and aliens, but even sometimes indulge in some anthromorphic stuff too, but not as often because of the labelling. I am not a furry. I do not associate myself in the lifestyle or create characters to be sonas and act through them. The only involvement I have has solely been commissions and having wonderful friends who are furries. I don’t mean to pull the “I have furry friends” card, but I’m just stating my point that I have nothing against furries as I know it’s a great community and just like any community there are going to be flaws. I only dislike certain attitudes/views within the community in how some members treat things a certain way such as freely and wildly labelling anything animalistic as furry. It’s abusive and a bit intimidating when it’s such a huge dominant factor in the online art world especially commissions.
It's a subject that this friend and I have discussed and vented a lot of our frustrations that any time someone makes something like a werewolf or dragon it’s stamped as furry related or reblogged then tagged as furry. Anthromorphism has been around longer before it became this mainstream trend to humanize them and implement a fandom to coincide with it while the other side of the coin is not the furry side. I don’t consider anything furry unless the owner/creator says it is and that’s how it should be. We artists/creators deserve the same amount of respect when creating things and should be treated what the artist requests them to be as furry or not. It also coincides with thievery too, but this journal isn’t about that.
I’m glad in a way I’m not all that engaging sometimes, and it’s also sort of hurt me a bit as an artist, but I’m sometimes grateful that I don’t get as much flack or people being problematic towards me or my art in whatever form. Probably after this journal I’ll probably get flack anyways, but honestly, I don’t care enough to let it affect me because I have a life and I also have my own goals as an artist to do one day and I’ve just never been really part of any group of people but myself and friends.
I’m asking more or less of how everyone reacts to this and their perspective if they agree or not. It’s subjective to begin with or at least the term and how one views oneself since there’s no set rules as a furry, but common traits. Which I feel like a line needs to be drawn where there’s an established understanding that not everything anthromorphic/animalistic belongs to the furry fandom unless stated otherwise by the creator/artist.
This is an open discussion and all views welcome. Just be nice and not accusatory or rude in any way. This is just my view and sort of vent.
(No I will not accept the phrase I’m furry adjacent either or scaley. It’s still labeling.)
(I’m also not here to offend anyone. If I have that was not my intention. I just post here to have an open discussion since it’s one of the most popular sites for the furry community)
For me when someone, who enjoys furry art,shows, comics, and ect says they are ''not a furry'' is sounds the same as someone who watches anime everyday saying they are ''not a anime fan''
It just seems like denial due to the bad publicity furries get online.
Liking something shouldn’t be used as an identity or label. You can be a fan of something yet not make it a lifestyle.
Unfortunately we live in the time of labels, there is a thousand different labels for people liking things and liking the same things but in different ways.
You get a similar thing with otherkin, too. While otherkin and furries have some amount of overlap, someone who is otherkin and likes media involving their kintype doesn't mean they're also a furry because they like that art. They shouldn't be automatically lumped in with furries just because they identify as something non-human, so of course they'd feel a kinship with characters and art of their identified species. Otherkin can be furries and furries can be otherkin, but that isn't and shouldn't be the default.
The question then becomes "When does someone become a furry" and that's not really a black and white question. So I don't think the answer to that question should be black and white, either. It's something personal to the person, and I think even being a "furry" means different things for different people. Some for example do use fursuits and going to furcons as a way to say "I'm a furry" while others just use fursonas. And still some just have an animal or anthro OC that they don't really have any personal connection to, and thus don't see it as a fursona. It's something that means something different for everyone and it would be a disservice to the variety of opinions to boil it all down to just "liking anthro animals." If somebody wants to identify themselves as a furry because they like anthro animals, awesome. That's the definition that works for them. But I don't think it benefits anyone to use that definition for everyone who likes anthro animals.
As for the whole "art getting labelled as furry" point of this journal, I think that's just the inevitability of the Internet. It's what happens when you give the majority of the world a place to congregate and and share pretty much whatever they want to share with little repercussions outside of those that violate laws or TOS's. I fully agree that an artist's wishes about how their art is labelled and shared should always hold priority and I can understand the frustration that comes from it. I think people tend to forget that anthro characters have been around....pretty much since we've figured out how to describe animals with human features. Or humans with animal features. Not everything animal is furry, just like not everything animated out of Japan is anime, but a certain style of animation. But certain people on the internet either don't know or don't care that's the case and just group it all together anyways. You and your friend are perfectly justified in being frustrated at that. Anthro characters can exist outside of the furry sphere. But there's always going to be somebody who labels it as such no matter what you say.
Ya the internet is what it is and what it has become over the years that there's really no way of escaping anything hardly, but just being vocal for yourself and standing up for yourself. Even if people may or may not ignore it there are respectable people on the web that will listen and care. <3 So friggin thank you. Almost literally got teary eyed at your response honestly.
I could ask you this then:
Are you a furry? What got you into the furry fandom? How do you identify yourself as one or how do you represent yourself as one? What do you love about being a furry?
I've been a fan of anthro art for years and actually I've never considered myself a 'furry' in those days. It took me a bit more time to got into the community, and then I decided to call myself a furry (or rather scalie lol). I found some friends who were furries/scalies and that was the moment when it all started for me.
An artist can create a painting with 10 different colored Marilyn Monroes with the intent of it representing that we should not idolize actors as saints or gods. Only to have the audience print them on T-shirts and make the image a pop-icon household piece. What does the Artist do about that? There are probably a myriad of different answers and all of them are right and wrong depending on the artist's perspective. But in the end you can't control what the audience, especially en masse, interprets from the art.
Your take on anthropomorphism is correct. It's been around a lot longer than the furry fandom we currently know right now. But the current furry community has a very distinct style. It's cartoonish in a way, probably more correlated to how cartoons in the 90's/00's anthropomorphisized characters. And the more an artist sticks closely to that style, the more the furry fandom will attach themselves to it.
A cartoonish style dragon with animated, bright, wide eyes and a smile that is easy for someone to garner facial recognition from will be latched on to by the furry fandom much more than a hyper-realistic, more pragmatic dragon, such as the ones drawn by artists Jaime Jones.
For your frustrations, I don't have an answer. Only you can solve that problem. But probably know artists throughout history have felt the same way you do now about said problem.
Oh it's not just cartoon style or the typical furry art style. It's also beyond that to mine, to my friend's to realism that just gets claimed/dubbed/labelled as furry when usually some of the time it's not represented as such yet some furries feel like it has to be labelled as such because it's anthromorphic. Not saying all do it but those that do it's like why is there a need to stamp it as such? Course this is the internet I get that, but I just have to ask the very important question of the WHY of it all. WHY do some feel like anything animal/anthro related is claimed as furry like on autopilot. Is it just how they grew up or their mindset or their personal interests and their own personal backlog of things. It could be so many reasons yet no definitive answer, but just that not everything has to be that way. Artists like me and others who have the same mindset are just kind of tired of it.
All in all this journal is a vent of things and I know I'll never get an answer other than "that's the internet for ya."
Also think you're right about the fact that artists should be able to make animal-ish / animal-related content without it being instantly labelled as furry.
Sadly, when you get into the granularity of all this, though, it's nearly impossible to avoid.
What I mean is this: Let's say there's a new werewolf movie coming out. It's just a horror movie or whatever, but let's say there's one shot in the trailer where you see the werewolf, and it looks good. Like, the sort of werewolf design that isn't super horrific or monstrous, and is the sort of 'handsome' wolf-humanoid that could be easily said to be similar to a big wolf-anthro from the furry sub-culture.
A million people are going to see this image in the trailer. Almost all of them think 'wow, nice new scary movie, cool werewolf' - and then in that group, there are some furries, too. Some of them will think it's a hot werewolf. Some of them will think the same thing as the non-furries, and not think about this movie monster as a hot guy. Either way, those groups are fine, they're all not claiming this new thing is a furry thing. Almost none of them are going to take the time to screenshot it and post it somewhere online. And then, let's say, only ONE of the people who screencap it are going to post it and say 'MY NEW FURRY HUSBAND' or whatever.
And of course, the image will have no sourcing when it's posted, no indication of what it is or where it's from.
So, you have a minority of people who are doing this shitty mislabeling. But then, because it's been done, thousands of other people are going to see this post and think 'oh this is some new furry art.' Or they'll think the person who posted it, made it. And then the proliferation of this wolf from this movie as a furry item spreads, with many people not even knowing what it's from. Some people will think it's not hot, some will know it's from a movie and respectfully leave it alone, etc, etc. Lots of things are going to happen. Someone'll draw fanart, but like 99% of artists won't, but it only takes a few good fan-art pics to popularize a character as a 'thing to do'. The people who then enjoy that first fanart may not know what it's from, but they enjoy the art, because that art is, itself, furry art, even if the inspiration is from the movie trailer. The movie isn't even OUT yet.
My point is, it's not as though the whole community labels these things incorrectly, it's not as though the whole community is a hive mind and know what everything is and is supposed to be, or where it came from.
My point is, even if you got 99.99999% of the whole furry community to be good about not claiming all animal-related or anthropomorphic media as 'furry', as soon as one jerk of a person, who IS happy to claim non-furry stuff as furry, shows another person something without sourcing it or explaining it, the assumption of 'oh this is furry I guess' is made by the other person, because they don't know what it is, even while they're one of the people who doesn't like the 'false labelling'.
~
Sorry, that went on too long.
It's a viral spread that is hard to control, is what I mean. I like to think that a good amount of furries actually do respect when someone says 'this game or this movie isn't furry' - it's just that it's going to happen, via some minor vector, and then spread, insidiously.
Ah yes the chad werewolf. Don't get me wrong I do like them but they are like the pinnacle of lot of the frustrations and how they've just slowly been categorized into the furry fandom over time which honestly I see so much of. But it's like how you described and it just slowly spreads to something that no one could have stopped anyways because people are people and the internet is the internet. People can get away with almost anything in terms of stuff like this because one they don't care and they feel like they can do whatever and two just for their own personal interests. So I agree!
But it also comes to that part of showing someone something that's not sourced and that person has no idea what it is but just auto response of dubbing it furry, which is also a big frustration of mine. It's just such a generalized term nowadays and overused even by non furries.
I'm just yelling at the ocean but I wish people on the internet were more decent, sourced things properly and respected content better and not just misrepresenting something for their own personal hot take.
I know there are good people who do retweet/blog right in honest good faith for the creator too. It's just lot of the time's it feels like it gets so dwarfed and hidden within the sea of those who don't read/listen/care and it can be very soul sucking as a creator.
As a general description being a "Furry" means "Someone who has an interest in anthropomorphic animals or animals that have human-like characteristics associated with human intelligence (e.g. such as being able to speak fluently in a human language or decide to act in a way more associated with a human society than they normally would as a feral animal). This includes mythological creatures with animal like appearances (e.g. dragons, griffins, etc.), any sort of alien species that would physically be more associated with animals rather than humans in appearance and any animal like creature from any work of fiction (e.g. Pokémon, Digimon, etc.)". The key word in all of that is "interest" as this basic description allows people who just have a shirt with Mickey Mouse on to say their a furry, or on the other side of extreme the crazy guy living in his mothers basement growing an actual mickey mouse in a test tube for some unknown purpose. Because its a generic term that technically encompasses all of humanity because everyone on earth would love to meet a dog that can talk perfect English, even if they are allergic to or even hate dogs. That said this description is more of an undefined context and is generally used by people with no social familiarity with the fandom, and is a simple way of explaining how one can be a furry.
When it comes to being part of the "fandom" or the "Furry Community" that just like any other fandom or community. You choose to identify as part of it. Like how I like Japanese animation and could be considered a general anime fan, but I don't really join in or associate with the fandom or communities, so I don't identify as an anime fan, generally speaking. Being a Furry in that context is always a choice, you get to make as an individual. Though it's worth mentioning that sometimes life forces us down routes that means we end up being part of a group meaning you might end up being assigned the title and there's nothing you can really do to change that without cutting yourself off from said community entirely, which will lead to backlash. When people do this, I interpret this more as short hand for others acknowledging your involvement in said community and sort of trying to chat with you, or break the ice rather than trying to force you into the community (though there are those that try to do that, some because they have mental issues needing to simply things into specific boxes, others because they're just A**holes).
All that said under certain context, the use of terms like "Furry" can have their meanings open to use as and when you deem it appropriate to. For example you as an artist might not be part of the Furry Fandom or its communities but you enjoy doing Furry content artwork, this means you aren't likely to put it in your Bio on your Social Media platforms but when you list what kind of content you are willing to draw you might use the term "Furry" as a short hand rather than saying all the content that generally encapsulates. Labels like "Furry" are really just humanities attempt to simplify things, for easy understanding and digestion, so it's how you use the term "Furry" that ultimately allows others to know how it connects to your life.
Sorry if this is me rambling and doesn't make much sense. I tried putting my thoughts down as best I can to respond to your journal here. I'm not too good with words.
I think the term furry is just used so loosely and things have been over generalized/categorized on autopilot to where even non furries who are aware of furries will even use the term furry or assume it is based on the content shown. So it's just kind of like this spread of mindset that's more or less happened over the years or at least the people I'm around whether mutuals or close friends, but it's come to the point of like it's giving a lot of furries the claim of things when some of the stuff may not be represented as such. I get it's a thing that's never going to go away or can ever be controlled, but it's just frustrating and something I wish more people were vocal about and curb it at some point.
On the other hand I can't help feeling that many artists who do draw a lot of things in the furry realm are hesitant to call themselves furry in part because of the stigmas that come with it. And as for the people insisting on labeling things against the artist's wishes, there is a certain comfort in grouping things together in recognizable chunks.
People should be free to choose their labels, if any. I have known people on both extremes of the labeling spectrum. I don't have a good ending to this, so cheers
I just wish there was more respect in that sense for creators and that not everything has to be furry owned/related/dubbed/labelled or claimed as a furry or given credit as one when anthro stuff has been around longer furries became a thing.
~
When art is released for public consumption, it has the potential for millions or billions of people to see it. They are all going to have their own thoughts about it.
Anything released could have an infinite number of reactions to it.
Artists have never really had any control over how the public views or perceives their work, unfortunately. Nowadays, it's super easy to witness the reaction and whatnot, and it's very easy for the public to show off their perceptions and reactions to art, be it distain or too MUCH admiration or too much self-involvement [like fanart of that movie werewolf getting it on with someone's person OC]. Clearly, the movie makers didn't want that to happen, and are maybe frustrated by it. Their horror movie monster is now 'daddy material' online or whatever.
But, that could have happened at any point in history. A book about a werewolf could have come out at any point and a number of people could have thought he sounded like the most lovely creature. In the 1800s. People would have just kept their ardor for Good Sir Monster in their heads, back then, most likely, due to social mores / severe sexual repression.
I think what I'm saying is the reaction people have to art is self-expression, and a desire to engage with the art they enjoy. It's not always done with tact or awareness of how it affects the original creator, because art is 'freely available', when it has been made public.
It does indeed suck, though, to have people equally as willing to 'mess with' things from movies and comics and TV and whatever, as well as screwing with the work of smaller, individual artists. I would think that, for most furries, it sometimes feels like it's okay to 'furry-claim' characters from giant companies, because there's usually no one face, no one artist that the community is abusing. I think we all grew up with the idea that all the stuff we saw was mass produced by companies, because we grew up watching cartoons, and cartoons were just.. there. Comics and TV and toys and games are just.. around. Everywhere. They are there for us to consume, to buy, to enjoy.
Kids don't have a perception that anyone made any of that stuff. It's all so abstracted, remote, obfuscated from artist to child consumer.
My point is, we all grow up feeling like we can play around with 'our toys' and then that feeling can persist from all the big known mainstream entities into everything else we see in those same avenues. People look at all of this mainstream stuff on their PC monitors or on their phones, and then on that same screen is a picture of a dragon. It's a great dragon, it looks like it could be from a movie, but it's from a single struggling artist, but most people just see it and say 'hot dragon, I'm just as free to fantasize about this big boy as I am about Draco from Dragonheart, right? Of course I am.'
All the artists can do is accept that any number of things can and will happen. The only way to truly retain ownership to one's ideas is to keep them private.
No doubt a main problem is the fact that there's no objective definition to being with, then you mix other bad traits like appropriation, over-simplification, tribalism, not caring/having no respect for the subject or people involved, etc; and it just becomes the confusing mess that we live in.
From one side, you got the ones wanting representation or other's achievements/content to be part of their group, then the ones that dislike anything similar and throw stuff into the same bag, and overall just ignorant folks that spread misinformation while thinking they're correct (especially those doing it in "good light"), it's certainly a toxic mentality that's almost impossible to fix or minimize, sadly, plenty of people are too comfortable with viewing antro=furry which is a bigger problem with those with clout or some power (mods, admins, site owners).
Gotta appreciate those who do not fall into those categories and are understanding, besides having the respect to acknowledge how you want to label yourself or don't & can totally appreciate art in a neutral way; there are always going to be those who ruin the mood, but at least there are some who can let you breathe and can have a conversation with without falling into a -side vs side- thing.
Ya there's really no black or white answer to any of this. It ultimately comes down to one claiming and owning their own label as a furry or not without the worry of it being enforced. Because being a furry was something of someone calling themselves one and not having people call you one.
It's just really part of my frustrations that have more or less boiled over especially seeing my friend go through this to where it's not something that's going to be stopped any time soon. The internet is the internet. Not a healthy place, but it's also such a heavily utilized social place too yet so far beyond any control of regulating stuff anyways or at least regulating decency which goes the same way in the outside world. I absolutely appreciate the folks who do care, who do understand, who do read the creator's comments on their material and how they represent them and they actually listen or care. It's people like that I cherish most and so glad are around, but hard sometimes when there's a lot of others who don't and just see whatever piques their interest is up for grabs and think they can do whatever.
So thank you! ;]
Little me: But...I don't want to be
The idea of identities and labels has become so polarizing I've elected to treat it like personal, intimate information. Its something to be learned by earning trust and developing actual personal relationships. Otherwise you get lost in a mob mentality of labels and projection and perceived ownership of a fandom, community, etc.
A lot of it is sheer ignorance. Some of it laziness. The rest is a highly vocal few shrieking to the masses about how this X and that is Y and if you dont agree you're in denial, oppressive, (insert latest insult here)
what you brought up about anthro being around since before "furry" was a thing reminds me of a quote:
"Because it is new to you does not make it new"
This is seen with how enthusiastically newcomers take to all the new ideas and worlds people have created, but its also seen with the ignorance and laziness I mentioned earlier with how people engage with the art. Some grow out of it, a few will harden to the shrieking moron.
But I think you have a solution within your own post:
" I don’t care enough to let it affect me because I have a life and I also have my own goals "
as I eluded to in the beginning of this post; Choose the time and place of engagement of any given community. Encourage those that respect you and your work. Don't waste your time on those that don't. That's time and effort that could be better spent perfecting your art and doing what you love.
Ya I mean I have been pretty good about just not really involving myself in a many communities or fandoms other than just passionately talking about somethign to someone and from there it's just how I make friends. Don't really go to cons or anything either. But ya I'm in the same boat of the ignorance and exposure stuff.
And ya at some point I'll make a lighter journal of my goals going forward and art and all. Thank you again!