FA+
Shop
Another odd thought on something a bit controversial
9 years ago
General
It sucks that most of the stuff I find interesting to look into the details and philosophy of are often the things that are too controversial, and thus, 'taboo' to discuss; as if discussing anything that one may disagree with is somehow forbidden. Then again, perhaps that's why I find things interesting in the first place.
Anyway, something popped into my mind that after a bit of thought, ended up seeming a bit odd to me. Here on FA, as I've said before, we have Tiger/Cougars, Fox/Wolves, Frog/Tree, Leopard/Mountain Goat, and many more impossible hybrids, along with plenty of other fantasy traits, such as glowing body parts, extra limbs, bright/unrealistic body colors, and the list goes on and on.
With the sky still coming nowhere close to the limit, there are still people's OC's who are Transvestites. Before you punch me, listen; from what I've read on, people who undergo the long, fragile process of becoming trans only do so if they really feel that they were born wrong and need to change themselves.
But here's where I don't get it, if furries can literally have any feature imaginable about themselves, why would one create one that sees itself as imperfect, that felt the need to change itself from its original creation. It seems it would be far simpler to have made this imaginary creature in its true form in the first place, rather than making a character that is psychologically driven permanently change itself. Of course an exception would be one's own fursona, which would reflect themselves in real life, but what I am discussing is that of simply original characters not bound to any real person. To create a character that wasn't right in the first place seems like a flaw in the creator's part almost, if not an act of cruelty to create a creature that now requires a constant supply of drugs or injections to keep its current form.
Now I know this is a way too intense and in-depth look at the psychology of imaginary characters, but having done some research of the medical workings of the process in real life, and (in this author's opinion) the negative effects it seems to have, I just find it a bit odd that one would create a character with such a huge flaw. I mean, you can have characters with any imaginary arrangement of genitalia, and there's literally a unique option for the gender of each arrangement here on FA to choose from. However, the transgender option is still there, normally referring to the detail that the character(s) had to achieve their physical form unnaturally, and my final question in this being simply, why? If one could have a character of any form simply born that way, why make a character that denies their natural existence?
Anyway, something popped into my mind that after a bit of thought, ended up seeming a bit odd to me. Here on FA, as I've said before, we have Tiger/Cougars, Fox/Wolves, Frog/Tree, Leopard/Mountain Goat, and many more impossible hybrids, along with plenty of other fantasy traits, such as glowing body parts, extra limbs, bright/unrealistic body colors, and the list goes on and on.
With the sky still coming nowhere close to the limit, there are still people's OC's who are Transvestites. Before you punch me, listen; from what I've read on, people who undergo the long, fragile process of becoming trans only do so if they really feel that they were born wrong and need to change themselves.
But here's where I don't get it, if furries can literally have any feature imaginable about themselves, why would one create one that sees itself as imperfect, that felt the need to change itself from its original creation. It seems it would be far simpler to have made this imaginary creature in its true form in the first place, rather than making a character that is psychologically driven permanently change itself. Of course an exception would be one's own fursona, which would reflect themselves in real life, but what I am discussing is that of simply original characters not bound to any real person. To create a character that wasn't right in the first place seems like a flaw in the creator's part almost, if not an act of cruelty to create a creature that now requires a constant supply of drugs or injections to keep its current form.
Now I know this is a way too intense and in-depth look at the psychology of imaginary characters, but having done some research of the medical workings of the process in real life, and (in this author's opinion) the negative effects it seems to have, I just find it a bit odd that one would create a character with such a huge flaw. I mean, you can have characters with any imaginary arrangement of genitalia, and there's literally a unique option for the gender of each arrangement here on FA to choose from. However, the transgender option is still there, normally referring to the detail that the character(s) had to achieve their physical form unnaturally, and my final question in this being simply, why? If one could have a character of any form simply born that way, why make a character that denies their natural existence?
In the case of creating characters who "suffer", it's less about being cruel to the things you make and more about giving them a direction to proceed in after creation. Without conflict a story stagnates, and generally that's not what people want for their characters.
In addition, gender dysphoria is one such problem that a great many people may contend with in their own lives and they might find it easier to navigate their own emotions and thoughts on such a thing by infusing a fictional character outside of themselves with the same problem. It can be powerful catharsis for people who need outlets for personal frustration or confusion, and I've found that character creation and resolution can be a wonderful a coping mechanism.