/fur/ - Furry★

We are the Ailuridae, and we are many

Vaguely carnivora furry robot.

>>94803 (OP)

>8 avians

I really find this hard to believe. Where are all you other birds?

>>95000

Im here

I never fucking post

>>94803 (OP)

Hooman.

>>94803 (OP)

I plan to make one based on this bird.

>>95189

Aggretsuko fad died out from what I've seen until they get the second season but even then I made mine before that show came out so I wasn't bothered by it

I don't think it's a hipster choice at all, I think the fad sona species like sergals are overrated and overhyped choices to make a character out of, but that's just my opinion. I don't care what other people think of my fursona, it's mine and I have fun with it. Of course, I make sure he's not a sparkledog rainbow with glitter cum and what have you because it's excessive and unnecessary.

Go for it if you want dude, red pandas are very cute, and no one's gonna rip on you for making one.

>>95294

I mean, I've already gone for it, since like a decade ago. Red pandas are somewhat totemic to me, and it doesn't hugely bother me. I just like to think about these sort of things. In the past I used to care a lot about being unique, and while I've mellowed out a bit I still don't really like being part of what's extremely popular, like I could never be a sergal or a fox. I think red panda fits me a lot, though.

Are you the one with the tailmaw?

>tfw you're an octopus and you'll never, ever run into another one at any con ever

Guess we live up to the characteristics of our counterparts in the wild, at least.

>>95303

Nah, mine has yellow eyes

Colony of worm-like organisms that use bones as a form of structural mechanism to move.

Lovingly referred to as a "congregation of corpse collectors".

>>95322

An artist had a similar concept in one of their media save for that colony identifies as feminine while mine identifies as masculine. Their colony also uses coral remnants for structural support, while mine uses vertebrate bones.

What does furry think of Spergfox? Are all foxes spergs?

>>95328

CAPTCHA = DRPWING

>>95329

>>95331

Furry/Autism is allowed here right?

>>95341

Equine Science has nothing to do with botnets, but here is a picture just for you negrito-kun.

>>94803 (OP)

kitties represent

>>95326

Human, but I fuck Pokemon. 0% furry + 100% furry (feral) means I reach a statistical average of 50% furry which puts me on the same tier as most anthro furries.

Debate me.

>>95000

hey gamer

I'm a human, won't deny I am one, don't wish I wasn't one. But it's fun to imagine, I guess if I had to choose I'd want to be a Red Panda or I see myself similar to one.

>short

>stubby

>solitary

>sedentary

>anti-social

>doesn't care for sex

>tired frequently

However, I'm open to the idea that I might be more similar a different type of animal and I'd be happy if anyone would help me figure out what that is. Animals like Bears, Otters, Salamanders, and Alpine Ibexes are aesthetically pleasing to me. More and more Red Pandas seem like a fad choice to me, but I can't say I really care. One of my concerns however is that people tend to draw Red Pandas with human proportions and less how they actually look if they stood upright.

>>95189

Red Pandas seem to be a popular choice for internet-dwellers with low self esteem, in my opinion. Like myself.

>>95666

>One of my concerns however is that people tend to draw Red Pandas with human proportions and less how they actually look if they stood upright.

That's fair, there's not much reason to avoid it since they still look adorable that way.

>>95666

>wanting to be a manlet

>>95671

>Lesser Panda in Polar Bear Cafe and Resasuke from Retsuko are good examples of anthropomorphic Red Pandas with distinctly Red Panda-like personalities

LP doesn't seem to match up too well with those traits you mentioned imo.

He's very polite, but he seems to be fairly outgoing and with a healthy amount of self confidence.

He might just seem like he doesn't have much since the other characters unintentionally push him out of the spotlight whenever he has the opportunity to shine.

I'm fairly sure the whole point of his character in PBC is that he's an incredibly respectable, responsible, talented, and all around amazing person that constantly gets pushed to the side despite that because, unfortunately for him, he's the Lesser Panda.

All while the clumsy, fat, lazy, bum Panda gets to be the star of the show just because he's a significantly more well known Great Panda.

It always makes me feel good to see writers making proper use of animal characters, even if I'm biased to like them regardless.

>>95703

>I think you're certainly projecting a little bit

Which is why I was reluctant to share and said they could be debated. But from what I've noticed from Red Panda characters in shows like Polar Bear Cafe and Retsuko, they seem to have a "child-like" quality to them. I wouldn't say I'm that naive either, but for the most part it seems to describe Red Pandas well. Red Pandas in the wild are caught and poached because of their lack of survival skills and general inability as an animal, making them endangered.

And none of the characters in Kung Fu Panda are really written with animal archetypes in mind except for Po. Even then it could be argued Shifu is reluctant to accept things and has trouble seeing outside his worldview, making him naive this way through ignorance.

But all of this is open to debate though, I'm pretty sure we'd be able to find out a "Red Panda stereotype," all of us seem pretty similar when it boils down to it.

>>95722

Because as much as Red Pandas shy away from attention, they desperately want it too. From what I remember in the show, he always seemed to downplay his accomplishments but border on humble and boastful. He also came off as a bit child-like or "kosher."

That's not to say there can't be outliers to the stereotype. These are just common traits I've noticed between Red Panda characters and their creators and not just myself.

>>95723

So with a little bit of thinking on it, I do think you're unfairly representing red pandas. They're not unintelligent - their closest relatives are raccoons and other mustelidae, which are all pretty intelligent or at least crafty/wily creatures. Your argument kind of comes down to them being endangered and lack of survival skills, but they never needed to evolve those because of their preferred habitat and diet. They spend most of their time in trees, which is a natural defense against predators, and human interference is such a wild-card you can hardly hold it against any animal in particular.

Lesser Panda in PBC didn't really have enough episodes to develop much of a character, and I think >>95722 nails it - they sort of exist to highlight the hilarity that red pandas are considered second place even though they were the first discovered panda (which literally meant 'eater of bamboo' - but now it's more synonymous with 'bear', which red pandas are very distant from) and in most objective cases, the better-evolved panda. The red panda diet is also a lot more flexible, where they can eat more bugs, fruits, and birds without causing significant issues by lack of bamboo.

I mean, I still agree with most things, but lack of intelligence/naivete is not one I agree with. Aside from that, four characters does not make a compelling sample size for stereotyping, anyway. Going forward, as/if red pandas become more mainstream, I think we'll particularly see them begin to take on a combination of aspects of bears and cats, as that's what they are seen as mostly.

By the way, if you want to know, the main reason red panda are endangered is actually a similar issue with giant panda, ironically - they just sort of don't do the whole mating thing very well. Females only have a gestation period of like three days IIRC. They're probably all asexual losers and the male red pandas have to turn to sodomy to satisfy their needs.

>>95855

Animal symbolism only goes so far, is the thing. Wolves get an arbitrary reputation for the whole 'lone wolf' thing, but they're actually extremely social, pack-based creatures. A lone wolf is actually likely to be very volatile and not have its needs met - a lot of animals actually need that social hierarchy to be very healthy.

When you're getting down to the very gritty details of personality, you then also start to get into temperaments, and this is where you see the traits that are much more personifiable. While red pandas have a tendency to live isolated lives, they are capable of maintaining a social status of a few of them - but in zoos we've seen a handful of temperaments (just like with other animals) like assertive (one red panda who frequently takes the food that her siblings were currently eating, where most others didn't do as frequently) to passive (waiting to get their food to try to avoid conflict). More practically, just look at cats and dogs, where unless you're a sheltered shut-in you've probably met enough to see a difference. Most dogs are outgoing, but some more than others. Some cats are hyper-independent, whereas others are very much lapcats.

That's just focusing on them as actual animals to point out that, even in animals, stereotyping too hard is downplaying the range of personalities they can have. When you turn them into intelligent humanoids, this berth only widens further. That said, I do like most of your ascribed stereotypes, in part because they do fit myself too, but I think truthfully a lot of these stereotypes will just match a lot of people trying to participate in the furry community to, moreso than any other community. It's sort of like how the furry community is overwhelmingly alternate sexualities - not quite representative of the whole population, so trying to apply furry demographics to the entire population must be done with care. Here's what I agree with from your list of stereotypes:

>polite but standoffish - matches that they're mostly isolated creatures, used to living independently.

<low confidence/self-esteem is something I think would depend moreso on the character, as anyone within any group can suffer from both a low sense of self and a high sense of self.

<naive or forgetful - not knowing how to respond/react conflicts a little bit with getting along with others well. in a real social situation they might be somewhat awkward, but there would be a certain charm they'd learn to rely on. anything more specific is too specific for a stereotype, I think

>attentive, likes detail

>likes spending a lot of time to themselves or hobbies

I think red pandas would certainly be more mechanically inclined, and would get easily absorbed in their hobbies or crafts to the extent that they might even forget their own bodily needs at times, until suddenly it's the middle of the night and they're starving because they've eaten nothing. This might come off as naive and forgetful, but primarily only happens when they're given the freedom from obligations to do so. I think they are somewhat sociable, and the sense of standoffishness is only because they can get really focused on their tasks. In a broad social sense, I think they would have a natural charm where others feel like they can trust the red panda, which only furthers their sense of obligation whether they want that attention or not. I think they would have a strong sense of security or wanting to build such, because they want to create the conditions where they can flourish and focus on their hobbies uninterrupted.

By the way I'm the one projecting now. :^) Like I said, I agree with a lot of them, but getting too specific with it is more just calling them out for being autists when there's a wider range of personalities they can fit. I think a stereotypical red panda would range anywhere from a mechanic who responds somewhat gruffly to people trying to interrupt them but otherwise cares a lot and wants to help to a gardener who takes extremely delicate care to her precious flowers, frequently using them as a launch-point to talk to others. The stereotype is less so, "Man what an isolated prick," and more like, "That's such a red panda thing, getting so wrapped up in your work."

>>95861 agreed

I actually meant to talk about that but my post ended up too long. Having an animal you symbolically associate with is fine, but temperaments are definitely a thing and none of them are a cookie-cutter personality that match you. It's completely okay to pick a species based on aesthetic, history, culture, or anything more shallow. A lot of people have Pokesonas because a lot of Pokemon have appealing designs, after all.

For myself, red pandas are totemic, in that I channel a lot of positive energy through them. In years past I would look at pictures of them to remind myself that life can be carefree, and while it's not much different from looking at funny cat pictures I made it mean something more to me. I got a neat red panda pendant that I wear around my neck, and while it's certainly not magical I use it as an object to remind myself how to stay grounded when life is getting to me. Also, just in general, their aesthetic is highly appealing - while unrelated to either species, 'catbear' is a very appropriate term to describe them. For other people, they'll probably never really find anything totemic to them, as they won't need it or it won't appeal to them in a sense. There's nothing wrong with that, either - red pandas are cute and while I sometimes get defensive about my individuality, more red panda art is always welcome.

But if you want a spiritual connection to your choice, keep in mind you will never exhibit all of the stereotypical traits you presume of a creature. It's instead better to focus on the positives that animal represents, and work yourself towards those goals and make them who you are. I think that is, in essence, what having a spirit animal is about.

I Have No Fursona, and I Must Yiff

Seriously, I've been trying to find a species that's "me" for YEARS, but I just can't settle for one.

How do I know which one is right for me, /fur/?

>>95859

>then you start to get into temperaments

>stereotyping too hard is downplaying the range of personalities

I'm not denying that or people's personality types, people with different personalities can still make sense as the same type of animal.

Using stereotypes just makes it fun. I've been thinking about switching fursonas or looking for an animal that feels more like "me" but I haven't found one, so I look at these kinds of instinctive traits and compare them to see what my temperament most closely matches.

Stereotypes are necessarily true either, that's sort of the point and I realize the harm they can have. It's when they get too specific that they start to become ridiculous.

And I've never seen wolves or people or identify with wolves as a "Lone Wolf" or such. The stereotype with wolves for me is the stereotype of that of a "basic" or normal person. Widely outgoing (social), not too worried (relies on others), overvalues themselves (tries to be stoic, seen as a symbol for people who admire stoicism), etc. That's not saying that wolf fursonas are for basic people, they aren't necessarily. But they're a common animal most people will gravitate towards, and as such they're stereotyped for the reasons most people find them appealing or admirable, or possibly for reasons people had to deal with when wolves used to be more of threat towards humans. Wolves, Foxes, and Bears are the most common, so it makes sense they have stereotypes or that theirs tend to be more concrete or comprehensible.

>>95861

That's what I've been trying to go for, I don't mean to get into a lot of nitty gritty nitpick traits, but just how people see them on the surface.

>>95862

>It's completely okay to pick a species based on aesthetic, history, culture, or anything more shallow.

This is also where I struggle. I'm not one to consider race or geography when it comes to fursonas or similar traits, but it feels weird to be associated with a Red Panda when I haven't even met one myself and they live in the Himalayas. They sort of feel unrelated in that regard.

>>95867

Find an animal who's traits you admire and try to be more like that.

>>95879

>spoiler

I like you, anon. You're funny.

Hows this for a sona design? just pumped it out using Oob's character maker thang. Haven't settled on a sona yet so this may end up being my actual sona design lel

>>95916

like pic 1 or 2?

>>95000

>>95008

nice GET

yes i did vote in that earlier :)

>>95917

oh god this is why I don't art often, i'm either real hit or real miss o lordy

I just can't imagine a fursona for myself. At least not a conventional animal anyway. I could maybe get behind a scourge beast.

>>95847

Sadly, my only artistic outlet is SL so I made a "close enough" version through that.

>>95000

always watching anon, always watching

>>95000

Do paraves count?

>>96838

I think that was the idea.

I don't really have a fursona. Lots of characters with a bit of me in them, but they're all mostly unlike me. If I had to pick one I'm using a lot lately, it's this girl, an Iberian Lynx. I like a whole lot of species, but felines are a big one, and lynxes especially.

hello i am cow

>tfw pokéweasel

>>97057

Is this you?

>>97139

When I was younger I had a short fling as a cat-dragon hybrid. It didn't last very long, but I've always appreciated the aesthetic of dragons to some extent.

Don't make it about what other people think. At best, if you're not a fan of being typical, then you should embrace that to some extent, but ultimately if you like the aesthetic then go right ahead. For every whiner about you being too generic, there would have been a whiner about you being too unique. If you want your fursona to have a deeper spiritual meaning for yourself, then that's fine too, but ultimately your choice in species should be for yourself, even if it's a lack of concrete decision in form. (I sometimes argue that having a fursona is about idealizing the perfect body form per someone's tastes, which for a lot of people can't be boiled down to strictly one set of traits, hence the lack of decision on species. At the core, it's still the same character, just in an alternate form.)

>>97172

A residence with multiple furs. Alternatively, it could be newspeak for a single person whom fancies themselves MPD and 'houses' multiple versions of themselves in the form of fursonas inside their head, which given the context of the story strikes me about as likely. For a lot of people, furry borders too much on escapism.

I don't know which one to pick.

badger (but I feel like badgers are fat/bulky and I'm not)

raccoon (I had a bad experience with one and now I feel weird about raccoons)

weasel (hard to draw and I'm no smol boy)

help.

>>97401

I guess though miniature makes me flustered. I'm not even that short, 5'8". >w>

I want to be a brown tabby cat, but I also want to be a green pond frog, and sometimes I want to be a north american fork tailed barn swallow. I want to have a great many fursonas, but I can't decide on just one.

My 'sona is a beeg kitty.

(I actually considered going with a goat instead at one point but someone else I sort of knew went with a goat and I didn't want to be that faggot who copies someone else's idea.)

>>102095

They're around. Most of them are T-Rex's or raptors. Dino furries tend to have masochistic fetishes I noticed like crushing fetishes or bdsm stuff.

>feathers

Almost never. Every single dino furry I've talked to specifically stated they were big fans of Jurassic Park. Which influenced their fursona decision. And as we all know Jurassic Park lacks feathers. This is also where every raptor furry got their fursona from since the Velociraptor in reality was the size of a turkey and they based the dinosaur off of a larger one called Deinonychus. They probably picked "Velociraptor" because it sounds cooler.

>no hyenas mentioned yet

Good, fuck off we're full.

I'm a degenerate phoenix-colored hermaphrodite gryphon. Also sometimes fennec fox.

Do avian monsters/aliens count as avian or other?

>>102253

>>102459

Seems birdlike enough, though I'm not too sure how well aliens fit into the whole furry thing.

>>95322

>colony of worm creatures

Neat.

>>102416

Yes

>>102519

Molluscoid?

Worm colony here, wanna cuddle?

I like bugs a lot, so I wanna make something based on that.

Moths are neat, but they and bees are the Fox/Red Pandas of bugs, it feels like.

The sheer number of them feels daunting to try to enter into if I were to do something different with it - which I probably would.

Might make something based on like... Khepri or something, since I like mythology shit as well.

Are there any stereotypes for lagomorphs? I don't think I've heard of any.

Red Panda

reference is wip but this is what I got atm for it