[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / animu / choroy / doomer / komica / mde / vichan / wboy / xivlg ][Options][ watchlist ]

/fur/ - Furry

all fur one and one fur all
You can now write text to your AI-generated image at https://aiproto.com It is currently free to use for Proto members.
Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
Select/drop/paste files here
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Expand all images

►►► Get Whitelisted | Rules | Catalog | Log ◄◄◄

| Find & Share | Art | Edit | Literature | Porn |

[–]

 No.96706>>96790 >>96794 >>97164 >>97170 >>97174 >>97222 >>97385 [Watch Thread][Show All Posts]

How do you prefer your talking animal stories?

What I am talking about is the level of animal vs human personality and behavior. Using animals either as a purely aesthetic purpose and have them act completely similar to humans (Disney's Robin Hood) or have them think similar to humans but rely on animalistic instincts or traits (Redwall, NIMH, Zootopia, etc), or have them look and act completely animal but rationalize their thoughts in a human way (Watership Down, Plague Dogs, etc). Or perhaps a different form entirely? Are there certain stories or types of stories that have good or bad personification? Let me know what you think of these, as well as what you enjoy.

Related topics and somewhat off-topic discussion is allowed.

 No.96762>>96791 >>96855

4 is best


 No.96790>>96791

>>96706 (OP)

2 is best


 No.96791>>96792

>>96762

>>96790

Care to elaborate aside from the image? Why would be one better than the other and what types of stories would it better tell?


 No.96792

>>96791

2 is pedobait furry, 4 is at least pretending


 No.96794>>97267 >>97348

>>96706 (OP)

Anyone like #1?


 No.96855

>>96762

1 through 5 is best


 No.97006>>97168 >>97267 >>97582

File (hide): e68af22b9406b83⋯.png (665.92 KB, 640x900, 32:45, degrees of anthro.png) (h) (u)

At least use the proper one


 No.97129

I recently watched Studio Ghibli's "Pom Poko" and it was nice in its portrayal of the Tanuki in several ways, ranging from anthropomorphic to realistic animals. The transformations were also nice.

Using your chart, I lean three and up; Disney's Robin Hood was nice, but I prefer a story like Zootopia or MLP, where the animal traits are integral and it's not just otherwise swapped out for humans.


 No.97130>>97247

Oh, I completely forgot about Studio Ghibli's "The Cat Returns"; that's another excellent portrayal, similar to "Pom Poko" in how it treats the cats, with them either being realistic cats or anthropomorphic, but significantly less so.


 No.97164>>97247

>>96706 (OP)

I like all types of personification.


 No.97168>>97171

>>97006

gross why does she have a vagina ;w;


 No.97170>>97247

File (hide): 3cc612586cc119e⋯.jpg (37.45 KB, 484x497, 484:497, 1548568168411.jpg) (h) (u)

>>96706 (OP)

>Redwall, NIMH, Zootopia

you just named my three favorite furry movies/book.

we would get along well.


 No.97171>>97190

>>97168

because its for pedophiles.


 No.97174>>97383

>>96706 (OP)

>Or perhaps a different form entirely

also, I like them that way too


 No.97190

>>97171

that's fucked up


 No.97193>>97224 >>97227 >>97383

File (hide): e321e27dacea164⋯.jpg (109.13 KB, 749x1067, 749:1067, felidae.jpg) (h) (u)

Seems people are misunderstanding what I mean by this thread, I didn't mean for the picture to dictate it, only as a slight reference to the topic I was trying to portray.

Focus less the picture I posted, I didn't mean for that to be the basis. What I'm interested in is how and in what ways different types of animals can control stories and how they can add or take away from a story.

For example, I was suggested to watch the movie "Felidae" by other anons and I was not a fan to say the least. The ways in which they talked and interacted felt uncanny, neither human nor cat-like. They were too overly verbose and added thought into situations that didn't need it or what a normal person or cat wouldn't typically think. Basically, they were personified in a way that felt very off putting to me, unnatural, and dare I say somewhat autistic. Nothing seemed to come about naturally or fluently, felt very forced or robotic at times. As opposed to a movie like Watership Down were their thoughts and emotions felt natural to the events but still emphasized the fact that they were rabbits and because of that, they didn't feel like human brains in rabbits or humans in rabbit costumes. But who knows, someone will probably come along and tell me how I didn't understand Felidae, that's what this thread is for. Argue about good points of personification, list the ones you think came off flat or bad. I wanted to explore what can make animal people feel natural, unnatural, uncanny, etc and the balancing acts between different portrayals, what makes them good, what makes them bad, etc.

I'm just tired of all the porn and sexuality in this fandom and I wish people would stop talking about which characters or things they happen to find attractive.


 No.97222>>97234

File (hide): 4f4fbefe0aa1ec5⋯.jpeg (112.58 KB, 900x677, 900:677, 58FC5A7D-EF81-4EB7-8544-F….jpeg) (h) (u)

>>96706 (OP)

was never a fan of this chart

it just assumes evolution all ends with humans while in reality it's just another animal becoming brainy and bipedal, like, rodent/primates did


 No.97224>>97247

>>97193

Curious. I’ve heard of the film but never seen it and now I want to after reading this.

I hear it’s not easy to get a hold of but I know someone who’s got it on tape.

I think it’s pretty gross how sex-centric the fandom is. When I go to any other kind of professional or fan convention, new people ask me about my interests in that sphere or what I do for a living or whatever. At furry cons everyone wants to know if I’m fucking the people I’m there with, what my orientation is, and whether I’ve ever seen anyone fuck a dog. It’s really tiring.

At least try to be subtle. It’s not like I wouldn’t fuck someone from an industry trade show. I just would rather start by chatting with them at the hotel bar on the second or third day, and see if we have anything in common first.


 No.97227>>97247

File (hide): 78dac58b4bee691⋯.jpg (36.02 KB, 400x300, 4:3, image.jpg) (h) (u)

>>97193

Quoting your spoiler, me too anon, me too


 No.97234>>97270

>>97222

It's going in reverse and the joke is related to what is okay to sexualize. Saying that the further you go in the chart the further it becomes bestiality-like.

It's also in reference to anthropomorphism which is adding human characteristics to animals. So the chart does have a valid gradient between totally human and totally animal.


 No.97247>>97262

File (hide): dde0b5a7f2908e6⋯.jpg (47.44 KB, 588x588, 1:1, thinking.jpg) (h) (u)

>>97224

It's easy to find online, it has a dub apparently which I don't know if it may or may not have effected my opinions on it. Voice-acting aside, I thought the writing was pretty bad. If you feel like watching it, go ahead, just come back here and tell me what you think. All I can say is that I don't recommend it, but I'm interested to know why people like it or might think it to be good.

>I think it’s pretty gross how sex-centric the fandom is.

It's difficult at times to even want to be associated with the fandom, I get found out without even saying much besides that I enjoy Tolkien-esque fantasy and what animals could think if they were like people. There's very much a stigma around it at least with people who use the internet, they either think that you want to write children's books and have a weird obsession with them, or they think you're a sexual degenerate who doesn't want to be human, or somewhere in-between. I think the problem is with how Furries present themselves, I've stopped calling myself a Furry altogether because most will have an immediate negative connotation to it, but still people figure out what sorts of themes I like and call me a Furry anyways.

>At least try to be subtle. It’s not like I wouldn’t fuck someone from an industry trade show.

I'm not one for casual sex anyway, I'm strictly celibate and seen as a black sheep in any group in terms of all my opinions and preferences. My aim is try and be what I think the Furry fandom or other people should be like.

>>97227

That's why I appreciate many more discussion threads or talk about anthro related media in general instead of just "what animals do you like?", etc. I would go to another site or place, but this is the only place where discussion seems worthwhile. All other anthro-related sites or content seems to devolve either into porn or becomes based off of emotion and fanfiction-tier.

>>97164

How do you think stories work for all of them? Obviously some things will come off more believably than others. I think it's important to keep in mind the level of personification and their actions, thoughts, etc, so they match up and don't feel lopsided or uncanny. And I think certain scenarios work better for different levels of anthropomorphism than others.

>>97170

Do you know of any more books like NIMH by chance? I swear there were a lot of similar ones, but I can't remember them. Like Mice society books, The Rescuers book is the only one that comes to mind.

>>97130

I very much enjoyed "The Cat Returns" although I wish more "cat-like" elements were incorporated or at least I feel they could've gotten away with it. Their society was very human-like or at least from what I remember. But at the same time, I'm glad they didn't make them too cat-like and have them come off feeling uncanny or forced. My favorites are ones that incorporate their animal traits or needs into the basics of their society.


 No.97262

>>97247

>I very much enjoyed "The Cat Returns" although I wish more "cat-like" elements were incorporated or at least I feel they could've gotten away with it. Their society was very human-like or at least from what I remember.

From what I recall, it was mostly cats on their hind legs. Their kingdom was always in the afternoon, because cats like laying in the sun, and there were nice details such as guard cats having a black and white palette resembling a suit and tie.

Now that I think about it, that film also had good bits where the human girl protagonist is slowly transforming into a cat while in the kingdom, which makes for a nice halfway portrayal.

>But at the same time, I'm glad they didn't make them too cat-like and have them come off feeling uncanny or forced. My favorites are ones that incorporate their animal traits or needs into the basics of their society.

I agree here. I like how early MLP had them stomp the ground instead of clap their hooves, sit on bales of hay instead of chairs in some places, and behave like real horses in many of their mannerisms. Unfortunately, it's my understanding the later seasons, I stopped watching during the fifth, has had the lazy writers add more and more human mannerisms and landmark cameos and whatnot.

Oh well, it is what it is, and I'll always be able to pick and choose so I can still enjoy things.


 No.97264>>97352

Mid-range. I like /tg/ tier stuff. Their own distinct races and cultures, based off of animalistic standards, but, clearly not human.


 No.97267

>>96794

>>>/monster/

>>97006

3+ is good to me. 5's damn qt.


 No.97270>>97287 >>97288 >>97292

>>97234

Furries are just zoophiles in denial.


 No.97287

>>97270

Not really... I can't fap to anything with an animal pussy on it, but I can fap to anything with a human pussy on it.

I think the true animal fuckers are those who draw realistic animal genitalia on the characters.


 No.97288

>>97270

>in denial

Speak for yourself.


 No.97292>>97298

>>97270

Keeping that line of thinking:

>Lolicons/Shotacons are just pedophiles in denial.

What's your point?


 No.97298

>>97292

Japanese people and their culture have pedophilic tendencies.


 No.97348>>97383

File (hide): 8a3de8b4f0ddf51⋯.png (1.01 MB, 805x1696, 805:1696, B3D31DCA-59C5-4903-ACC5-EA….png) (h) (u)

>>96794

That would be me. I find Kemonomimi very appealing, myself.


 No.97352

>>97264

last I checked there was a rabied mod on /tg/ pruning anything not human


 No.97353>>97354

File (hide): 22b64c57a6c7982⋯.jpg (53.95 KB, 1024x588, 256:147, dun.JPG) (h) (u)

4 kinds of furry

3 out of the 4 are the evils


 No.97354>>97381

>>97353

">The "Anthro"

>brainlet cranium with no regard in fixing/bumping it up if such a creature'd be smart enough to walk and talk

>plantigrade or just plain human feet even when it's already established the species is digitigrade

>muscles aren't modified to fit the bipedal body in any way, literal just human muscles or other animal parts attached to human parts with no theorizing/fusion of the two types of muscles/bones themselves

>The Disney

>just a regular feral earth animal, walking upright

>...

>may also talk and grab things with the feral body for no reason

>The Jap

>just a human with an animal accessory

>...

>no

>just a bug eyed, dot nosed, if that is even suppose to be the nose, abomination with an axe wound for a "mouth"

>really just a grey alien with lots of makeup and either a tiara or four actual ears"


 No.97381>>97389

>>97354

Digitigrade wouldn't actually work, the poor anthro's ankles would snap.


 No.97383

>>97174

>we'll never get a NofNA story featuring a piscine character

I'll get an autistic mega-post on NofNa in here in a bit.

>>97193

Maybe the dialogue is better in the book. It's been a long time since I've seen the movie at least, but I remember liking it. I'll have to do a rewatch for any critical discourse.

>Argue about good points of personification, list the ones you think came off flat or bad. I wanted to explore what can make animal people feel natural, unnatural, uncanny, etc and the balancing acts between different portrayals, what makes them good, what makes them bad, etc.

This is what I love about furry/anthropomorphism. Seeing how it affects media and how well it's used is super satisfying.

>I'm just tired of all the porn and sexuality in this fandom and I wish people would stop talking about which characters or things they happen to find attractive.

I'm with you on the first point, but I think it's just as interesting to see what qualities attract people to fictional characters.

>>97348

Could you explain why? Everytime I see that aesthetic it just seems lazy compared to just having an anthro character.


 No.97385

File (hide): 4f682bc7b6a4cfa⋯.jpg (256.6 KB, 1600x744, 200:93, neck types anthro.jpg) (h) (u)

File (hide): 006f8d02719e1d5⋯.jpg (1.78 MB, 1913x2588, 1913:2588, anthro guide.jpg) (h) (u)

>>96706 (OP)

throwing this in for good measure


 No.97389>>97391

File (hide): 2ecda97add989ad⋯.jpeg (188.31 KB, 980x603, 980:603, 1FE52568-C05C-44C5-9463-7….jpeg) (h) (u)

>>97381

Digitigrades are among the best legs, like, ever

look at t-rex's and all that weight they had to balance on those two legs, and they still ran fast

these digits were so reliable they didn't even need arms!

bipedalism would actually be a breeze for digitigrades, finally being able to stand upright and think before you move rather than being driven by pure instinct alone

even our own amputee runners are given digitigraded prosthetics when competing in the sport. some runners with natural legs even say the prosthetics give those runners an unfair advantage


 No.97391>>97393

>>97389

It's good for speed, not for stability, UNLESS you have something akin to the T-Rexes massive FEET or the large paws of a lion. smaller feet allow for more pressure to be put on the ground = more speed (see cheetahs and compare their paw shape to lions) however this makes them easier to knock over, and easier to harm. It's like with a tank, you can go with the BT-7 and have a tank that can jump a fucking 5-meter pond but its armor will be penetrated by a 37mm anti-tank gun, while the slightly slower and less agile T-34 would shrug off the 37mm gun fairly easily.


 No.97393>>97394

>>97391

Well as I said, even our own amputees are given these godly digits for competition.

Are you implying such bipeds would actually have a hard time moving despite everything we already know?


 No.97394>>97395

>>97393

>implying such bipeds would actually have a hard time moving despite everything we already know

No, I'd just say that if you were to walk with your bi-ped digitigrade furry friend and push them, they'd probably fall over, when you'd probably barely lose balance. The principle of instability allows for a higher speed. There is a similar concept in martial arts when moving forward quickly to strike.


 No.97395>>97398

>>97394

Oh so if someone was on stilts or something they'd be more vulnerable to lose balance?


 No.97398


 No.97582>>97592

>>97006

>best one (4)

>gets best kink (spreading manko)

She is built for breeding


 No.97592

>>97582

Why do they seem to get more embarrassed toward the human end and happier toward the animal end of the spectrum?




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Screencap][Nerve Center][Cancer][Update] ( Scroll to new posts) ( Auto) 5
44 replies | 11 images | Page ???
[Post a Reply]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / animu / choroy / doomer / komica / mde / vichan / wboy / xivlg ][ watchlist ]