Definition Request

http://www.collectedcurios.com/Chloe_Not_a_Furry.jpg

Judging by the tone of JJ's various sketches that address this issue, this comes up alot and in negative ways, so I'm just gonna go ahead and ask a mod to pre-emptively lock this thread and that people not reply here.

Can I have people PM me their definition of the distinction between Anthro and Furry? To me, the terms are fungible. I don't know what key aspect I'm missing.

I like the art, I just don't get what the importance is in using a specific label. I don't know what I'm filtering in/out by using one term or the other.

I would actually like someone to give the answer in this thread - I am curious myslef, not being "in" the furry/anthro/whtv community and JUST maybe there are others like me here.

My take on it is as follows. Your mileage will very. Also, my apologies in advance if I accidentally insult anyone, especially Jolly Jack.

Anthro is shorthand for anthropomorphic animal and is neutral in meaning. They range from regular dogs that talk to characters like Bugs Bunny or Chloe (contrary to popular belief, toon animals typically qualify as anthros). Sometimes kemonomimi (Japanese catgirls and the like) get lumped in, although that's usually stretching the definition until it reaches the breaking point.

Furry can refer to two things and is usually used negatively in both cases, sometimes to the point of being an insult.

– Strictly speaking, a furry character is synonymous with an anthro, but there is an added implication (sometimes imaginary but oftentimes it's real) that the anthro exists mainly so the artist and/or audience can indulge in adult-oriented hanky-panky hijinks, to put it mildly.

– The other sort of furry is the furry fan. Ideally, a furry fan refers to anyone who likes depictions of anthropomorphic animals in art and print, be it tame or naughty. In reality, furries are stereotypically thought of as that relatively small segment of the fandom that really gets noticed – namely, the more extreme "furry fetishists" AKA "freaks, perverts, and weirdos". It's these "freaks, perverts, and weirdos" who have turned the term "furry" into a pejorative towards anything anthropomorphic.

Fans of anthros (the non-"freak, pervert, and weirdo" type of fan) don't like to be called furries because of that stereotype (with some of the stuff out there, can you blame them?). Calling them stereotypical "furries" is like calling classical artists like da Vinci and Michaelangelo purveyors of mind-numbing hardcore porn because women (sometimes nude, sometimes not, and only occasionally sort of naughty) figured in their art.

-----

My interpretation of the linked picture is thus: Jolly Jack is trying to point out that he and his characters aren't "furries" in the negative stereotypical sense, but encompass a whole lot more than just sex (especially the perversions that would make him claw his eyes out with a hot poker). Unfortunately, he has to suffer with viewers who just don't understand sex appeal usually has nothing to do with sex itself and mistake him for the "freak, pervert, or weirdo" he's not.

I don't take offense

And I don't care what label people attach to my work. If the shoe fits; I'm not going to waste time railing against it.
I was just saying I'm not keen on the term "furry".

Had never noticed any outrages in word "fur".
So I do now...

P.S. Furvertation - one of forms of humanity-dissapointation,which linked with... no,not "anthro animals"/"fauna humanity"

Quoth Jolly Jack:
I don't take offense

You, sir, are a class act. The furry genre – heck, every genre – needs more artists like you.

The issue here is how the word "furry" is being used to refer to the fans. Because of several incidents of negative publicity, it's getting to be treated like "Trekkie" -- once virtually unknown outside the fandom but used derogatorily by people who wanted something they could point and laugh at.

McClaw wrote:The issue here is how the word "furry" is being used to refer to the fans. Because of several incidents of negative publicity, it's getting to be treated like "Trekkie" -- once virtually unknown outside the fandom but used derogatorily by people who wanted something they could point and laugh at.

Indeed. Thats why I prefer to refer to my art too as anthro and not furry. The only problem that I see here is that "anthro" (beeing an abbreviation of "anthropomorphic") means in fact "human", which might be a little comfusing to people nonfamiliar with the terminology.

Generally,"Furry" - it is when there are only fluffy furry skin and some features of the animal.
"Biologically",it is still Homo Sapiens Sapiens.

26_994 wrote:Generally,"Furry" - it is when there are only fluffy furry skin and some features of the animal.
"Biologically",it is still Homo Sapiens Sapiens.

Homo Sapiens Sapiens are classified as simians, so not all anthro's are biologically human. They just have human aspects.


To me Anthropomorphic and Furry is generally synonymous, but I notice that sexually explicit(SE) pictures are generally called furries while non-SE pictures are called anthropomorphic art.

You're nerd?Yes,simians,I knew it. And you'd better read some old tales.
SA is really "furry" - because there is nothing wrong,that Art loves Kat.


P.S.:Now I've learned - my IQ is out of charts. 7-bit charts - and it is 129 generally

26_994 wrote:You're nerd?Yes,simians,I knew it. And you'd better read some old tales.
SA is really "furry" - because there is nothing wrong,that Art loves Kat.


P.S.:Now I've learned - my IQ is out of charts. 7-bit charts - and it is 129 generally

I recommend you show your intelligence through well thought out responses, or at least blind us with science before advertising why we should accredit you opinions.

And to keep things on track, before I realized I was a fan of anthro art I did mainly associate the word "furry" with folks who dressed up in fur costumes and attended conventions (so in short I do still see it negatively). However, "Anthro" is a little bit less main stream and I can use it without getting the same strange looks that I would get if I was using the word "Furry."

Moving to other people, I know a lot of people that use the word Furry with negative thought/intention, and that is something I would like to try to avoid with the style that I have found I am a fan of.

xombie wrote:before I realized I was a fan of anthro art I did mainly associate the word "furry" with folks who dressed up in fur costumes and attended conventions (so in short I do still see it negatively). However, "Anthro" is a little bit less main stream and I can use it without getting the same strange looks that I would get if I was using the word "Furry."

Moving to other people, I know a lot of people that use the word Furry with negative thought/intention, and that is something I would like to try to avoid with the style that I have found I am a fan of.

The whole furry thing is a bit of a misconception.

After coming across this place, I've found myself getting more and more into the whole anthro thing. And I like to know stuff, so I've looked into the whole furry thing.

First off, the reason the public image of furry is fursuits and weird sex in fursuits, is because they're the more outrageous aspect, which makes good television. Things like CSI, some sex program and Tyra Banks for example.

Second, the fandom does not help itself. The idea is that it's something you can use to express yourself, no matter who or what you are. Unfortunately, that means you get a fair number of exceptionally weird fetishes going on, which again, media latches onto. I'm not going to go in to the worst offenders, but lets just say a lot of it is way over the top and just gives bad image.

As for furries themselves, a lot of them tend to be over the top, which is a little daunting, but from what I've learned, they are generally friendly people, and to be honest, given your average internet user, probably a lot nicer than the majority of the groups out there. There is a bit of a weird time when you realise that a pretty hefty proportion of furries tend to be gay, but thats probably the whole expression thing coming into play. It seems to be a nicer environment for people to come out. Whcih is the really weird thing. Everything you hear or see about furries tends to be negative, but they are pretty much regular people. You still get your fair share of drama-queens and the like, you get the bad eggs, but other than that they are welcoming, friendly people, if not a touch creepy at times.

Personally, when the art is brought up, I prefer the term anthro, as it avoids the negative connotations of Furry, but as time goes past I'm finding myself more and more into a lot of the culture, which worries me a little.

But yeah, Anthro/Furry. Same thing. It's attributing human or humanoid characteristics to something. Anthro could be pretty much anything you can thing of being anthropomorphasised (animate and inanimate objects, animals, etc), while furry means specifically animals with human traits. Even then, human traits can be as insignificant as a standard rabbit that talks. Or a sheep that has human style eyes.

*jazzhands*

Bottom line. If you say anthro you sound more cleverer.

the word "furry" has been used so many times in different meanings that it has no real point to it.

as for Anthro, to me it just clear and simple.

Smelge wrote:Second, the fandom does not help itself. The idea is that it's something you can use to express yourself, no matter who or what you are. Unfortunately, that means you get a fair number of exceptionally weird fetishes going on, which again, media latches onto. I'm not going to go in to the worst offenders, but lets just say a lot of it is way over the top and just gives bad image.

What you're describing is an unfortunate intersection of media (looking for attention-getting things they can use to sell copy / ad space) and people who tend toward extremes and want the attention. Those with more understanding of what the media tries to do will restrain themselves and don't get broadcast; those that can be conned into participating in "the show" get publicly thrashed and drag everyone else down with them.

The only really diferent between Furry art and Anthro one - furries are able to cross BETWEEN "kinds" -
in fact,they are animals in their ... "souls",not genomes.

P.S.
Why I've given all my life to the science,if nobody listen to me "because of my little age" ?!?!
OMG...wait!I have experimental thing named SbaGen!I can make a start with this!

P.P.S.

A=H S S
K=F C
P=? ?
S=S V

P = ?

It is to the Sequential Art

26_994 wrote:
P.P.S.

A=H S S
K=F C
P=? ?
S=S V

P = ?

Pip is a penguin, but I don't know which kind

H S S ?

F C ?

S V ?

HSS - Homo Sapiens Sapiens (Human)
FC - Felis Catus (Cat)
SV - Scurius Vulgaris (Squirell)

EDIT: edited the H in human, but only due cosmetic reasons

Well,my point of definition:

"Anthropic" become "furry",when ... not when Arthur loves Katleen,but when Katleen loves Arthur



For Wikipedia:

"Furry" unites 4 kinds of art:

1."Weak"-anthropomorphic animals (example:"King Lion")

2."Strong"-antropomorphic animals (example:"SWAT Kats: The Radical Squadron") _________(yes,weak example...so try to offer something more suitable...)

3.Nekomimies: a kind of anime characters (really mostly girls only).Uses giving cats' features (ears,tail and ... throat ) for raising up charactr's charisma.
Sometimes gets into p.2,when the grade of cat features is too high

4."Fabletail" (or any other suitable name ) : kind of giving animals' features for characters for showing the specialities (correct me,please). Sometimes gets into p.2.

Example...please,add one - i'm tired...

Is the theme is closed?