Are You A Furry?

[Dissension]

That's what I meant, too. = P They can enjoy stories without furries, but having anthropomorphic animals is a major selling point for them.

[JeffCvt]

I guess I should have been more clear.
Anthropomorphic animals are not a "selling point" for me. Just looking like a good book or comic is what gets me reading.

[KJOokami]

And does the mere fact of having anthropomorphic animals in them independently improve your enjoyment of any particular works of art or literature?

[JeffCvt]

I can't say that it does.

I mean, I like the idea of animals that can walk and talk, but it does not give me any more enjoyment when reading a comic, or waching a movie, or anything else.

What I enjoy in things like that are totaly unexpected twists that no one saw coming. (Like pete being bad, or Joel when he was turned into King, or most recently, the temple in the ferrets backyard.)

[Sleet]

You don't sound like a furry to me then.

[KJOokami]

Yeah, I'm curious as to how you would define a furry then. :/ And, more importantly, how you define yourself as a furry.

Sounds to me like you're more of a connoisseur of well-done art and literature, who isn't biased against furries. But simply not being against a group of people doesn't make you a member of said group.

[JeffCvt]

I don't know how I would really define a furry.
Although I guess I think a furry as someone with a species chosen out for what they are. (My viewpoint on what I think they are)

And what do you mean define myself as a furry, because I don't.
Do you mean how close I am to being a furry or something?

[Kitela]

Being a furry is such a broad definition, you really have to decide for yourself whether you're a furry or not. Even when I had a fursona and enjoyed many anthropomorphic animal movies I still didn't think I was a furry until I socialized with other furries. Others may think just simply appreciating the art's and works (such as comics and movies) with anthropomorphic animals would make them a furry and that's fine too.

[KJOokami]

And what do you mean define myself as a furry, because I don't.

Ohhhhhh. Well, that would explain it. I hadn't realized that. I was under the assumption that you were one of the furries here; my bad, dude.

[JeffCvt]

It's fine.
While I don't think of myself as a furry, I guess some people might think that I am.
I do read a few web comics that are furry. (In fact, I think all of the comics I read are furry in some way)
I've just never thought of myself as one.

[0404]

where and when did furry originated from? I'll not be suprised if it originated from cavemans.
edit: not furry that we are talking about, like Human-animal being ex:Rabbit from Alice's Adventures in Wonderland

[Sleet]

Anthropomorphism has existed since ancient times. A fandom centering around it started in the '80s more or less.

[Sansash]

Sansash: You have a point there... but then the Na'vi are aliens, not an alternative to people. *shrugs*

Who ever said that anything furry has to feature furry characters as an alternative to people? Why can't furry characters be aliens?

Avatar is only furry in the loosest possible sense.

Considering how loose the general definition of furry is, how is Avatar only loosely furry? One could carry that logic to Rick's story Ten Thousand Miles Up and say that it is only loosely furry. The geroo and the ringel are alien races supposedly from different worlds. They have distinct characteristics that resemble those of certain Earth animals and they are anthropomorphic, but as far as we know, neither race came from Earth, and there may not even be an Earth in the galaxy.

The Avatar movie I will not say is furry much at all, but they do have slight animal traits.....and some weird hair.

Exactly. Yes, they are aliens from another world. Yet, they are still anthropomorphic (human-like) in form, and they feature some catlike facial characteristics, as well as expressive ears and tails.

[Sleet]

I saw the Na'vi as more typical alien folk than cat people. I think their furless skin was what did that to me.

[Sansash]

You know I wonder, if any animals were to evolve into intelligent beings and walk upright and get opposeable thumbs, whether they would lose most of their body hair at some point in the same way that humans have.

[Sleet]

They probably wouldn't.

[0404]

Anyone remember game called Impossible creatures?
In that game techknowledge called 'Sigma techknowledge' allows two creatures to be combined. With that human can create real life furry.

[Malkus]

Yeah, there's Germanium, Francium, Ununseptium, ununoctium, ununtrium......Not too terribly original. Of course, they're named for the founders or some convenient temporary name.......

Unobtainium is an insider joke. Originally it came from aeronautics engineering and referred to currently not existing materials or components with fantastic properties that would be very useful to solve tricky problems. Later it got adopted by the SF fandom to refer to likewise fantastic substances/tech. Considering this stuff can only be found on a moon 4 lightyears away it's not too farfetched to think some savvy scientists in the fictional future would give it this name, though.

As for heroic wolf movies, there's an OVA of Wolf's Rain.

Ah, Wolf's Rain.

My favorite anime. Sad though.

[FlintTheSquirrel]

You know I wonder, if any animals were to evolve into intelligent beings and walk upright and get opposeable thumbs, whether they would lose most of their body hair at some point in the same way that humans have.

If they began wearing cloths, then yes they would. The reason humans are not as hairy as before, and the reason our feet are so soft and fragile is because we wear cloths and shoes, so natural hair no longer needs to protect us from the cold, and our feet do not have to be hard to allow us to walk over stones.

[Sansash]

Well... there might be more to it than that. When humans first began to hunt, 2 million years ago, the weapons they used were very primitive. It is suggested that the initial hunting style implemented consisted of simply running the prey down to exhaustion. In fact, some indigenous people like in Africa still hunt this way. Humans are likely the best endurance runners in the world; faster animals than humans are built for speed, but not endurance for long distances or lengths of time. Humans are the only species that voluntarily runs extremely large distances (Like a marathon). It may also be suggested that hairlessness (and our diverse collection of sweat glands) evolved in concert with persistence hunting. Certainly helped.

[FlintTheSquirrel]

I am willing to say this is not the case, because not many can run for longer than a minute till they are out of breath. Humans had a lot more hair in the past. It is just adaption to new conditions and loosing the burden of hair when we have other means to keep warm. Tis why people like the Norse had a ton more hair than everyone else. Because of the colder weather and needing the extra hair to keep warm, cloths were not enough.

I have heard the same thing you said about endurance, although I do not like thinking about that type of thing. It may be a contributing factor, but I think clothing has been the main factor, especially for how frail our feet are now.

I will not claim anything I say is actually correct, as I have been completely wrong on so many things. Just the thing that makes the most sense to me. Both the arguments are adaption to survival.

[Liam]

You know I wonder, if any animals were to evolve into intelligent beings and walk upright and get opposeable thumbs, whether they would lose most of their body hair at some point in the same way that humans have.

If the selection pressures for both are interrelated, most probably.

As you already said, the earliest, sub-Saharan dwelling humans had evolved near-hairlessness to better dump excess heat. Their head hair had become more "fluffy" as well to radiate off the greater excess heat of their bigger brains.

[Coatl_Ruu]

Yeah, sweating is probably the most efficient way to get rid of excess body heat, and humans, being hairless, are the best at it. Prehistoric hunters would just chase after their prey until it overheated and couldn't keep going. That worked to cancel out any speed advantage an animal might have had.

[Obbl]

Well, that and since humans fall from foot to foot, our method of running is several times more efficient that any four-legged creature.
Makes us naturally better at endurance running.

[Sleet]

But worse sprinters.

[0404]

But worse sprinters.

some times I find my cat way more faster than me. she is also extremely fast at climbing stairs, one set of stairs in about second and a half.

I find climbing stairs with four legs (I mean two legs and two arms)is more efficient than only with two legs.
isn't walking with four legs more energy eiffeicent than walking on feets because the forces are divided in to four diffrent legs?

[Alastair]

I've been wondering lately about how the fandom would have progressed if the Internet never existed. I say that it would make it pretty difficult to meet other furries, arrange in person meets, etc. So what do you guys think?

[JeffCvt]

Well, not being a furry, I don't really know for sure.

But I would imagine that it would have an impact on the number of people who admit to it.
Being they didn't have anyone to talk to about it, like everyone can here, most probably wouldn't have an idea just how many there were.

[Dissension]

I've been wondering lately about how the fandom would have progressed if the Internet never existed. I say that it would make it pretty difficult to meet other furries, arrange in person meets, etc. So what do you guys think?

In the '70s and '80s, furries were considered a subset of the science-fiction culture and frequently attended sci-fi conventions. Without the Internet, I assume it would have either stayed that way or continued to blossom into its own thing.

[Foxstar]

I've been wondering lately about how the fandom would have progressed if the Internet never existed. I say that it would make it pretty difficult to meet other furries, arrange in person meets, etc. So what do you guys think?

In some ways, the fandom would likely be more splintered and likely not as big. That said, a lot of the drama and issues come from having such a wide ranging amount of people from all over the globe involved, so it's possible that a lot of the major drama of the last ten years may not have happened.

[Sleet]

The internet is a breeding ground for drama. The fandom would be much less whiny if it only existed in person.

[The Grey Wolverine]

But it would be far less interesting, and my social circle would be full of less awesome people.

[Sansash]

I am willing to say this is not the case, because not many can run for longer than a minute till they are out of breath.

A healthy human being should be able to run for more than a minute or two without absolutely needing to stop for breath, and I don't mean sprinting as fast as you can, I just mean running, or maybe even just jogging. Hundreds, possibly thousands of people run in marathons in any city that has one every year. I don't run marathons, but I can still run or jog a little bit on my treadmill at home, and I'm actually underweight for my age and height. Just saying.

isn't walking with four legs more energy eiffeicent than walking on feets because the forces are divided in to four diffrent legs?

Walk around on all fours for a few days and let us know! I think a horse is one of the most efficient animals for moving fast for long distances, and they have more/better sweat glands than most animals. A horse might be able to cover the length of a marathon as well as a man could, but I'm not so sure about other big animals, dogs, or cats.

[KJOokami]

A healthy human being should be able to run for more than a minute or two without absolutely needing to stop for breath, and I don't mean sprinting as fast as you can, I just mean running, or maybe even just jogging.

'Healthy' being the key word. Unfortunately, a vast number of people worldwide (growing vaster every day) are anything but 'healthy'.

Hundreds, possibly thousands of people run in marathons in any city that has one every year. I don't run marathons, but I can still run or jog a little bit on my treadmill at home, and I'm actually underweight for my age and height. Just saying.

Note, though, that anyone you talk to who runs marathons knows months and months in advance that they plan to run one, and that they have to train themselves daily in order to make that happen. An average person can run a marathon if they train hard enough, but the average person cannot because they either don't have the time, the motivation, or a mix of both to do the work required.

Walk around on all fours for a few days and let us know!

Hey, this guy has been doing it for about a decade now. :p

I think a horse is one of the most efficient animals for moving fast for long distances, and they have more/better sweat glands than most animals. A horse might be able to cover the length of a marathon as well as a man could, but I'm not so sure about other big animals, dogs, or cats.

Oh, a horse can and will outrun all but the best of marathon runners. Apparently a place in the US (somewhere in the midwest I believe) has been running a "man-vs-horse" marathon annually for quite some time, and it took until 2004 for someone to actually beat out the horses. Plus, the horses were hindered by the fact they had riders guiding them through the route. If they had no one riding them, especially if they were running on adrenaline (which I believe is how we got on this topic; humans hunting various animals by wearing them out), then there are very few human beings who would ever be able to stay on one's tail for long enough to wear them out.

The thing with smaller animals like dogs and cats is that you can't really expect a chase to go on long enough for them to wear out. If they were being hunted by a human, they'd be heading for cover as soon as possible, upon reaching, they'd be darting in and out of brush, behind trees and bushes, and they would pretty easily lose a human there.

[RandomGeekNamedBrent]

A healthy human being should be able to run for more than a minute or two without absolutely needing to stop for breath, and I don't mean sprinting as fast as you can, I just mean running, or maybe even just jogging.

'Healthy' being the key word. Unfortunately, a vast number of people worldwide (growing vaster every day) are anything but 'healthy'.

Hundreds, possibly thousands of people run in marathons in any city that has one every year. I don't run marathons, but I can still run or jog a little bit on my treadmill at home, and I'm actually underweight for my age and height. Just saying.

Note, though, that anyone you talk to who runs marathons knows months and months in advance that they plan to run one, and that they have to train themselves daily in order to make that happen. An average person can run a marathon if they train hard enough, but the average person cannot because they either don't have the time, the motivation, or a mix of both to do the work required.

Walk around on all fours for a few days and let us know!

Hey, this guy has been doing it for about a decade now. :p

I think a horse is one of the most efficient animals for moving fast for long distances, and they have more/better sweat glands than most animals. A horse might be able to cover the length of a marathon as well as a man could, but I'm not so sure about other big animals, dogs, or cats.

Oh, a horse can and will outrun all but the best of marathon runners. Apparently a place in the US (somewhere in the midwest I believe) has been running a "man-vs-horse" marathon annually for quite some time, and it took until 2004 for someone to actually beat out the horses. Plus, the horses were hindered by the fact they had riders guiding them through the route. If they had no one riding them, especially if they were running on adrenaline (which I believe is how we got on this topic; humans hunting various animals by wearing them out), then there are very few human beings who would ever be able to stay on one's tail for long enough to wear them out.

The thing with smaller animals like dogs and cats is that you can't really expect a chase to go on long enough for them to wear out. If they were being hunted by a human, they'd be heading for cover as soon as possible, upon reaching, they'd be darting in and out of brush, behind trees and bushes, and they would pretty easily lose a human there.

points 1 and 2: we're talking about early humans who had to hunt for food. They were likely healthy.
point 3: lol, a devoted monkey furry XD
point 4: of course horses are faster, which is why we originally domesticated them and started riding them to hunt.

[MilesKingford]

There's almost no girls in the fandom.

I don't believe I mentioned women, Sleet.

Many furries aren't social enough to interact outside the fandom.

I don't know about that. From the last time I checked I believe the statistics were in the minority when it came to furries dating other furries. It is far more likely that people (furries included, of course) would date those within their own social circles, especially when in school, college or university. For most, the furry fandom is nothing more than a minor interest (meaning they still heavily involve themselves with those outside the fandom), while others (a small minority) take the fandom to whole new extremes that makes it... unlikely they would date a person. And then, as you said, there are those between these two groups who would be too shy to confidently approach those outside the fandom but still want human company. That's just my opinion, anyway.

[Sleet]

True, but most of the furries you meet in big furry places like FA or conventions tend to be more extreme, dedicated furries (for better or for worse).

[Alastair]

I had a pretty unfortunate incident with a troll on FA. He wouldn't leave me alone, so I had to block him. I just think it's a shame that there are people in the fandom that are like that.

[Sleet]

The fandom is full of unsavory characters. I like places like here where everyone is so cool and friendly!

[Nyaliva]

That's most of the reason why I don't just call myself a furry, people automatically think of the extremes whereas if I ever associate with furries, on purpose or by accident, it's usually people like the ones here, where without an "Are you Furry?" poll, most outsiders wouldn't be able to tell.

EDIT: I just thought, everyone's been suggesting it but in the 2.5 months I've been here I don't think I've yet hugged Sleet!

*HUG*