Feed aggregator

submitted by electricfoxx
[link] [2 comments]

submitted by -hhhh-
[link] [10 comments]

Finding other furries who like Skype Camming as much as I

submitted by MezzaCorux
[link] [11 comments]

alright so ive been giving a looot of thought into this and ive decided to get a tat. its only 3x3 cause the shop close to my home is doing them cheap for that price. on that note, i cant come up with a full design that im happy with. im not asking for some one to draw it for me(although if some one did thatd be awesome!) cause i dont have the money to give for it at the moment. but can some people help me out with ideas? the themes im wanting in it is steampunk and wolf. the one idea i have is a wolf paw print filled with gears and such and making it look bolted into my skin. anyone want to help? thank you and sorry for the long post.

submitted by Scraps_wolf
[link] [1 comment]

submitted by Arluza
[link] [3 comments]

Author: Draconis Once, Flayrah was the the only place to find information on the Furry fandom. You might see a comment on a board or on IRC, perhaps LiveJournal, but there were not a lot of options. The few conventions out there would make a post here, perhaps some themed newsletter, but that was about it. [...]

submitted by Micney
[link] [46 comments]

submitted by electricfoxx
[link] [comment]

submitted by a_ballesteros
[link] [2 comments]

Author: Fred The last time I reviewed DreamKeepers, with vol. 2, Flight to Starfall back in Anthro #18, July-August 2008, it was by David Lillie & Liz Thomas who had just gotten married. Now it’s by Dave & Liz Lillie. The marriage seems to be working out. Volume 1, Awakenings (Anthro review), was published in December [...]

submitted by canadianpanda
[link] [17 comments]

...another strip I found today.  Whatever it is, it must be catching!

Dilbert Daily Strip: 2013-05-27: http://www.dilbert.com/strips/comic/2013-05-27/

Author: Higgs Raccoon Following a launch in Adelaide, South Australia, three mini-episodes of Wastelander Panda have been released on the project’s website and YouTube channel. The episodes show glimpses of brutal life in a vast wasteland inhabited by humans and the occasional, rare, anthropomorphic animal. The main characters are a human child (later adult) named [...]

Furries play a starring role in a 2006 paper that explores ‘animal geography’, an emerging field of cultural research related to human-animal interaction. The paper’s author believes that furry phenomenon is on the leading-edge of changes affecting society as a whole: the replacement of human-human social contact with human-animal social contact.

The paper, written by Dr Heidi J. Nast and published in ACME, is titled “Loving… Whatever: Alienation, Neoliberalism and Pet-Love in the Twenty-First Century” (link to full text). If that sounds like tortured prose, then, well, you should read the article itself. It’s not easy going. But hidden under the unwelcoming academic language is a fascinating perspective on the furry phenomenon.

Nast’s point mirrors one I’ve made in a previous article, Furry As An Alternative To Religion. She notes that traditional community structures—archetypically the rural village church—have broken down in the modern world. People have moved into cities, lost connection with the people around us, and this has left us feeling alienated and alone. It’s a sad irony that many people feel lonely, while simultaneously being surrounded by other human beings.

I argued that furry provides that missing sense of community, and Nast makes a similar argument although she sees furry as one example of a wider cultural shift. She thinks that people are projecting human characteristics onto animals, as compensation for a lack of real human contact.

Nast sees this happening most obviously in the first world’s growing trend for pet ownership. She argues that domestic animals are much less likely to be working animals, and much more likely to be a humanized ‘member of the family’. Pets are de facto children to many people, offering a big advantage over real, human children: pets are less inconvenient. She writes:

“…pets (especially dogs) today supersede children as ideal love objects; they are more easily mobilized, require less investment, and to some degree can be shaped into whatever you want them to be”

 

Nast points to a growing marketplace for inessential pet ‘care’ as evidence. If she were writing her article today, she might also point towards the tendency for people to create a social media presence, like a Twitter feed, on their pet’s behalf. And she argues that people are spending time and money on animals, instead of spending that time and money on humans.

The time and money being spent on non-humans is also institutional, including scientific research and charity. Cats can be cloned (for a price); you can take your pooch to a ‘dog psychologist’ (for a price); urban animal welfare is increasingly focussed on minimizing euthanasia (at a cost to human taxpayers). Nast suggests that this time and money would be better spent on minimizing human suffering.

Nast feels that, by humanzing and infantalizing animals, we become less connected to other humans. She goes further to suggest that this is linked to consumerism, where animals are a convenient replacement for human beings because the relationship is uneven. We can, essentially, spend money on our non-human family without having to worry about whether it’s useful in any way. As Nast puts it:

“…the hypercommodification of pet-lives [and our]… post-industrial lives and places… [are] tied firmly to neoliberal processes of capital accumulation more generally and the attendant growing gap between rich and poor.”

 

Which sounds a bit like something you might read on an Occupy Pet Warehouse flyer.

To put it in a less tortured fashion: Nast sees our human-like engagement with non-human animals as evidence for the inhumanity of a capitalist world.

The furries fit into her argument because our human-to-human contact takes place through an animalistic lens. We are humanizing (virtual) wild animals and using them for our own ends. As she puts it:

“In the case of furry fandom, humans [present themselves as animals], this transmogrification apparently being needed in order to facilitate human contact, sociality, and love.”

 

Like the people who humanize their pet dogs, we furries are focussed away from human society. We focus on ourselves, or on the part-human versions of our fellow furries, or on non-humans altogether.

Furry, in Nast’s eyes, is a product of our dehumanized capitalist world. We socialize through the guise of animal-people because our world doesn’t allow us to (easily) directly socialize with human beings.

***

Now that all sounds like Nast has gone off the deep end. But plenty of evidence from the furry world supports her ideas.

Firstly, ever notice how much easier it is to interact with a fursuiter than the person inside? Most of us (and many non-furries) find it more natural to initiate social contact with the animal-person.

Secondly, furry’s spread throughout the world broadly correlates with deregulated capitalism. First in the USA in the 1980s, then other modernized western nations such as the UK, Australia and Germany in the 1990s, then the remainder of Europe and South America in the 2000s, and more recently capitalist Asian nations such as Singapore, Malaysia and Japan.

Thirdly, we furries are relatively alienated from greater society. That’s because, as a group, we often don’t meet society’s norms: perhaps it’s because of unusual sexuality, or geekiness, or distaste for mainstream culture. This alienation reduces our engagement with fellow human beings.

That’s not to say that Nast gets everything right. She lumps furries into three broad categories:

1. “egg-heads with more or less intellectual interests in how and why a society or group anthropomorphizes animals“
2. “furries [who] assert a particular animal identity, either playfully or believing that they were animals in a former life, or that they are an animal trapped in a human body“
3. “persons erotically and/or sexually invested in their animal-identity“

It’s not hard to poke holes in her categorization, an exercise I leave to the reader.

She also asserts that furry “involves largely ‘white’ adult populations“. While mostly true, this misses the point: furry is not a monoracial phenomenon, as evidenced by its spread across the world. However I can see how she could draw this conclusion from her happily unscientific data collection method: looking at “photographs of furries reproduced on various websites“.

***

The biggest flaw in Nast’s ideas is, I think, her willingness to tie everything back to capitalism and consumerism. She presents it as a fait accompli, which I suspect is normal for academics performing research in the field of cultural geography. I don’t want to explore the validity of this point of view—I’m sure that readers will hold a range of strong opinions—but suffice to say that I don’t think Nast makes a compelling link.

To be fair, her focus may be geared toward the sensibilities of the journal that published the paper: ACME. ACME has the following mission statement, which you read at your peril:

“The journal’s purpose is to provide a forum for the publication of critical work about space in the social sciences — including anarchist, anti-racist, environmentalist, feminist, Marxist, non-representational, postcolonial, poststructuralist, queer, situationist and socialist perspectives.”

 

So ACME is not exactly aiming for political moderation.

As an aside, check out ACME‘s unintentionally ironic guidance for prospective authors: “The style that ACME advocates emphasizes clarity, accessibility, and care in writing.”

Happily, Nast’s article is written to a higher standard than that. However it’s not an easy read by any means. So I can’t really recommend it, despite its worthwhile and unfamiliar approach to the furry phenomenon.

Dr Nast is writing a book on the topic: Petifilia: Volume 1. Presumably furries will make another significant appearance. I’ll read it with interest.

submitted by iamfman
[link] [comment]

Dear Papabear,

I happen to be the only fur in my family. The rest of my family hates furries so I have to hide the fact that I am one. As a result, I often feel disconnected from my family and suffering from clinical depression just makes it worse. I feel like I have to hide who I am in order to get any acceptance from them. I love being a furry and wouldn't want to stop, but at the same time if it makes my family life miserable, is it worth it? Any advice would be appreciated. 

Nite Mastr

* * *

Greetings, Nite,

You may have already read some of my letters in the Coming Out Furry category in which I talk about how telling your family you’re furry largely depends on their attitudes. Well, you already know their attitudes, which are, sadly, very negative. So this is a good opportunity to discuss what comes next in more detail.

Papabear recently had a bad experience that is relevant to this conversation. Someone I care about who has been a big part of my life recently learned that I was a furry by stumbling over some stuff on the Internet about me that talked about my real name (I don’t hide on the Internet, but I don’t advertise my human identity, either). Now, “Pat,” as I will call him or her to protect their identity, is a lovely person but very normal and straight-laced and I didn’t think that Pat would handle the news well. Because I still wanted Pat in my life, I decided not to divulge my furry side in this case.

Apparently, Pat has taken this news very badly and hasn’t talked to me since finding out. There could be two reasons for this: 1) Pat is disturbed by furries and doesn’t like that I am one, or 2)  Pat is upset that I didn’t explain I was a furry and was hiding something, feeling this is a violation of trust. If the reason is #1, then that pretty much explains why I didn’t tell Pat because I didn’t want to lose the friendship. If the reason is #2 and Pat is fine with my furriness but upset about my failing to reveal this side of me, then I’d have to say that the identity card always has two sides to it. If Pat is trying to take the moral high ground, I happen to know that there are a couple of secrets in Pat’s life that were hidden from people important to Pat. Perhaps I was wrong to conceal my furriness, but it was a judgment call I had to make (and, once made, can’t reverse) and that, at the time, I thought was correct.

So, why am I telling you about my life as an example? To show you the two scenarios of coming out. Number 1 is the most obvious one, but number 2 is more subtle. Your family might see your hiding your furry side as a violation of trust, even though I’ll bet you $100 and a couple of pots of honey that they have secrets of their own.

You ask whether being a furry is worth it, then. That depends on you. There is an increasing number of furries in the community who have only joined the fandom because they think it’s cool in an outrageous way and they want to be part of something different. These are the people who eventually abandon furries because they have “grown up.” They are posers. If you are a poser, then no, it is not worth it for you. Go do the stuff the other “normal” people do and forget about furry.

Then there are the real furries. These are the people for whom furry is a part of their being, their essence. They will be furries their entire lives. That’s me. I was a furry before I knew what the heck it was (and before the modern fandom was even formed). And once I learned about furries I was like “WOW! There are other people out there like me!” And I never looked back. Have I had to hide it from some people? As you saw above, yes, I have. Does it upset me some that I did so? Yes, it does, but here’s the thing: I am a furry, but I am many other things, too. I am a son and a brother; I am a writer and an editor; I am a friend and a lover; I am a seeker of spiritual truth and a lover of animals; I am an artist who is fascinated by science. These are all things I can share with people who cannot handle the furry thing.

You are more than just a furry, Nite. When you are with your family, be a son, brother, grandson, cousin, nephew. Hopefully, there are things you like to do with your family that don’t involve the fandom, like maybe going fishing, or to a concert, or shooting hoops, going to church, or playing video games. These are all things you can share with them.

The point is we are not simple creatures with one pair of genes. We are all complex individuals with many things to offer to the world. Think of yourself as a chameleon who can do more than change color. When you are with your family, your chameleon form takes the shape of a family member; when you are with other furries, suddenly you grow fur and a tail. Take the case of Pat again. Pat might be under the misconception that all the other things I revealed to Pat were somehow a lie because they didn’t involve my being furry. But that’s not true. All the other parts of me are just as real as my furry side, and that included my friendship.

Take this lesson in life with you: as you grow as a person, don’t be a judgmental jerk like your family. Accept people for who they are (and learn to forgive) and you will have evolved beyond the gene pool from which you emerged.

I hope that helps. Bear hugs to you!

Papabear

Like to read? Perhaps a writer yourself? Then this long a’waited extended lit’ discussion with Carni and Ramirus! (swear we were charging up the proverbial laser til’ Rams was on board for massive COMBO-BONUS,.. honest!) Literature (of the) Anthro Variety!! - Like to read? Perhaps a writer yourself? Then this long a’waited extended lit’ discussion with Carni and Ramirus! (swear we were charging up the proverbial laser til’ Rams was on board for massive COMBO-BONUS,.. honest!)

submitted by Godspeed122
[link] [11 comments]

submitted by Tmachine
[link] [5 comments]

Author: crossaffliction My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic garnered two spots on the February top-100 comic sales chart in this month; both issue #3 (which I wasn’t a fan of, but whatever) and the Twilight Sparkle Micro-Series issue (which I also wasn’t a fan of) made 45 and 62, respectively. Meanwhile, Adventure Time #13 lands [...]