Feed aggregator

As someone who has no idea what all this means, can someone please explain it? I know neer banned a bunch of people unjustly but that's it.

submitted by ClayCRUSH
[link] [16 comments]

submitted by IonOtter
[link] [10 comments]

submitted by Miliainare
[link] [comment]

submitted by PistonPitbull
[link] [7 comments]

submitted by firetyger
[link] [18 comments]

submitted by Greynois
[link] [5 comments]

submitted by HarmonyHeartstrings
[link] [6 comments]

submitted by notheanix
[link] [3 comments]

submitted by felinearts
[link] [16 comments]

submitted by NonSarcasticRaccoon
[link] [5 comments]

submitted by Darkmayne
[link] [24 comments]

submitted by kensethdude
[link] [comment]

submitted by FarrgoPelz
[link] [2 comments]

It is enough to post to my channel here that I must say in the past few weeks FurAffinity is hurting it’s users. I just came across a quick Reddit feed which posted a pic of what FA was suppose to look like after a $16k drive to boost up it’s site. Well we can see the changes have never happened. Let me break this into my terms as a web designer and a business owner.

Pros: The site is well maintained and allows many things go on to it. They have a nice message system and a nice profile protection system.

Cons: The site has some bad layout and bad colors. Users are booted by admins. to quickly and others post pointless things we don’t need to see.

Overall the site needs some well defined maintenance. I understand it is free and those who run it do it in charity. I understand running something this big for free comes at costs, but wait …. wait …. IT’S THE BIGGEST FURRY SITE IN THE WORLD! So why does someone like the now upcoming Weasyl. com trump FA? Well they fixed all the issues, they gave a site better look and seperated things users want. It is one thing that has always bothered me, “Why does FA never listen to it’s users and take action quickly?”.  Also the whole $$ thing is just wow! Now they are looking for donations again to keep it up, yet they do not change anything. There are so many out in the fandom world that are willing to help, why not listen to them? Let someone with $$ take it over and show the fandom world FA is BAD-ASS site!!  I still say, ” Do not give up them (FA) they do thier best and will keep trying. But in the booming age of the internet if you are weak others will quickly take you out in one blow.  Come on FA don’t give em’ that chance, stand up and fight the fight! Make the cool looking site and make departments for art, suits and more!! “  – end Rant .

I'm trying to submit a picture to FA and keep getting error 500. But I can browse the site as per normal. What does it even meeeaaannn??

submitted by Lark_thelandshark
[link] [5 comments]

submitted by ACatNamedSilver
[link] [11 comments]

submitted by evilsibe
[link] [comment]

My question is a bit of a touchy subject. Recently we helped a fellow fur out by providing a place to live, as he was getting evicted from his prior residence. We were taking a chance, being that we did not know him very well, and now we wish we had.

A couple weeks after he first moved in we noticed something was a bit off. He admitted to us quite plainly he had stolen food from his previous roommates. I was none too happy and immediately told him if I ever caught him stealing from us, that he'd be out. Not long after this incident he made a sexual pass at my mate, right in front of me. I told him not to grab my boyfriend's ass, and that was his one and only warning.

Today he told me he threatened a small neighbor kid by saying if the kid's dog (a pit bull) came near him again it would die. 

I am at a loss as what to do. I no longer feel comfortable with this fur in my house. I do not know how to break it to him that he might need to leave, especially since he traveled thru multiple states to get here, and I do not want to see anyone out on the street.

Sam Darkhorn

* * *

Hi, Sam,

This is a good example of the danger of letting someone into your home whom you don’t know well. It was nice of you to take that furry in, but generosity can only go so far. You need to have some respect for yourself and your own sanity. Therefore, if this arrangement isn’t working out, you are the lord of the manor, so to speak, and have the right to tell him to leave.

However, before you do that, let’s look what we have here. First there was his confession that he stole food at his previous place. However, he has, as yet, not stolen from you, and you made it clear this wasn’t acceptable. Secondly, he grabbed your mate’s butt. You put a stop to it and, I surmise, he hasn’t repeated the act. Finally, there was the dog incident, which is disturbing. I hope you told him that what he said was inappropriate and potentially criminal.

So, basically, this furry has got no social skills to speak of. Likely this is because either he was poorly raised by his parents or he has a mental or emotional problem. This shouldn’t be your problem, but you have made it your problem by bringing him into your home. You are right that it isn’t very kind of you to just kick him out onto the streets in an area he doesn’t even know well.

Do you like the guy, despite his flaws? If so, he is worth a bit of effort. I would suspect your initial deal with him was that this would be a temporary arrangement, yes? You can patiently explain to him what behavior is acceptable and what is not, and if he improves, then you don’t really have a problem, and, eventually, he’s moving out anyway.

If you don’t like the guy (behavior or not), then you need to move on this more quickly. Start working on plans to get him out now. Locate a friend or family member who will take him in and figure out a way to get him there. You don’t have to toss him on the street, but you should figure out something quickly. You don’t have to necessarily tell him you are doing this because he’s a buttmunch, just tell him that your financial circumstances have changed and you cannot afford him to stay much longer. Again, assuming you weren’t inviting him to live with you forever and ever, this is not a betrayal or a matter of you going back on your word.

Good luck!

Papabear

Post by Quentin Julien. Quentin is currently completing two MAs at Grenoble University, in performance studies and in literature, while preparing for a PhD Project on the furry fandom. His articles will be published in French and English.

Visitors to the Weickmann museum in Ulm, Germany, can look forward to seeing the exhibition’s highlight: the famous Lion Man (link to official museum website). Sculptured in mammoth ivory, experts estimate that the masterpiece is about 30,000 years old. The body is mostly human, with a feline head. Its anthropomorphism and zoopmorphism is evidence of a tradition, thousands of years old, going back to the early days of the human race, and therefore an integral part of our culture. The culture of the furry community, consisting of fans of anthropomorphism and zoomorphism as it does, is a contemporary example of this, with its creative use of visual and digital arts, and its exploration of the dialogue between man and animal.

Those familiar with furry will find numerous similarities between the sculpture and the imagined animal-person of the furry fandom. Firstly, the head of the Lion Man is largely that of a feline—a lion or a tiger—with little evidence of human features. Secondly, the body of the Lion Man is bipedal, a human shape, typical of furry representations. Finally, the Lion Man is not a simple bipartite body, human below the neck and animal above. Indeed, the sculpture is unrefined at its extremities, making it possible to imagine different options for hands and feet, and doubt remains as to the intention of the artist. This parallels with furry: the resolvable extremities of the Lion Man possess characteristics of both human and non-human animals, and furries similarly include such features, for example the pads, claws and fur of an animal, but within the lengthened shape of a human hand:

More than graphic art or sculpture, it is performance that might be the oldest human exploration of a hybrid animal-person. In order to demonstrate this, we come back again to prehistoric art. Siegfried Giedon’s research into cave paintings take special notice of the drawings in Pech-Merle, a cave in de Cabrerets, Lot County, France: ‘the oldest representation of a fusion between man and animal‘ (ref Gideon, Siegfried., The Eternal Present, New York: The Bollingen foundation, 1962—p.284). A woman with a bird’s head is painted there, adopting the crane position. By studying certain walls, considering wear due to touch and the tracks left on the ground in these areas, researchers concluded that the area was used for dance. Richard Schechner, an American professor of Performance Studies, hypothesizes as follows (ref Schechner, Richard., Drame, scripts, théâtre et performance., in Performance. Paris : Editions théâtrales, 2008—p.56):

If the prehistoric men painted and sculpted beings with a combination of human and animal physical attributes, perhaps they would also dress in this way? And if we go farther, perhaps the cave paintings are representations of their own dance, or perhaps are meant to accompany the dance in some way?

 

Accordingly we can draw a link from the cave paintings, and the Lion Man sculpture, to a ritual prehistoric dance. The link between these two arts could well look much like the link between today’s drawn fursona and constructed fursuit. However, if we consider the relationship between the furry image and the fursuiting performance, we find an inversion of the supposed prehistoric behaviour. Schechner considers that the performance of the ritual dance precedes the pictorial representation, a mural depicting behaviour. In the furry fandom, the drawing always precedes the fursuit, as it establishes a basis for the costume and subsequent performance. We can interpret this inversion as societal, a difference between the time of the Lion Man and the twenty-first century.

The primacy of the performance in costume, in prehistoric times, is evidence that this was more important in society at the time. This suggests that the act of putting on an animal-person costume and performing—i.e. fursuiting—is anthropologically important. Sex is often considered to be an important part of furry, a point that can be marginalized because of the negative connotations associated with a so-called ‘deviant’ sexuality. Without wanting to opine on this complex subject personally (perhaps a topic for someone with specialist knowledge), there are arguments that allow us to extract the drama from the topic, particularly those made by Schechner who connects the three key subjects of the prehistoric art: hunting, dance, and fertility. He writes: ‘the people of the Stone Age celebrated not only animal fertility, but also human fertility, as evidenced by drawings, figures cut into stone, and associated symbols‘. He makes special mention of the figures in the Konark Sun Temple in India, once again both human and animal: ‘most of the scenes of copulation and human contact correspond to dance poses‘ (Ibid.—p28). One notes that such depictions make up a large proportion of furry art, where we also see hybridization of human and non-human animals, performance, and—of course—pornography. The fertility scenes depicted in the Konark Sun Temple and many other civilizations celebrate sexual intercourse and phallic representations, as is the case with furry yiff art, depicting animal-people engaged in sexual activity or otherwise in an obviously sexually aroused state.

‘Retrospective: An Illustrated Chronology of Furry Fandom, 1966–1996‘, curated by Fred Patten, places the origin of the furry fandom in the mid-to-late twentieth century. However it seems necessary to consider furry in a wider context, one that emphasises the connection to our prehistoric past, and therefore the societal value of furry’s culture. If we consider the resonance between early and current depictions of animal-person hybrids, it is not possible to consider furry as something separate from normal human society. Furry is a natural regrowth of an important part of human culture, one that has accompanied us for a long time, and will continue to accompany us for a long time into the future.

Article de Quentin Julien. Quentin termine deux masters en arts du spectacle et littératures à l’université de Grenoble. Il prépare actuellement un projet de doctorat sur le Furry Fandom. Ses articles seront publiés en français et en anglais.

Le visiteur du musée Weickmann à Ulm attend avec impatience de voir la pièce majeure de l’exposition : la célèbre statue de L’homme-lion (official museum website). Sculptée dans de l’ivoire de mammouth, les experts estiment le chef-d’œuvre ancestral agé d’environ 30.000 ans. Le corps majoritairement humain, sa tête est celle d’un félin. Ainsi l’anthropomorphisme et le zoomorphisme attestent-ils d’une longévité millénaire remontant à l’apparition de l’espèce humaine et faisant donc partie intégrante des linéaments de sa culture. La communauté culturelle Furry, composée de fans d’anthropomorphisme ou de zoomorphisme, s’inscrit donc à la fois dans une époque très contemporaine avec l’utilisation des médias, des arts visuel et digital dont ses membres se servent à des fins créatives, mais également dans la lignée d’un dialogue à jamais renouvelé entre l’homme et l’animal.

Le Furry attentif trouvera de nombreuses similitudes entre la précieuse statue et la forme animale imaginée hybride des membres du fandom. La tête, premièrement, semble entièrement celle d’un félin, lion ou tigre, et ne présente pas de traits caractéristiques du visage humain, ce qui est également le cas des avatars furry. Le corps, quant à lui, est représenté dans une position de bipédie qui, elle, est d’avantage liée à la position humaine: nouveau point commun avec les avatars en question. Enfin, il ne s’agit pas non plus d’un corps bipartite moitié animal et moitié humain selon une limite placée au niveau du cou. En effet, si la sculpture se montre grossière pour représenter les membres, il est possible d’envisager que l’on n’y distingue pas des mains et des pieds mais plutôt des formes de pattes malgré que le doute subsiste quant à savoir quelle est la part souhaitée ou non de cette indétermination. Encore une fois, l’art furry se montre comparable à l’homme-lion puisque les extrémités des membres des Furries possèdent des caractéristiques à mi-chemin entre l’homme et l’animal comme cela est visible sur l’image suivante dans laquelle l’on distingue les coussinets, les griffes et la fourrure de l’animal mais dont la forme allongée de la main rappelle une main humaine :

Mais plus encore que l’art graphique ou la sculpture, c’est la performance zoomorphe qui se révèlerait être la doyenne incontestée en ce qui concerne la représentation de l’hybridation homme-animal. Il faut pour le démontrer revenir de nouveau à l’art préhistorique. Les travaux de Siegfried Giedon identifient sur le plafond de la grotte du Perche-Merle « la plus ancienne représentation connue de fusion entre l’Homme et l’animal. » (ref Gideon, Siegfried., The Eternal Present, New York: The Bollingen foundation, 1962—p.284). Une femme avec une tête d’oiseau y est peinte adoptant une position de dance. En étudiant l’usure de certains murs, exposés à des attouchements répétés ainsi que les traces laissées sur le sol de ces mêmes grottes contenant des peintures d’êtres dansants, les chercheurs concluent que des pratiques de danses avaient lieu dans ces endroits. Richard Schechner, fort de ces informations, fait l’hypothèse suivante (ref Schechner, Richard., Drame, scripts, théâtre et performance., in Performance. Paris : Editions théâtrales, 2008—p.56) :

Si les hommes préhistoriques dessinaient et taillaient des êtres possédants à la fois des attributs physiques humains et animaux, pourquoi refuser de croire qu’ils aient eu de véritable costumes ? Et si l’on va plus loin, pourquoi ne pas supposer que les peintures rupestres représentent leurs danses ou accompagnent la danse à leur manière ?

 

Un lien peut donc être fait entre la représentation dessinée, et par extension sculptée—l’homme-lion—et une forme de danse rituelle. L’articulation entre les deux arts pourrait bien ressembler à l’articulation entre l’avatar, ou le fursona, et le fursuit. Cependant, si l’on considère la relation entre l’image et la performance/danse dans le cas du Furry fandom, on relève une inversion. Richard Schechner considère que l’acte rituel performatif précède l’acte pictural, soit la réalisation de peintures murales. Or, dans le Furry, le dessin digital précède toujours le Fursuit puisqu’il en constitue une sorte de patron. On peut alors interpréter cette inversion comme tributaire de la société de l’image qui est celle du XXIème siècle.

L’acte performé en costume pourrait donc bien remonter à des temps lointains et être considéré comme un geste culturel prépondérant dès les sociétés préhistoriques. Cette mise en regard entre la danse en costume et le Fursuiting, c’est-à-dire la performance ou la dance réalisées en costume d’animal, met en valeur l’ancrage anthropologique du Furry Fandom. Il s’agit dès lors de ne pas marginaliser trop hâtivement ce dernier notamment décrié parce qu’une forme de sexualité déviante s’y développerait. Sans vouloir émettre un avis sur ces questions complexes qui nécessitent des compétences plus spécialisées, certains arguments permettent de dédramatiser la controverse, notamment lorsque Richard Schechner relie les trois pratiques de la chasse, de la performance et de la fertilité. Il écrit à ce propos : « les hommes à l’âge de pierre ne célébraient pas seulement la fertilité animale, mais aussi la fertilité humaine, comme l’attestent les dessins, les figures taillés dans la pierre, les peintures et les symboles retrouvés. » puis, à propos des représentations de la fécondité montrée par les figures de Konarak, encore une fois animales ou humaines, il ajoute : « la plupart des scènes de copulations et de caresses correspondent à des poses de danse. » (Ibid.—p28). Force est de constater que de mêmes piliers fondent l’art Furry, dans lequel l’on retrouve l’hybridation des espèces, la performance et une production pornographique qui lui est propre. La fertilité à Konarak, mais dans bien d’autres civilisations également, était célébrée par des représentations phalliques omniprésentes comme c’est le cas dans ce que les Furry nomment le Yiff, c’est-à-dire les dessins représentant des avatars Furry ayant des rapports sexuels entre eux ou encore présentant un état ostentatoire d’érection.

La chronologie du mouvement construite par Fred Patten (Retrospective: An Illustrated Chronology of Furry Fandom, 1966–1996) circoncit le Furry Fandom en proposant un point de départ dans les années soixante. Cependant, il semble nécessaire de replacer le mouvement dans un contexte diachronique plus large pour reconsidérer sa valeur sociétale. Si l’on s’intéresse aux résonnances possibles entre ce dernier et les résurgences multiséculaires des représentations d’hybridations entre homme et animal, il n’est plus possible de rejeter définitivement le fandom à la marge de la société. Ce dernier n’est qu’une repousse naturelle d’une thématique qui accompagne et accompagnera longuement l’humanité.