Feed aggregator

More recent news about Arctic Justice: Thunder Squad, a new animated feature we have mentioned before. Straight from Variety: “Jeremy Renner [The Avengers] has signed on to voice the lead character in 3D animated family film Arctic Justice: Thunder Squad from AMBI Group. Renner joins previously announced Alec Baldwin, James Franco, Anjelica Huston, and Omar Sy in a rag-tag group of inexperienced heroes combining to thwart the evil Doc Walrus, voiced by John Cleese, and save the Arctic. Renner will be voicing a fox named Swifty. The movie is fully financed and produced by AMBI principals Andrea Iervolino and Monika Bacardi, with animation work being done out of their AIC Toronto studio by Dimos Vrysellas (Shark Tale). Cal Brunker and Bob Barlen (Escape From Planet Earth) co-wrote the screenplay.” Still no word on a planned release date, but you’ll know when we do!

image c. 2016 AMBI Group

New members

After a big July, we didn't induct any new members in August. Maybe our next new member will be you? If you'd like more information about joining, read our membership guidelines.

Member news

Members Mary E. Lowd, Skunkbomb and Frances Pauli sold stories to Scratchpost Press's The Society Pages, a forthcoming anthology.

Televassi will have a poem in Thurston Howl Publications' Wolf Warriors III, their charity anthology. In addition, his story from Gods With Fur will be reprinted in THP's 2017 wolf anthology.

From Spring's Storms, the sequel to Patrick "Bahumat" Rochefort and Keith Aksland's novel From Winter's Ashes, has begun serializing on the web.

GoAL Publications released the third (and final?) issue of their eponymous magazine.

New markets

• ROAR 8 is open for submissions (as of September 1). This general audience anthology always has a loose theme; 2017's is "Paradise." Editor: Mary E. Lowd. Publisher: FurPlanet. Length: 2,000–18,000 words; prefers 4,000–12,000. Payment: 0.5¢/word. Deadline: February 1, 2017. Submission call.

For ongoing markets previously covered but still open (and occasionally, open in the future), visit the FWG web site:

• Paying short story markets
• Non-paying short story markets
• Novel/novella markets

Remember to keep an eye on the Calls for Submissions thread on the forum, as well as other posts on the Publishing and Marketing forum.

Cóyotl Awards

The 2015 Cóyotl Awards were awarded at Rocky Mountain FurCon! The winners:

• Novel: Barsk: The Elephants' Graveyard, Lawrence M. Schoen
• Novella: Koa of the Drowned Kingdom, Ryan Campbell
• Short story: "The Analogue Cat," Alice Dryden
• Anthology: Inhuman Acts, Ocean Tigrox (editor)

Congratulations to all the winners! Remember, to the best of our knowledge, the Cóyotl is the only literary award you can hug. (Okay, you could hug a Hugo, but it wouldn't be comfortable.)

Odds and ends

Thurston Howl set up a FWG Submission Deadlines Calendar using Google Calendar; you can visit it on the web, or subscribe in a calendar app of your choice. The calendar not only hits the markets that get picked up in this monthly newsletter; he does a good job of finding "furry-adjacent" markets.

While the Guild blog is not blogging as hard as it should be these days (your president-slash-editor accepts full blame), the forum remains quite active. If you are not part of the activity there, go add to it! Also, consider writing a guest post. See our guidelines for the details.

As always, the FWG Goodreads group needs more good reads. (Get it? I'm here all week.) Go add things to our members' bookshelf—see the instructions here on how.

Have a terrific month! Send news, suggestions, feedback, and legal awoos to furwritersguild@gmail.com, or leave a comment below.

Submitted by Fred Patten, Furry’s favorite historian and reviewer.

Fairytales Written by Rabbits, by Mary A. Parker. Illustrated by Michelle Cannon.
Melbourne, Vic., Australia, Ferox Publishing, September 2015, trade paperback $12.99 (x + 228 pages), Kindle $2.99.

Despite the charming cover by Michelle Cannon, “Fairytales” is a single word everywhere except on this cover.

Its countryside world seems very familiar —

“But first they must catch you.” (p. 1)

With a major difference –

“The dust came in the late evening, many seasons ago.

Flashes of light flowed and danced across the twilight sky. Green, orange and purple streaks twisted among the clouds and stars. The rabbits were frightened at first, fleeing to the familiar darkness of their burrows, away from the unknown.” (pgs. ix-x)

Fairytales Written by Rabbits is both fantasy and science fiction. It begins with the same scenario as Richard Adams’ Watership Down; the peaceful realistic life of a countryside rabbit warren. This is interrupted by an unknown world-changing spectacle similar to that at the beginning of John Wyndham’s The Day of the Triffids; the sky is full of something strange.

What happened? It’s never explained. But man never comes to the countryside again. And little by little, over generations, the wildlife grows more intelligent.

Heath and his sister Millet are the young rabbit protagonists of Fairytales Written by Rabbits. In the first chapter, while they are foraging for food in the nearby meadow, lightning during a sudden violent thunderstorm (it’s implied that weather conditions have changed drastically since the dust) sets fire to a tall eucalyptus tree near the entrances of their burrow. A black hawk, also grown more intelligent since the dust, uses a burning branch to set backfires driving foraging rabbits away from their warren:

“‘We need to be upwind,’ she [Millet] said, ‘I think we need to get to the other side.’ Heath wasn’t really listening; he was too preoccupied staring at the hawk as it dived towards the warren. The hawk rose on the hot air from the flames again, clutching not a rabbit in its talons, but a glowing stick.

‘What does it want with that?’ Heath wondered out loud. He’d never even heard of such behaviour from a hawk. But the flicker of curiosity quickly turned to a wave of dread as the hawk sailed closer, and dived towards them, burning stick still in its talons.” (p. 10)

The hawk pursues Heath and Millet, possibly because they’re two rabbits close together. They are driven by both the hawk and the spreading grassfire away from their warren, towards a large stone burrow that readers will recognize as an ancient human drainage pipe.

The rabbits are familiar with the thing, but fearful of it. It’s become known as the Great Stonecutter Rabbit’s burrow in the rabbit’s religion that has developed since the dust:

“The legend of the Great Stonecutter Rabbit was born, a giant that dug through rock and hills so that a little water would still flow to the rabbits. It was a gift, and worthy of respect instead of fear.” (p. 5)

Heath and Millet enter the large pipe farther than any rabbit has explored before. They are unexpectedly swept still further by a threatening flood that almost drowns them (readers will recognize a flash flood from the storm) and washes them out the other end, into unfamiliar territory:

“Hopefully there would be some decent grass and a chance to properly recuperate before attempting an overland journey home. But which direction to go? He assumed the stone burrow travelled more or less straight, but the more he thought about it the less certain he became.   They might end up in a completely different direction. They may never see the warren again.

This idea was not as distressing as he expected it to be. He was a young buck, and would have been expected to move on from the warren eventually anyway.” (p. 35)

It would be a spoiler to give away what Heath and Millet find and what adventures they have, but they are both science-fictional and magical, together and separately. There is mystery and excitement. There is heartbreak and redemption. There is death, both old and new. There are other animals that readers will recognize; notably Stares-at-moon, the longtail. Fans of Watership Down – and who isn’t? – will want to read Fairytales Written by Rabbits.

The author says, “All author royalties earned from the sale of this book will be donated to the Big Ears Animal Sanctuary, Tasmania.”

– Fred Patten

• Buy on Amazon

Stumbled across this: It’s a new Disney coloring book, decidedly “with a difference”, called Art of Coloring: Disney Animals. It’s part of the Art of Coloring series, designed to “inspire creativity and relaxation”, where familiar images are split up into many small segments designed to be filled up quickly with small dabs of color. In this case, images of Disney animal characters from several decades. “Relax, and let the creativity flow through you. Whether a skilled artist or an everyday dabbler of drawings and doodles, fans of all ages will enjoy these stunning pen-and-ink illustrations of beautiful landscapes, elaborate patterns, and memorable characters from Disney’s hit animated feature films themed to cute and cuddly animals.” It’s published in hardcover by the Disney Book Group, and it’s available now over at Barnes & Noble.

image c. 2016 Disney Book Group

Hello Everyone!

We open this week's show with a discussion on whether or not money makes a relationship happier and longer lasting. We go through a Chinese study to find a possible answer to whether or not money can buy love and happiness. 

Our main topic is on financial responsibility. Your hosts, with guest RhythmFox, discuss different issues that you might encounter in your life, from difficulty setting a budget, attending a convention in a fiscally responsible way, or learning the difference between a national bank and a credit union. We talk about our lives and how we've made mistakes in the hopes that you can avoid doing the same yourself.

We close with a question on how to handle being in a relationship where you're supporting a mate who does not seem motivated to find work of their own.

For more information, including a list of topics, see our Show Notes for this episode.

Thanks and, as always, be well!

FA 034 Financial Responsibility - Can money buy love? Should you buy a fursuit instead of pay rent? Should artists pay taxes? Should you support a mate who refuses to find a new job? All this, and more, on this week's Feral Attraction

Pokemon Go (Pawsome! #21)
Whats the deal with Pokemon Go? Thats what the group is talking about today. ***NEW EPISODES BIWEEKLY ON WEDNESDAYS*** THANKS FOR SUBSCRIBING!!! FACEBOOK: http://www.Facebook.com/TheRaccoonsDen... From: The Raccoon's Den Views: 1564 23 ratings Time: 12:43 More in Entertainment

also, here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIbIZSNFIXo ep 132 - Indy Fur Con LIVE - also, here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIbIZ…

Hi,

I am gay (although I don't tell people) and I met a guy a few years ago, who I suspect might be hiding his sexuality. We met through a mutual friend and we very quickly became friends. He is a foreign student who was studying in Scotland and was leaving to go home for the summer only a few months after we met.

He suggested that I could go and meet him in his home country over the summer, which I was delighted about. I though maybe he liked me. We spent a couple of weeks together and just became better friends. Nothing happened.

After the summer he returned to continue studying and we spent more time together. We would walk home from his work each week which took about an hour and we would just talk and talk. 

A few months passed, and one night, out of the blue he asked me if I was gay. I was very surprised by this as because I think I am fairly straight acting. So I was honest and said that I am. He then asked me if I liked him. I thought maybe he was wanting to come out to me, and I told him that I do like him. At this point he told me that he was straight, which was pretty disappointing.

The next day, he deleted me as a friend on Facebook, and wouldn't reply to any texts or emails. We didn't speak for 8 months.

So one day, out of the blue around the time he was planning to return to the country to study (after the summer) he added me as a friend again and said we "could talk". Over the next month or two we saw each other a few times. We made polite small talk although things felt pretty awkward. He went away home again (for Christmas this time) and when he came back he asked if he could stay on my couch (he had done this occasionally at first after I'd spent time with him over the previous summer). So he slept on my couch most weekends over the course of four months, and then or a prolonged period of 7 weeks when his lease ran out on his flat - but he was leaving for the summer again so didn't want to renew it. By the time he was leaving to go home, we had become really close agian. Maybe even close than before because I often felt he flirted with me.

On two occasions he described something I said or did as "cute." He was always singing and substituting my name into the lyrics. I started going to the gym and he would comment that I was looking good. Just little things like that.
He would also watch football and rugby matches with me and comment on how muscular some of the players looked.

He has now moved to London, and having not seen him for 3 months, he invited me to go to visit. During the course of my visit, he said several things that I don't know if he meant as flirting. We were walking along and he bought some peanuts. After eating them he said that the peanuts had made him "horny."

I had claimed that the break away to London felt like a mini-holiday. Towards the end of the holiday he said that usually on holiday he would "make-out" with someone. He was looking for something in his backpack and he said "it won't be in this section, that's where I keep my condoms." He constantly asked me about my sexuality, and any time he saw a gay couple holding hands, he would point it out to me and say something like "if you had a boyfriend that could be you." If he saw a gay bar he would say that if I wanted to go in he wouldn't mind and would come with me. Like I said earlier, I am quite straight acting so I don't go into gay bars.

All of these little things just have me wondering if he is confused about his own sexuality. I am older than him. I'm 34 and he is only 22. When he was asking about my sexuality I told him that when I was 23 I had a girlfriend.

The most confusing part of this whole situation, is that over the course of this summer (the period after he left my flat and meeting him in London) he got a girlfriend. She lives abroad so he doesn't get to see and spend time with her.
In between saying the things I mentioned before (which may or may not be flirting), he never stops talking about her, and what they did over the summer. He was quite detailed in telling me about their sexual encounters. He's constantly taking pictures so he can send them to her. He seems to be happy when talking about her, but I wonder if it's possible he is overcompensating by being ultra-macho. His flirting has definitely gotten stronger sine he got a girlfriend, but is talking about his girlfriend him trying to reassure me that he is off-limits? Is he flirting with me just because he is sexually frustrated?

I have never repeated to him that I like him. I love him as a friend. He's an amazing and funny guy... but I'd like there to be more. However, I don't want to lose his friendship again.

What do you think? What should I do?

Confused and Frustrated 

* * *

Dear C&F

You don't say what country he is from, but I'm wondering if he is from a culture that is extremely anti-gay (e.g. Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Iran, Korea....), which would result in his being very very nervous and uptight about coming out. Another issue here is that he is very young and probably still struggling with his sexual identity. These two added together, along with all the mixed messages, tell me that you are walking into a big ol' mess of a relationship if you try to push the issue. 

My advice? Do not initiate an intimate relationship before he gets his head together about who he is. To do otherwise will lead to much misery on your part.

Hugs,
Papabear

Submitted by Fred Patten

Doglands, by Tim Willocks
NYC, Random House, September 2011, hardcover $16.99 (308 [+1] pages), Kindle $9.99.

This has been published by Random House Children’s Books, but packaged to look like an adult title. Most reviews (non-furry) have compared it to London’s The Call of the Wild crossed with Adams’ Watership Down. The dogs in it talk to each other, which qualifies it for reviewing here.

“Once upon a time in the Doglands, a blue greyhound gave birth to four pups in a prison camp that the dogs called Dedbone’s Hole. The blue greyhound’s name was Keeva and she named her firstborn Furgul, which in dog tongue means ‘the brave.’ Keeva loved Furgul from the moment she saw him, but as she licked his newborn body clean and gave him her milk to drink, her heart was filled with fear. Furgul had been born with a terrible secret. And she knew that when the masters discovered his secret, they would take him away.” (p. 3)

Furgul is born into a puppy farm, specifically a greyhound breeding farm whose purpose is to produce as many greyhounds for dog racing as possible:

“When the pups no longer needed Keeva’s milk, they joined the other hounds in the exercise yard and Furgul got a better look at Dedbone’s Hole. A lot of greyhounds lived here, in a compound surrounded by a high wire fence. Outside the fence he saw a junkyard and some shacks. Inside the compound the greyhounds were locked in crates – one crate each, where each hound lived all alone – which were even smaller than the whelping cage that Furgul lived in. For just one hour a day the hounds were released from the crates to feed and exercise. The masters made sure there was never enough food for all the hounds, and so the hounds had to fight one another, snarling and biting at the filthy troughs of grub to get enough to eat. The older dogs said the masters starved the dogs on purpose to make them compete, so they could find out who was weak and who was strong and who might make a good racer. They did it to teach them that it was stupid to make friends. They did it because they were bullies who thought it was fun to feel so powerful.” (pgs. 4-5)

Furgul learns that his father was named Argal:

“‘Where is he?’ asked Furgul.

Keeva shrugged. ‘Your father is like the wind. He goes wherever he chooses and he does whatever he likes.’

‘Wow,’ said Furgul, ‘he must have a really great master.’

‘Argal doesn’t have a master,’ said Keeva. ‘He’s free.’

Furgul frowned. ‘What does ‘free’ mean?’

‘I don’t know,’ said Keeva. A troubled look came over her face. ‘Argal tried to explain it to me – something to do with what he called the Doglands,’

‘The Doglands?’ Furgul felt the fur on his back stand up on end. The word sang in his blood. ‘What did Argal say?’

‘I wasn’t really listening. I was in love.’

‘Where are the Doglands?’ asked Furgul.

‘I don’t know that either,’ said Keeva. Confusion and pain clouded her eyes. She looked out between the bars of the cage in which all five of them had to lie day and night in their own pee. She gazed out beyond the high wire fence, past the rusting heaps of trash in the yard, to the mountains on the far blue horizon. ‘Maybe the Doglands are somewhere out there.’” (pgs. 8-9)

Furgul’s secret is that Argal wasn’t a bloodhound, so he’s a crossbreed – a mongrel – and when he gets older and it’s obvious to the masters that he’s not a pure bloodhound, he won’t be eligible to race, and he’ll be put down. He has to escape first; to become free to look for the Doglands and his father.

At first, Furgul doesn’t escape as much as he goes through a series of terrifying mishaps that he is fortunate to get through alive. Then he becomes a pet, which is safe but both boring and frustrating. Whatever Furgul wants to do seems to get him a “No!”

“Then there was walking.

You would think that walking was the easiest thing in the world. But no. Walking was a whole new dimension of yelling and rules. First of all Furgul had to wear a collar all the time, which he hated. Then, whenever the dogs went outside, a leash was attached to the collar, so that Furgul had to walk in step beside a Grown-Up. Whenever he stopped to examine an interesting, unusual or delightful smell – like another dog’s pee – the Grown-Ups would tut and mutter and pull him away.” (p. 64)

When Furgul tries to escape from that life, Doglands turns into slapstick comedy. Here Furgul tries to disguise that he’s a loose dog by mixing in with eight other dogs being walked by an improbably oblivious dog walker:

“Furgal slipped into the middle of the pack and slunk along as close to the ground as he could. He blended in like Kinnear [a bulldog] at a squirrel’s birthday party. There was a Pomeranian, a cockapoo, a mini schnauzer, a Jack Russell, a Cavalier King Charles, a Yorkie, a dachshund and a chow. One had a bright pink collar with golden studs and another a leopard-print leash. Some wore ribbons and jewels in their hair. The dachshund wore a little red dress.

The tallest of them was twelve inches shorter than Furgul.

Worst of all, every one of the eight ‘dogs’ was a girl.

They all gaped at Furgul with their tongues hanging out.

‘I’m traveling in disguise,’ whispered Furgul. ‘So just act natural, girls. Don’t attract attention – and, please, keep your voices down.’

He was instantly deafened by a clamor of giggles, squeals and chatter.

‘Who’s this tall drink of water?’

‘Don’t look now, ladies, but he’s a dog. A real one.’

‘You know what they say about a long snout.’

‘Look at those scars!’

‘And those thighs!’

‘I bet he goes like a train.’

‘The cheeky devil isn’t even wearing a collar!’

‘He’s stark naked!’ (pgs. 88-89)

This is followed by the Dog Pound, and the story turns grim with the threat of death again. Then – well, Furgul has lots more adventures. Always going towards the Doglands.

Doglands (cover by Angelo Rinaldi) is very readable, but it’s no Watership Down or The Call of the Wild. The mood swings in the story are too artificial; they destroy any believability. Furgul often uses a simile in his vocabulary to something that he couldn’t know about. Here’s one of the worst:

Finally, Kinnear – who had watched these disasters with amusement – explained it to him. ‘Don’t you get it?’ he said. ‘Rupert is you new name. Your pet name.’

‘Rupert?’ said Furgul, horrified. ‘That’s even worse than Kinnear.   Or Tic and Tac. It sounds like a bear’s name. A bear who wears checkered pants.’” (p. 63)

That’s something that Furgul wouldn’t know about – Doglands covers his life from his birth, and there are no bears in it. It’s also a reference to the English Rupert Bear children’s newspaper feature; he wears yellow checkered pants. Willocks’ inability to refrain from putting jokey in-group references into his novel have made it a clever writing exercise rather than a narrative that you can get lost in, like Watership Down or The Chronicles of Narnia.   But how many furry books are classics? By all means, read and enjoy Doglands.

–Fred Patten

• Buy on Amazon

Join Tal, Roland and Adoom tonight sans one gryphon as they discuss the weeks news! Episode -26 - Everything has been sharked

And once again, a young lady who finds herself in over her head — in the kitchen! This time it’s Malice in Ovenland, published by Rosarium, written and illustrated in full color by Micheline Hess. “Lily Brown is a bright, curious, energetic young girl from Queens, New York. When her mom forces her to stay home for the summer and do chores, Lily fumes. Little did she know that the greasy oven in the kitchen was going to give her more excitement and adventure than she could possibly handle.”  Apparently that involves a visit to a land of giant lizards and other fantastic creatures. Now Rosarium have released the Malice in Overland graphic novel, collecting the first four issues of the comic in hardcover. Check out the new trailer on YouTube.

image c. 2016 Rosarium Publishing

(Continuing yesterday’s Part 1.)

Here’s the thing – most of the anger towards Fursonas is because it wasn’t the doc we expected, or to some, what they wanted.

A lot of that comes with the general history of the fandom. How media took our hobby and portrayed it as a pagan cult of sex crazed orgies, by animal-suited maniacs.  From Vanity Fair, CSI, MTV, etc portraying us as a fetish rather then a community of artists, writers, dancers, and more.  The way they just don’t get what we are about is what many members in the fandom have been fighting to overcome for years.

And it’s been more or less a success, even with the press, as the fandom evolved to what it is today.  To how we see each other, what we believe in, and just enjoying the weirdness that we are.  After newly turning that corner, perhaps Fursonas could threaten to bring back all the negative old things they been working to overcome.

But that’s not what Fursona is or ever tries to do.

[DR]: My movie is meant to question what a “negative view” of the fandom is. While furry is definitely an accepting place, I do think that there’s a double standard in this community. People want to be accepted for themselves, but sometimes find it hard to accept things that are outside of their own comfort zone. I see this all the time in communities and I see it all the time in furry. Just look at babyfurs, and how plenty of more “normal” furries don’t want to have anything to do with them.

I love this fandom so much that I want it to be better. I think if we’re going to keep patting ourselves on the back for being so accepting, that means having to ask some difficult questions of ourselves—how much do we accept? What is the price of individual expression in the fandom? What is a “good image” and much is it worth? I still grapple with these questions all the time.

This is something I agree with. Our fandom does have a double standard. I know it because as a gay man I’ve seen how a community that views itself as open minded and accepting of all walks of life is also filled with selfish, shortsighted, rude, or even despicable people. Same with the kink community, with it’s view of itself as open minded and accepting to all walks of life, only to see some sides view other sides as inferior or even taboo.  It’s the very same with the Furry fandom. We’re a community that is open minded and accepting, and guess what I’m going to say next.  We’re also regular flawed humans.  It’s not hard to see a pattern when you’ve seen it repeated many times.

This is what Fursonas talks about, and it’s not what everyone in the fandom wants. Which is why many have seen Furries as the preferred doc, with its more positive view of the fandom over Fursonas criticisms.

But here’s the other thing, Furries wasn’t made for the fandom. Let me ask you a question: if you’ve seen Furries and are a member of the fandom, what do you learn from it?  What information does it provide that hasn’t already been discussed time and again from other members of the fandom?

I love Furries, it’s a good doc, but it already features information I knew by heart. When I saw it with my partner at Califur, he learned more about the fandom from the doc because he’s not apart of it. He knew very little besides what I told him. Furries works best for people on the outside to look into what we’re about while shedding away the tabloid crap. It does a great job of showing how open and creative the fandom is, while talking a bit about the history of why Furries are sometimes looked down upon.

The only problem I have with it is that I feel it’s too short. Especially since the doc brings up so many different areas of the fandom and only gives a small glance on some subject matters.  But some of that can be chalked up to independent filmmaking and what resources Eric’s team had to work with. His team had some of the same issues when looking for subjects to interview.

[ER]: When I began work on my own documentary, this was probably the biggest concern that furries had when I approached them to be in the film. They wanted to know precisely what they were getting into, and they were curious about where the film would end up and how they would be portrayed. Because the media had a precedent of representing furries in a way that was overwhelmingly negative and/or satirical, this was an understandable concern.

I see the film works best to show outsiders what we’re about, but as Eric began showing the film at cons and film festivals, he’s been amazed by the reception for the film from the fandom itself.

[ER]: I’ve been thanked for including a diverse group of furries in the film that represent different aspects of the fandom, particularly when it comes to art and writing.  A few people have told me that they would be comfortable sharing the film with their parents as a means of discussion their own furry identity, and I’m honored the film can initiate that kind of dialogue. I have even seen the film bring a few to tears, and I’ve been told it’s renewed and/or affirmed their drive to participation in the community. After working on the film for so long, I was acutely aware that furries were going to be my toughest, most critical audience. I feel fortunate that the film has been well received, and it’s incredibly rewarding to share the film with a community I care so much about.

That last quote actually makes me want to bring up one more point. The Furry Fandom is pretty much a sandbox fandom. We all have a basic agreement of what we are – people who like walking, talking animals. But that’s just the sand in the box.  The fun is what we can make with that basic concept. How we can make something that can help us figure out who we are, or what we want to be. How to awaken the inner child as the years go by. Or explore adult areas about yourself.

The two docs show that. Furries shows all the avenues the sandbox can offer, while Fursonas points out some of the limiting walls of the sandbox and asks how we can work with them. Which is why Dominic wasn’t surprised to see the initial reaction to the film, but is happy to see what has been coming out of it.

[DR]: Polarizing, haha. Some people love it and some people hate it. Some people hate it without having watched it, which is the only thing that bums me out. I like to think the reaction has been more positive than negative. I think that so many furries start out on the defensive when they watch media on the fandom, because they’re waiting to see how the media is going to get it wrong. And so I wasn’t very optimistic about how the film would go over, because it holds a mirror up to the community and suggests that maybe we need to think about this stuff in a different way. And honestly? I thought that furries would be way too stubborn to want to listen to some asshole filmmaker trying to tell them that maybe they should be nicer to Boomer. But I was pleasantly surprised. The film appears to have opened up a discussion somewhat. I see people having informed, productive arguments about it. That was the best I could hope for—for the film to start a conversation.

Even the two filmmakers have agreed that each film explores different areas of the fandom.

[DR]: I’m a pretty competitive person, I have to admit. I had been working on Fursonas for a little while and then I found out about Ash’s documentary and I was all geared up to hate it, because I’m an asshole and wanted to be THE BEST! When it showed at Morphicon in 2015, I drove from Pittsburgh to Columbus by myself just to watch it. I was pleasantly surprised by the quality of the filmmaking and by its earnest message. I went into it thinking that it would be some kind of PSA, but it really isn’t. It gives you a nice slice of the fandom from his perspective. We had a long discussion about it afterwards. When I showed Fursonas at a limited furry screening in San Francisco, Ash surprised me by showing up unannounced the same way I did to him.  Some people want to label his movie as propaganda and my movie as sensationalism, but I think both movies go much farther than that. Ash and I both adore this community and have dedicated over four years of our lives to exploring it as honestly as we can—just in different ways.

[ER]: Overall, I have seen furries respond positively to both films. That is not to say I haven’t seen critiques, but that’s to be expected with any work of art, particularly when two films with a similar subject matter are released around the same time (I recall the year when The Prestige and The Illusionist were both released). I don’t really see it as a contest, as both films ultimately have different focuses and serve to illuminate different themes, so if anyone is interested they should probably watch both.

I would say that certain differences in our philosophies as filmmakers is what produced two unique films with unique outlooks on the furry community. It’s difficult for me to be critical of Dominic’s approach because his goals were not my own. In many ways, Furries represents my perspective on the furry fandom at large, and I think it summarizes my feelings in a way that’s more well-rounded than anything I could put to words at this point.

That is the biggest take away I feel we should look at the two. The fact that we even have two docs about Furries released in the same year still blows me away. It’s not really fair to compare the two, since they have completely different purposes. For Fusonas in particular, it raises questions that are not easily answered. As Eric points out about AC…

[ER]: Given that Anthrocon is not only a non-profit organization, but also the largest furry convention in the world, I can understand and appreciate their need for discretion when working with the media.

Considering what Kage and AC have had to work with over the last decade with the media portraying us as a fetish, and being a go-to punching bag for other fandoms.  Even with all that, AC has come out on top, having its biggest year so far with over 7,300 people attending. A 1,000+ increase from last year. It’s not hard to see why things are the way they are. I don’t see Kage as a bad guy. I have never met him, but you don’t have to see much to know how he loves and cares about the fandom.

But what Dominic presents is a question of how far love should go, even with good intentions, when it may have negative effects too. Is it good to have a sandbox with pre-made molds so kids in another box don’t make fun of you?

While Dominic shows his bias as clear as day, there are people in the film who agree with Kage. The subject, Bandit, agrees when he’s watching one of Kage’s lectures about how a good image can take fifteen years to make, but can be destroyed in fifteen seconds. Diezel Raccoon was fired from his job just for telling people what he does on weekends. Kage even tells us in the film himself. When Dominic goes onto one of his Winestreams, he poses a question about Boomer and Chew Fox, and Kage responds with fiery passion how they don’t represent him and his side of the fandom.

To be fair, Dominic shows it as a gotcha moment, but thinking about it shows more or less why Kage does what he does. I know people will point out that I don’t have anything from AC or Kage themselves for this piece. I reached out to them through their AC Media Liaison email, but never got a reply. I would have loved to have their view of the two docs here, but that is neither here or there. Instead, I want to wrap things up with this.

There are many levels of the fandom. I have had the privilege of seeing both the childlike wonder and the adult fun. I saw a ten-year-old girl in a partial fursuit dance her tail off in her first fursuit dance competition and have a blast, and I was part of a talk with an HIV-positive group learning about Furry as an alternative sex avenue. I have great respect for what Uncle Kage has done in the fandom, but I do not always agree with his policies.

I believe we need to be open toward criticism when presented to us. If not to see what other people think of you, then to see if there are areas you need to explore yourself to grow or reexamine. And from some of the reactions to this, I have a little less respect than before.

Fursonas does have its problems. The biggest being how it doesn’t go into detail about the fandom in general. Look at some of the reviews and they’ll say how they were interested in the project, but wished to know more about the fandom and its history. Plus the fact it doesn’t mention what a Fursona is can’t be ignored. Fuzzwolf & Savrin do a more negative review if you want to know more. But after seeing the film, I don’t see it as much of a film about the fandom as it’s a look at individuals in the fandom and the politics inside it.

Of course these are just Dominic’s, Eric’s, and my voices about what’s happened. Now I want to know what you guys think.

If you saw the films, what were your takeaways? Did you like both films or did your levels vary? Where do you see the fandom going? What are your thoughts about this article? I’m open to know and discuss what we see in the fandom. I want to end here with one more quote from Dominic about the need to learn and examine who we are.

[DR]: Something I struggled with when working on this film was how to avoid sensationalizing material that, in and of itself, was sensational? A lot of furries want to think of the fandom as a boring place when you examine it. They’ll try to downplay the strangeness of furry by comparing it to other communities. I think that furries are right on one level because yes, you can draw comparisons between our community and so many others. But I think if you look closely at sports fandom or religion or whatever else, you will begin to find these communities are anything but boring. They’re filled with drama, they contain hierarchies, there are politics, there is sex, and people that are living and dying for this shit every day. I think that the whole world (furry or not) is so fucking nuts and that it would be less honest to omit all sensational material than it would be include it. I look at this fandom and I see a chaotic living community with tons of people trying to exist under the same name. Sometimes it brings people together and sometimes it drives people apart. Maybe I’m way off base, though. Maybe it’s just cartoon fans. What do you think? 

Thanks for your time with this beast of an article. I await your discussions and have a nice day, you crazy fluffer nutters.

-Matthias

On the shelves now from Oni Press you’ll find a new full-color comic book series called Space Battle Lunchtime, written and illustrated by Natalie Riess. The idea is simple: When a famous interplanetary chef has to drop out of a famous interplanetary cooking reality show, a young woman from Earth (with dreams of being a pastry chef) is given the opportunity of a lifetime… if she can survive the experience! As with many interplanetary science fiction comics, there are boat-loads of non-human characters… and more than a few of them look rather like Earth animals you probably know! Ms. Riess is also well-known for another funny animal comic: A web series called Snarlbear. Comic Book Resources has a review of Space Battle Lunchtime that includes a lot of sample pages.

image c. 2016 Oni Press

(Note from Patch: thanks to the site’s valued long time contributor, Pup Matthias. As site manager, I don’t put a leash on writing, and this came from his self-motivated effort. Therefore, I’ll add a disclaimer that Matthias is sole author, independent from my previous posts and relationships or understandings with others. I had considered doing a followup about poorly-done mainstream Fursonas coverage called “furry is not a cult,” but then decided that enough conversation was already happening.  Uncle Kage, Dominic, Eric Risher and Matthias are all friends to me and all of them are doing great things for this community. If you only get to hear part of the story, let that say the rest. – P)

This has been an incredible year for the Furry Fandom. Zootopia crossed over a billion dollars, fur con attendance continues a healthy rate of growth, more positive news about the fandom has been coming out, and Furry Network has entered the Furry website game. And we’ve got not one, but two documentaries exploring the fandom made by people inside the fandom itself. Yet it’s the last part that has brought on some of the biggest debates in the fandom.

Since the release of the two documentaries, Fursonas and Furries, there has been a lot of praise and criticism towards both, although Fursonas has been getting the more vocal criticism of the two.  Which isn’t surprising.  Fursonas features a lot of topics that depending where you stand, can be seen as exposing an issue most would rather hide, or a sensational attack that continues the negative image of the fandom we’ve been working for years to get over.

The reason?  In the second half of Fursonas, we see director Dominic Rodriguez get pulled over by Anthrocon staff, and he was subsequently banned from Anthrocon for breaking their media policy. The rest of the doc then paints the con chair, Uncle Kage, in a negative light criticizing his practices both with media relations, how Furries should interact (or not) with the media, and the way he “censors” certain figures and topics to make the fandom more acceptable to the mainstream.

Now to make things clear, I like Fursonas. I like that it brings forward issues I believe we should discuss and come to terms with. I think some of the criticism doesn’t come so much from the film itself as that it’s a film the fandom didn’t expect. I’ll go into detail about that later, but this article is not a Fursonas defense piece.  It’s about exploring the topics and reactions that have become clouded with all the drama surrounding the two films. I love that we have two Furry docs that explore two different aspects of the fandom. I’ve even talked to both directors, who wish to express their own thoughts about everything going on. This isn’t trying to end the conversation. It’s to add more and make sure what we debate about is what needs to be debated about.

So let’s first examine the main issue, Dominic Rodriguez being banned from Anthrocon. This bit of information alone has been the deal breaker on whether people should watch the doc. It’s as if because Anthrocon saw fit to ban a film about Furries, then it can’t be worth watching in the first place. When you watch the film, you see the topic of being banned brought up, but also the main reason for them to be banned was because they didn’t agree to a Production Agreement, which would have given some form of creative control over the film to Uncle Kage.

People have debated how much of that statement is true.  When I first started to look more into this story, I knew we needed to see what that contract was. I reached out to Dominic and asked if he could share the document or emails showing what was discussed. Unfortunately he could not give me the exact docs or emails, because as he put it:

[DR]: Information that we release regarding the film has to pass through multiple channels, including entertainment lawyers. I’ve been told that I’m not allowed to share the entire Production Agreement, but I am able to quote relevant details word-for-word, so at least that’s something. …the contents of the emails are between the filmmakers, Uncle Kage, and lawyers.

Here are the applicable word-for-word specifications from the Production Agreement sent by Uncle Kage that Dominic’s team declined.

“While at Anthrocon, Producer agrees: (1) not to film sexually graphic images, (2) not to engage attendees in the topics of sex and sexuality, and (3) not to define Furry Fandom as a sexual community. Producer agrees any discussion of sex and sexuality that comes up within the production will be handled with maturity and put within the proper context. Documentary may, to some degree, discuss the topics of sex and sexuality on subsequent film shoots outside of Anthrocon.”

“Producer understands that Grantor will allow use of Anthrocon footage in Documentary provided that Grantor is allowed to view the final cut of the full-length Documentary film, in its entirety, prior to giving permission. Producer agrees to mail a copy of the final cut on a digital media format (DVD) to Anthrocon’s mailing address in order for Grantor to view.”

“Producer agrees that Grantor is allowed to request any Documentary segments or footage to be edited or otherwise altered, should Grantor have a reason to make this request. Producer understands that this decision is the sole discretion of Grantor. In the event Grantor makes such a request, Grantor shall provide a) a description of the specific footage the Grantor deems unsuitable; b) the time in the film where this material occurs; c) an explanation for why the material is objectionable; and d) a suggestion for how to fix the problem (shorten a shot, use alternate footage, remove the audio, etc).”

“Producer agrees to work with Grantor in order to edit Documentary to the point in which the final production is acceptable to Grantor. When Grantor and Producer have agreed to a final cut of Documentary, Grantor will sign an additional Release Contract which relinquishes said footage from control of Grantor. The Documentary will then be freely used for commercial and entertainment purposes at the discretion of Producer, provided that the final cut of the film remains unaltered after Contract is made. Any advertisements or marketing materials for the film will only contain the footage or imagery that is present on the agreed-upon final cut of Documentary.”

“If a suitable edit of Documentary cannot be fashioned, then Grantor can terminate Anthrocon’s involvement with the film. If Grantor wishes to terminate involvement, then Producer agrees to delete all footage related to Anthrocon or associated subjects from the final cut of Documentary. If Grantor chooses to terminate involvement, Anthrocon will not be mentioned in any manner during the entirety of the completed Documentary, nor on any advertising or marketing materials related to the film. Grantor can choose to terminate involvement with the film at any point up until the final cut is approved by Grantor in the form of a signed Release. Upon signing the final Release, Grantor and Producer have both fulfilled all requirements which are hereby agreed upon.”

Looking at this, it’s not hard to see why Dominic refused to sign the agreement.  The next question: How did it lead to the current state of affairs? Well that’s simple. They broke AC’s media policy. We see in the film itself an AC security member pulling them aside while talking to a fursuiter. But they filmed at AC before, as the project developed from a student thesis film to a fell fledged feature, and never got pulled before. As Dominic explains:

[DR]: There’s no doubt about it: we definitely broke the rules. How we came to break the rules is a little more complicated. We filmed footage for Fursonas during Anthrocon 2012, 2013, and 2014. All three years, I was a registered attendee, as were the couple crewmembers that accompanied me. One thing that’s important to note is that this movie was not always a “real movie” with a production studio and a distribution company and all these things. Originally, it was a crew of five college kids who were looking to make a short film for their senior thesis project.

I had never been to a furry convention before, and I thought it would be fun to register, walk around, talk to furries casually and off-the-record, and film a little b-roll that I could look back at later. This was for research purposes more than anything else. We filmed footage of furries walking around the convention and I showed this to the rest of my crew to see if they saw potential in the project. We all liked the idea and decided that summer that this was going to be our documentary.

I didn’t have to think about Anthrocon for a while after that, because the original 12-minute short film that I made for college actually doesn’t contain any footage from AC. In 2013, we had all graduated and decided that we wanted to expand Fursonas into a feature-length film. That year, we filmed nothing but b-roll at the con. We didn’t do any interviews or get into anyone’s business—we just filmed wide shots of furries walking around.

At this point, I wasn’t familiar with all the specifics of the media policy, but I assumed that it applied to more commercial projects. In my mind, I wasn’t “the press,” and I didn’t have an angle. I was just getting drunk with my filmmaker friends on a Saturday night, filming the furries for this eventual project that would probably go nowhere.

In 2014, we were taking the production more seriously. That’s when we got into trouble. Aside from filming the usual b-roll, we conducted one brief interview with Diezel Racccoon, who we had been following for the past two years. He had agreed to the interview, and we were talking with him and his parents, who were visiting Anthrocon for the first time.

In the middle of the interview, a Dorsai member asked if we had media badges, which we didn’t. He then told us that we were not allowed to be filming people and escorted us to a back room. I asked him why we needed to get media badges when we weren’t “the press,” but just a group of kids who were filming something independent. He said that because we had professional equipment, that was what made us different from other registered furries making their films. I think that when he saw me holding a microphone in front of Diezel’s face, he assumed I was approaching furries that might not want to be interviewed.

In any case, we went to the back room, and I had to show a Fursonas trailer on my phone, so they could see what the project was about. After viewing the trailer, the person that I showed it to (Xydexx Squeakypony) was concerned by Boomer The Dog’s presence, and said that we would have to talk to Uncle Kage about the film. Unfortunately, the chairman was busy, so they released us and we never filmed at Anthrocon again.

What followed was a back-and-forth between us and Uncle Kage via email. I had wanted to interview him, but we could not agree on terms. A big source of tension was how Anthrocon was going to be featured in the film—would we be allowed to show footage from Anthrocon? Would we be allowed to even mention Anthrocon? Who does this footage really belong to?

It was 2014 when I realized what an issue this was becoming. I wanted to explore furry in a nuanced way, examining controversies and things like that with humanity. But Anthrocon is so protective of its image (and the image of furries in general) that I knew I would not be able to work with them on this. If they needed to approve the final cut of the film, and they were already getting antsy just by seeing Boomer in his paper fursuit for a few seconds, how could I hope to do anything other than a PSA with their consent?

A lot of people think they’re “busting” me when they point out that we violated the media policy. It’s true—we filmed at the convention and then distributed the film without showing the final cut to the AC Board of Directors. I didn’t set out to break the rules, but I ended up realizing that I needed to break them if I wanted to keep my artistic integrity intact. This film reflects my biased opinion of the fandom. I think that the need to present a “good image” is standing in the way of individual expression. I use filmmaking and furry fandom to express myself, which is more important to me than anything.

We broke the rules, but we didn’t break the law. This is how many documentaries are made. They attempt to tell some kind of truth and they often will have to break rules in order to do this. How could I protest Anthrocon’s media policy in a film while getting the permission of Anthrocon to do so? That would be like Blackfish asking Seaworld for permission. I know, I know—that’s probably a bit of a stretch, but you get the idea.

A lot of people say that it’s unfair that I was banned from Anthrocon, but I disagree. It was perfectly within their rights to ban me. I broke the rules and I got banned for it. I accept that. People can decide for themselves when they watch the movie if I was justified or not. Honestly, all banning me did was create controversy and help promote the movie anyway.

That is true. Remember that rebellious movie filmed at Disneyworld without Disney’s permission, and all the drama that didn’t happen because Disney did jack about it… Do you even remember what the title of that film is? In fact, one case that kept popping into my mind was the incident that happened when Inside Edition filmed Further Confusion.

I asked Dominic if he felt his situation was in any way similar to Inside Edition.

[DR]: The difference between our situation and Inside Edition is that Inside Edition was denied permission and then filmed secretively. Our filming was never secretive. We didn’t realize that we were breaking the rules until it was too late. It was after that, that I started examining Kage’s Furries in the Media panels and realizing what a huge source of tension media relations has become. Getting escorted away at AC was the jolt I needed to push me in the right direction of figuring out what I wanted to say in Fursonas.

Of course, Fursonas wasn’t the only doc filming at AC. Furries was more of less working around the same time frame. It makes one wonder if the two knew about each other’s existence. But as the director of Furries, Eric Risher, states…

[ER]: Yes, but marginally. I never had any direct contact with Dominic until Furries had been completed. I had heard that he was working on a film (I think I might have seen a mention on FA or Twitter), but the only information I had about Fursonas was what had been posted on social media at the time. 

But Furries didn’t get into the same trouble, because they followed AC’s media policy of notifying them in advance what they wanted to do, as required under their Photography and Media Questions in the FAQ section on their website. But Dominic wasn’t aware, as he said; he was not aware of the policy and thought it applied towards more commercial projects. Not to someone who was only trying to make a student thesis film, using the con as b-roll that started to grow over time. Eric went through the same production agreement as Dominic did though.

[ER]: When I approached AC, I sent them a treatment that thoroughly discussed my interests as a filmmaker, including how I intended to incorporate any material filmed at their convention. Our contract with Anthrocon did state that they could make editorial suggestions regarding material filmed specifically at AC, but after reviewing the final cut of the film they chose not to exercise that right and they signed off on the film.

However that wasn’t the same case for Fursonas.

[DR]: What it comes down to is having to send the finished film to the Anthrocon Board of Directors for approval, and how they are able to recommend changes to any material they find objectionable, not limited to the footage at Anthrocon. For instance, if they wanted to take Boomer out of the film, or clarify that he’s “not really a furry,” that’s something they would be able to do. And let’s say I refused to do this—they could insist that all references to Anthrocon (including Uncle Kage), be pulled from the film. The fact is that Anthrocon, Boomer The Dog, Uncle Kage, and everything else are all tangled up in this mess of a situation, and in order to properly explore it, I had to be able to look at all of it, and not feel like I needed to collaborate with Anthrocon in any way.  

I think that if Anthrocon was able to approve the documentary, I would not have been able to explore the tension between community and identity in the fandom—at least, not in the brutally honest way that I had hoped to. I see a real problem in the community right now and I wanted to confront that problem. I don’t think that this is something Anthrocon wants to confront.

If you look back at the agreement from Dominic again, it does say that AC can edit any part of the film, while Eric says it only applied toward AC footage only. Anyone who has watched Fursonas can tell you that it looks at controversial people and topics like Boomer the Dog, Chex Fox, Bad Dragon, and the nature of sex in the fandom.

It was when they saw a few images of Boomer in the trailer while AC pulled Dominic aside, that made them nervous what the film would even be about.  So Dominic’s explanation of the agreement asking for editorial power over the entire film seems more likely.  Not just the AC footage, as Eric said for Furries.

I would not be shocked to learn that if Dominic did agree to AC’s agreement, they would have had to cut out everything featuring Boomer, Chex Fox, Bad Dragon, or sex in general; or make sure to put in many notes about how AC is not connected to them, they don’t represent the fandom at large, or those people aren’t true Furries.  Even though none of that is in direct reference to AC.  Yet the issue is only brought up when it focuses on Uncle Kage, and moreover when it looks at the bigger issues of identity in the fandom that don’t fit how certain people want the fandom to be seen.

Good documentaries aren’t made to do what you expect. But you’ll have to wait till tomorrow as this article just keeps growing.  More words from Eric Risher and Dominic Rodriguez in Part 2.

-Matthias

A little while ago we made mention of Nelbert the Introvert, the first children’s book written and illustrated by Disney Animation lead character designer Shiyoon Kim (Zootopia, Big Hero 6). A recent article on Cartoon Brew said that the book is now available at Mr. Kim’s web site. In fact Mr. Kim actually went so far as to direct an animated ” teaser trailer” for the book. Inspired by the likes of Disney animator/illustrator Bill Peet, Nelbert tells the story of a shy dragon who likes to play chess. Mr. Kim created a set of custom “brushes” in Photoshop to use in the creation of his book. They’re also available for sale on his web site.

image c. 2016 by Shiyoon Kim

This week we replace CJ with a lizard and Fayroe gets distracted. That’s basically the whole episode in a sentence.

Download MP3

[No video version this week, messed up the recording. :c Whoops.]

Link Roundup:

• South African Furry Magazine
• Japanese smartphone game is furry themed
• British Embassy Twitter uses meme

News:

• Getting Serious About Funny: Psychologists See Humor As A Character Strength
• Washing to exterminate 10 percent of wolf population
• The Secret Furry Patrons Keeping Indie Artists Afloat
• Man Bathes In Hot Sauce, Immediately Questions His Life Choices
• Scientists find only one true wolf species in America
• This Dictator Accidentally Told People To Get Naked And Work. So They Did
• Naked Suspect Wakes Sleeping Man With Kiss, Finds Out He Has A Gun
• Porn Poetry

Emails:

• Ariel – “About Furries who Don’t like Hugs”
• Zachary Lycaon – Dear FurCast
• Aleseyr – “Commissions”
• Edon Baia – “Furcast Fan Email w/Donation next Saturday”
• Devin D. Parlett – “Furry and Politics”

FC-243 Underwear Masquerade - This week we replace CJ with a lizard and Fayroe gets distracted. That's basically the whole episode in a sentence.

This week we replace CJ with a lizard and Fayroe gets distracted. That’s basically the whole episode in a sentence.

Download MP3

[No video version this week, messed up the recording. :c Whoops.]

Link Roundup:

• South African Furry Magazine
• Japanese smartphone game is furry themed
• British Embassy Twitter uses meme

News:

• Getting Serious About Funny: Psychologists See Humor As A Character Strength
• Washing to exterminate 10 percent of wolf population
• The Secret Furry Patrons Keeping Indie Artists Afloat
• Man Bathes In Hot Sauce, Immediately Questions His Life Choices
• Scientists find only one true wolf species in America
• This Dictator Accidentally Told People To Get Naked And Work. So They Did
• Naked Suspect Wakes Sleeping Man With Kiss, Finds Out He Has A Gun
• Porn Poetry

Emails:

• Ariel – “About Furries who Don’t like Hugs”
• Zachary Lycaon – Dear FurCast
• Aleseyr – “Commissions”
• Edon Baia – “Furcast Fan Email w/Donation next Saturday”
• Devin D. Parlett – “Furry and Politics”

FC-243 Underwear Masquerade - This week we replace CJ with a lizard and Fayroe gets distracted. That's basically the whole episode in a sentence.

This week we replace CJ with a lizard and Fayroe gets distracted. That’s basically the whole episode in a sentence.

Download MP3

[No video version this week, messed up the recording. :c Whoops.]

Link Roundup:

• South African Furry Magazine
• Japanese smartphone game is furry themed
• British Embassy Twitter uses meme

News:

• Getting Serious About Funny: Psychologists See Humor As A Character Strength
• Washing to exterminate 10 percent of wolf population
• The Secret Furry Patrons Keeping Indie Artists Afloat
• Man Bathes In Hot Sauce, Immediately Questions His Life Choices
• Scientists find only one true wolf species in America
• This Dictator Accidentally Told People To Get Naked And Work. So They Did
• Naked Suspect Wakes Sleeping Man With Kiss, Finds Out He Has A Gun
• Porn Poetry

Emails:

• Ariel – “About Furries who Don’t like Hugs”
• Zachary Lycaon – Dear FurCast
• Aleseyr – “Commissions”
• Edon Baia – “Furcast Fan Email w/Donation next Saturday”
• Devin D. Parlett – “Furry and Politics”

[Live] Underwear Masquerade

Roo and Tugs are joined by artist and Pokésona LilChu as they discuss the world of Pokésonas. Why do these exist? Are there different rules? Is it a bleed over in the style of Bronies? Some of the answers may surprise you! Roo asks all kinds of strange questions, Tugs loses his mind, and Chu...melts. We also have a DOUBLE food review, THE GAME, Space News, and Get Psyched!



NOW LISTEN!

Show Notes

Special Thanks

LilChu, our guest. He's also an artist! Check him out at www.chuartdesigns.com.
KSL's Nightside Project. We miss you!
Kira the Kitsune
Cane McKeyton
Syrus Flufferbottom (aka "Super Bitch")
Dee the Otter
Dronon
Lumeo
Guardian the Lion FOR COOKIES! (Even after Tugs accidentally made him bleed!)
Timid Grizzly FOR COOKIES!

Music

Opening Theme: Husky In Denial – Cloud Fields (Century Mix). USA: Unpublished, 2015. ©2015 Fur What It’s Worth and Husky in Denial. Based on Fredrik Miller– Cloud Fields (Radio Mix). USA: Bandcamp, 2011. ©2011 Fur What It’s Worth. (Buy a copy here – support your fellow furs!)
Some music was provided by Kevin MacLeod at Incompetech.com. We used the following pieces: Inspired . Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License.
Space News Music: Fredrik Miller – Orbit. USA: Bandcamp, 2013. Used with permission. (Buy a copy here – support your fellow furs!)
Get Psyched! Music: Fredrik Miller – Universe. USA: Bandcamp, 2013. Used with permission. (Buy a copy here – support your fellow furs!)
Closing Theme: Husky In Denial – Cloud Fields (Headnodic Mix). USA: Unpublished, 2015. ©2015 Fur What It’s Worth and Husky in Denial. Based on Fredrik Miller – Cloud Fields (Chill Out Mix). USA: Bandcamp, 2011. ©2011 Fur What It’s Worth. (Buy a copy here – support your fellow furs!)

Next episode: Some furries use their fan names. Some furries use their legal names. Some start with one and go to the other. Names are important in our fandom, so what are your thoughts? Tell us before September 9, 2016. (NOTE: "Real name" can mean many things depending on who you ask! "Legal" and "Fan" names are terms we suggest.) S6 Episode 3 – I Like To Poke Your Mom - Roo and Tugs are joined by artist and Pokésona LilChu as they discuss the world of Pokésonas. Why do these exist? Are there different rules? Is it a bleed over in the style of Bronies? Some of the answers may surpr