Furries - Not Entirely Human?

Recommended Videos

Relish in Chaos

New member
Mar 7, 2012
2,660
0
0
I have a couple of questions.

1) Is the term "furry" technically accurate? I mean, the fandom is meant to encompass general interest in anthropomorphic creatures, but animals like lizards don't have fur (nor do they have breasts, but whatever).

2) Aren't the only "real furries" that think of themselves as wholly non-human are the feral ones? I think I watched a programme a while ago of this boy that'd been raised in the wild with a pack of wolves or something, and he acted just like them.

Besides, if these people really believed that they weren't entirely human, how could they even talk through human language or understand the interviewing process?

3) I don't know how being a furry is remotely related to sexual orientation, unless you count zoophiles. But it sounds like it's one step away from becoming a stereotype, like the prejudiced notion that all homosexual men are into BDSM.
 

someonehairy-ish

New member
Mar 15, 2009
1,949
0
0
Grey Day for Elcia said:
Tom Milner said:
humanity is a state of mind, as well as matter. if they see themselves as more than human, then all credit to them for having a healthy mind and imagination.
Well, their DNA says they are wholly part of the human species. So it is indeed a case of mind, but not so much matter.
Actually we have quite a lot of surprising crap floating around in our genetic material. I''m fairly sure we've got genes in there left behind by retroviruses and the like. Not sure how any of that explains furries buuuut...
 
Jun 16, 2010
1,153
0
0
dyre said:
Besides, none of those people thought they were animals (that is, non-human members of the animal kingdom), or if they did think so, they were wrong.
You'd be surprised. Very recently I studied the concept of animism [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animism] within certain cultures. The belief that humanity is subject to context is actually very commonly held, especially outside of Western philosophy. We tend to think of things in terms of very strict black-and-white concepts ("This is a human, this is a dog"), but a lot of people in other parts of the world think it's foolish to make judgements based solely on physical characteristics or arbitrary distinctions.

For example, the Yukaghir [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yukaghir_people] believe that when you behave like an animal, your soul actually starts to transform and you start becoming the animal. So that if you spend years in the forests living with wolves, you will eventually be a wolf, even if your body looks human.

And really who's to say that's wrong? What's the difference between "a man who has spent too much time in the wild and has lost touch with the behavioural norms of human society" and "a man who has become a wolf"?
 

Freechoice

New member
Dec 6, 2010
1,019
0
0
James Joseph Emerald said:
dyre said:
Besides, none of those people thought they were animals (that is, non-human members of the animal kingdom), or if they did think so, they were wrong.
You'd be surprised. Very recently I studied the concept of animism [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animism] within certain cultures. The belief that humanity is subject to context is actually very commonly held, especially outside of Western philosophy. We tend to think of things in terms of very strict black-and-white concepts ("This is a human, this is a dog"), but a lot of people in other parts of the world think it's foolish to make judgements based solely on physical characteristics or arbitrary distinctions.
I am reminded of English teachers.

 
Apr 8, 2010
463
0
0
Necromancist said:
Dajosch said:
I loved all of that. Bravo sir, bravo.
Okay I certainly didn't expect that praise :)

Thank you very much for the feedback - I really appreciate it!

That said, I recall you mentioning you partake in Furry art and therefore might have a good view on the Fandom. If you don't mind me asking, what is your personal experience with the community at large and how would you see the motives of most furries for, well, being furries?
 

Woodsey

New member
Aug 9, 2009
14,553
0
0
In a 2008 study by Gerbasi et al., 46% of people surveyed who identified as "furry", (usually defined as a person with a strong connection with some sort of animal), answered "yes" to the question "Do you consider yourself to be less than 100% human?"

Yeah, I laughed. For about 5 minutes. I mean clearly they need to see someone about that, but... fucking hell.
 

JochemHippie

Trippin' balls man.
Jan 9, 2012
464
0
0
Those who actually think they're spiritually the animal you would call Therian, not furry.

Personally I think it's pushed way too far in many cases, their animals. Not humans, they don't think like you and they aren't like you.

Am I a furry? Yeah, am I a human? Most def. Do I believe I'm secretly an animal? Nope.
 

z121231211

New member
Jun 24, 2008
765
0
0
I was just reading something kind of cool; a couple of studies found a large portion of self-described furries consider themselves not entirely human in one way or another. It seems for some, it goes well beyond roleplay.
First day on the internet I see. Best wishes to the rest of your surfing.
 
Jun 16, 2010
1,153
0
0
Freechoice said:
James Joseph Emerald said:
dyre said:
Besides, none of those people thought they were animals (that is, non-human members of the animal kingdom), or if they did think so, they were wrong.
You'd be surprised. Very recently I studied the concept of animism [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animism] within certain cultures. The belief that humanity is subject to context is actually very commonly held, especially outside of Western philosophy. We tend to think of things in terms of very strict black-and-white concepts ("This is a human, this is a dog"), but a lot of people in other parts of the world think it's foolish to make judgements based solely on physical characteristics or arbitrary distinctions.
I am reminded of English teachers.
Not sure exactly what you mean.
But if you meant that "the West are happy enough calling a spade a spade and the Rest like to over-complicate it with bullshit" I think you've misunderstood.

Western thought tends to be rooted in concepts such as Descartes' mind-body duality and the sense that the world can be delineated into a series of reductive components (e.g. atoms) and concepts (e.g. nations). Which causes a lot of problems when the real world doesn't quite fit that model. Non-Western cultures, on the other hand, tend to embrace the chaos of reality and the fact that most concepts can't be cleanly separated from each other.
 

dyre

New member
Mar 30, 2011
2,178
0
0
James Joseph Emerald said:
dyre said:
Besides, none of those people thought they were animals (that is, non-human members of the animal kingdom), or if they did think so, they were wrong.
You'd be surprised. Very recently I studied the concept of animism [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animism] within certain cultures. The belief that humanity is subject to context is actually very commonly held, especially outside of Western philosophy. We tend to think of things in terms of very strict black-and-white concepts ("This is a human, this is a dog"), but a lot of people in other parts of the world think it's foolish to make judgements based solely on physical characteristics or arbitrary distinctions.

For example, the Yukaghir [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yukaghir_people] believe that when you behave like an animal, your soul actually starts to transform and you start becoming the animal. So that if you spend years in the forests living with wolves, you will eventually be a wolf, even if your body looks human.

And really who's to say that's wrong? What's the difference between "a man who has spent too much time in the wild and has lost touch with the behavioural norms of human society" and "a man who has become a wolf"?
Hmm, interesting. That's still in the realm of the intangible, so it's a lot less absurd than the furry claim (unless some furries think they have the soul of an animal trapped in a human or something?). I guess I could chalk it off as some kind of cultural relativism thing...furries are their own culture then. Heh.
 

GenericPCUser

New member
Dec 22, 2010
120
0
0
Grey Day for Elcia said:
So, furries and non-furries alike, what do you think? Is any of this valid? Do you agree with any of it? Disagree? Let me know.
I doubt the accuracy of any of those sources...

Most people who identify themselves as furry aren't obvious about it...

I feel this survey is a much better source of information http://www.klisoura.com/ot_furrysurvey.php
 
Jun 16, 2010
1,153
0
0
dyre said:
Hmm, interesting. That's still in the realm of the intangible, so it's a lot less absurd than the furry claim (unless some furries think they have the soul of an animal trapped in a human or something?). I guess I could chalk it off as some kind of cultural relativism thing...furries are their own culture then. Heh.
Well, really, what's more absurd, the idea that you can only possibly be 0% human or 100% human with no middle ground; or the idea that if you spend a considerable amount of time and energy pretending that you aren't human, that your "level of humanity" might fluctuate slightly?

It's also something which is tied up in the issue of personhood [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personhood], which is intensely debated in the field of anthropology.
 

Zakarath

New member
Mar 23, 2009
1,244
0
0
I'd kinda have to wonder how many of them just want to be another species enough that they've convinced themselves that they are. I mean, it's kind of obvious I'd like to be a dragon, I have to wonder if someone like me who was maybe just a little less grounded in reality would just convince themselves that they were one. (or whatever animal they felt an attachment to).
But that doesn't change the fact that they're still human.
 

LilithSlave

New member
Sep 1, 2011
2,462
0
0
Ah, the whole "I'm furry" as a personal transpecies identity thing. One of the things that is supposedly why furries have such a bad name. I can't imagine it makes transsexuals too happy, who feel that they are born in the wrong body being male or female, being themselves compared to by people who feel they identity largely with animals. And even more so by a society at large that takes pride in eating and killing animals.

On the other-hand, while I don't think they're transpecies, making furries these horrible people because they sympathize with animals isn't the sort of thing I get behind. A lot of furries, seem to have more respect for living beings than a lot of people. And having a little bit of a Dr. Dolittle complex isn't a horrible thing. Humans have enough hubris in their own kind, and not enough beings treat beings as having dignity based upon being living beings.

I think that adoration for other animals is a good thing. While some people may take it too far. I'm far less worried about those who take their love of animals too far, than people who take their indifference to animals too far.

Oh, how many people out there call men who do not hunt, "faggots"? Too many.

I think a lot of the science fiction about the upcoming singularity doesn't focus on being supposedly "weird" enough. Everyone is so certain that everything is going to "weird" to our culture, and different, that even approaching it, things will start to be seen as unfathomable. As in, a lot of it written about it, gets philosophical on the extremes of transhumanism and the like. But most stories still focus on Anglo-Saxon, middle class, heterosexual Americans. Even when getting anywhere near the Singularity, things are going to get fascinatingly weird and not enough material delves in that. We're going to see people use transhumanism to become fully functioning men and women everyday, to gender-bend, to become different races, to look a completely different age than they are, even look like children or old men and women, or even look like "furry" animal-people.

And that's a whole can of worms. Is the rest of society going to see them as less them human. Are they going to see furries who choose to get furry bodies instead of wear a fursuit, as having a bestiality attraction to themselves? Are people going to try to restrict their right to marry, love, or have sex? Are people who choose to have bodies that resemble children going to be seen as being paedophiles towards themselves? TV stations and the media in general is going to go absolutely nuts over the transhuman developments that may happen in our lifetimes. People are going to bend the heck out of gender, race, species, age, and together, these things are going to create a massive moral panic, I anticipate.

People are always asking the question of what it means to be human. But does it matter? People do deserve ethical treatment because of our speciesism. They deserve treatment because they're living beings. And if there is anything that humans deserve special treatment because of, it's our sentience and sapience.

That I'm aware, a lot of games about Transhumanism and Singularity don't tackle this enough. We may become robots that don't look anything like humans anymore. We might decide to look more like other animals. Obvious these things are going to happen because there are people who already want it. But hardly anybody is addressing it. The fact we're going to have white children go walking around with bodies that resemble black adults, we're going to have people who look like Asian women walking around, who were born white men, we're going to have people walking around that look like monsters, like trolls and orcs and the like, or inhuman looking robots like R2D2, or even 60 year old men fitting their bodies into something that looks like a 12 year old girl or people choosing to look exactly like a household cat.

Grandpa is going to look like this, someday.


I wonder how the kids are going to feel about that. Imagine this coming out of this mouth.
"Well, you see, kids. I was a war veteran in the United States. Back in a time when, while there were females in the military, they'd only had the right to serve in combat for a few decades. And was mostly made up of men such as I. And the middle east was still a predominantly Muslim place." Seem weird? This is going to happen. This is in your future. Guys like this [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hiWXAwbwIGQ], will someday be girls like the above. This will happen.

Quite a future we find ourselves in the presence of.
 

IamLEAM1983

Neloth's got swag.
Aug 22, 2011
2,581
0
0
That's a tough one. I've never met anyone who would seriously walk up to you and state something along the lines of "I'm part wolf!" even though I know that people like this certainly do exist.

On one end, human cultures with a more shamanistic bend have been known to associate humans with animals. This doesn't mean you're creating instances of zoomorphism, but that you're instead seeing parts of an animal's professed character in a given person. Hell, even some Western cultures do it. Why do you think some people are said to be "eagle-eyed" or "weasely" in nature?

Honestly believing you've got some animal guts, though, and that you need a fursuit for your "true self" to show, however, seems like an altogether different beast. I think people who go so far as to lose normal attraction levels for their fellow humans probably need to sit down and have a chat with a psychologist, or they're forgetting that in some ways, their idealized animal lifestyle would be far less, well, human, than what they're currently going through.

Consider that in most cases, furries don't choose wolves, for instance, as the entirety of what they are. They pick and choose the appearance, the heightened senses and the fact that having fur seems appealing to them, but most of the furries I've met liberally "Disney-ify" their fursonas.

So when some of my furry friends tell me they'd sometimes rather be wolves, I'm the first to ask them if they *really* would rather be forced to live in near-constant hunger, in situations where social dynamics can turn lethal at any moment, and where for all of their noble bearing, they're actually far inferior to your average gun-wielding human.

That usually gives them pause. Furries tend to have a highly idealized view of their elected species, usually perceiving animals from that species as being free spirits, as opposed to Humanity's legion of small proclivities.

It's never quite that simple, obviously.

I, personally, find a few species interesting from a design perspective, or in how they've come to mean something to your average human culture. That doesn't change the fact that I'm pretty happy with being a Homo Sapiens Sapiens.
 

Pinkamena

Stuck in a vortex of sexy horses
Jun 27, 2011
2,371
0
0
Metalix Knightmare said:
Oh Christ. The Otherkin. A group of people so freaking weird even most furries don't want to be involved with them.

Just write them off as the nutjob splinter group that they are and move on. Nothing good can come from this.
The otherkin are the furries that wish they were actual animals?
 

him over there

New member
Dec 17, 2011
1,728
0
0
Pinkamena said:
Metalix Knightmare said:
Oh Christ. The Otherkin. A group of people so freaking weird even most furries don't want to be involved with them.

Just write them off as the nutjob splinter group that they are and move on. Nothing good can come from this.
The otherkin are the furries that wish they were actual animals?
Not wish, believe they are reincarnations of animals.
 

Pinkamena

Stuck in a vortex of sexy horses
Jun 27, 2011
2,371
0
0
him over there said:
Pinkamena said:
Metalix Knightmare said:
Oh Christ. The Otherkin. A group of people so freaking weird even most furries don't want to be involved with them.

Just write them off as the nutjob splinter group that they are and move on. Nothing good can come from this.
The otherkin are the furries that wish they were actual animals?
Not wish, believe they are reincarnations of animals.
Well that's... Strange.
 

him over there

New member
Dec 17, 2011
1,728
0
0
Pinkamena said:
him over there said:
Pinkamena said:
Metalix Knightmare said:
Oh Christ. The Otherkin. A group of people so freaking weird even most furries don't want to be involved with them.

Just write them off as the nutjob splinter group that they are and move on. Nothing good can come from this.
The otherkin are the furries that wish they were actual animals?
Not wish, believe they are reincarnations of animals.
Well that's... Strange.
Indeed. Though they actually all aren't furries though. Otherkin and furry aren't mutually exclusive nor inclusive.