Is Disney Responsible For The Boom In Furry Fandom?

[2HF]

First I would like to say that I am in no way trying to demean furries. I'm not nearly innocent enough to go around judging people and I've always been a card carrying member of the "whatever floats your boat" club.

Now then...

I think we can mostly agree that for a very large number of people under the age of 30ish the first and most memorable sex scene of their youths was from The Lion King. We didn't get to see the actual act but I think we all remember this moment.

We remember the music, the looks those 2 gave each other, and this single frame.

Then there is Robin Hood and, more specifically, Maid Marian.

I'm not ashamed to admit that as a young child I had a crush on this foxy (yes, I know you see what I did there) lady.

I don't recall any other characters at the moment that might have sparked this interest in furrydom but if you know of any feel free to post them.

So anyway, what does the rest of the community think? Is it possible, even probable, that Disney is responsible for this boom in furrydom? Or is it something that has existed much longer and is only commonly known these days because of the internet?

Fire away.

Captcha is intrigued. Says "Well Now"

 

[Vault101]

NO

......

ok then..uhh portralys of anthromorphic animals go beyond disney

and I was totally into disney and animal charachters as a kid..surprisingly though I'm nto a fury

EDIT: as for that Lion king thing when your a kid all that goes over your head..and I dont think they actually do it....it wasnt untill re watching as an adult that I thourght "my god, that look just says "fuck me""

 

[Soviet Steve]

I'd say anthros pre-date Disney, a more reasonable place to place the responsibility would be Ancient Egypt I think.

 

[Zoe Castillo]

--

 

[Nantucket_v1legacy]

I never once thought Simba and Nala got naughty in that grass because of Nala's seductive pose.
You see in the next shot they lovingly hug each other. Plus, they had their cub when all the greenery grew back.

I remember in Lady and the Tramp when Lady ran away from the killer dogs because she was in heat. Then later on, the reason she felt so dirty was because she had not acted very lady-like and allowed herself to breed with Tramp. Hence why they had puppies at Christmas.

But to answer your question - I don't think Disney created furries. I don't see how you could find a cartoon lion physically sexy. I just to think Scar had a sexy voice (Jeremy Irons mmm)

 

[Scarim Coral]

No? I thought Warner Brothers was responsible for that ie Minerva Mink from Animaniacs. I guess the non animal characters that did lust for her could of been furry per say (yes it was unintentional due to the concept of furry was not invented back then).

 

[Kenbo Slice]

It's a conspiracy man.

OT: No, plain and simple.

 

[Chromatic Aberration]

Ahhh yes two of my favourite things to theorize about. Furrydom and weird sexual fetishes.

But first let's be fair here: Furrydom isn't solely about sex. Probably a huge factor, yes, but the appeal of escapism inherent in it, is probably much more important than that. To quote tvtropes on this [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FurryFandom]

There is a significant stigma to identifying yourself as a furry, mainly because on The Internet, they are often the butt of many jokes. For this reason, there are a lot of people who have the same interests, but don't identify as furries. On the other hand, if someone does like works with furry characters, some people are inclined to label them a furry. They may like the works for the furry characters, but they may also like them for simply being great stories. Who exactly is a furry is up for debate, but the only people you can be certain of are the ones who identify themselves as such.

As for the OP's question - yes and no. Association is probably a huge factor that goes into such an identification and this kind of escapism as well as possibly laying the groundwork for certain fetishes. That the mass media propagates the imagery and thus makes these associations more probable is a reasonable idea. To just shoot on Disney for that, not so much: as others already pointed out anthropomorphic animals can be found pretty much through the whole history of humanity - see the corresponding Wikipedia article for details [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropomorphism]. Also, while Disney was one of the most, say, prevalent companies in conveying that idea in recent decades it was by far not the only one and as others also pointed out, probably not even the worst offender.

So while Disney isn't so much at fault about all of this, something else clearly is, or has contributed significantly to the forming of Furrydom: The Internet. Global, almost instantaneous communication paves the way for uniting advocacy and interest groups who would otherwise be spread far too thin to have any significant group binding. The Internet acts in that regard as a catalyst in forming these groups. In my book, Furrydom is probably one of the most striking examples of this concept where a desire for escapism and simply seeking to satisfy ones kinks works together to form a group and an associated group identifier - notably through use of the Internet.

 

[Vault101]

The desire to fuck dogs preceded television, me thinks.

not the same hing as being a fury

most.. appropriate...gif....EVER

 

[PsychedelicDiamond]

Nah... the concept of humans with animalistic features is pretty much older than dirt. I mean, the ancient egyptians had a lot of gods with the bodies of humans and the heads of various animals and i'm pretty sure there are even older examples. I guess that's just a concept people like.

By the way, i never really got why Furries have such a bad rep. I know a few, most of them are good guys. I even enjoy some of their art.

 

[Erttheking]

Not really, it's kind of like saying Stephen Hawking created atheists.

 

[chadachada123]

Then there is Robin Hood and, more specifically, Maid Marian.

I'm not ashamed to admit that as a young child I had a crush on this foxy (yes, I know you see what I did there) lady.

When I first read the thread headline I thought of that exact character.

I'd say Disney contributed a bit.

 

[chadachada123]

snip

Not the same thing, but as you can see the majority do have sexual interest in animals. Or rather, crosses between animals and humans.

I'd say that the "cross" part is pretty important to most furries. They want to fuck an animal with human intelligence, not just fuck an animal. It's a pretty important distinction in terms of consent (of the animal/animal-human).

Same thing for cloppers: They don't want to fuck real ponies, they want to fuck cartoon ponies with human-level intelligence/sentience.

 

[Vault101]

Not the same thing, but as you can see the majority do have sexual interest in animals. Or rather, crosses between animals and humans.

there were furries in 1997? 0_0....well ok I guess things dont come out of thin air

but yeah..I just figured a furrie would rather screw this:

[spoiler/][img/]http://images.wikia.com/looneytunes/images/2/24/Lola%2Bbunny.jpg[/img][/spoiler]

than this

[spoiler/][img/]http://animal.discovery.com/mammals/rabbit/pictures/rabbit-picture.jpg[/img][/spoiler]

 

[baker80]

No, Disney is not responsible for furries. People being stupid creeps is responsible for furries.