# Why are feral furs looked down upon?



## SwiftDog (Feb 14, 2020)

And why does it matter? Anthros think they ave the moral high ground, but they actually don't. here's why: Anthros are clearly the result of combining humans with animals, which as we all *hopefully* know, is illegal.  Ferals, on the other hand, are in their natural state, unmarred by nasty humans, just critters doing other critters, and as such are clearly the superior type of furry. 

We must make sure anthro furries are put in their moral place!


----------



## Sir Thaikard (Feb 14, 2020)

Which one pays better? They're the ones who have the moral high ground.


----------



## Borophagus Metropolis (Feb 14, 2020)

*is just a woof*
*has no morals*
*but would like some morsels*


----------



## SwiftDog (Feb 14, 2020)

Sir Thaikard said:


> Which one pays better? They're the ones who have the moral high ground.



Hard to say. Within the furry community? Probably anthros. Without the community? harder to say. Lion King certainly made a lot of money, movies like Balto etc. Not sure how they compare to movies like Zootopia though.


----------



## Kinare (Feb 15, 2020)

Uhh... I assumed it was animals just evolving over time gaining human features and intelligence like Zootopia states, no zoophilia needed that way. Maybe I'm too innocent in that regard, or maybe everyone else is just a buncha sickos? Thing is, humans supposedly evolved from monkies and like all current lifeforms evolved from very basic stuff, so it's a somewhat believable scenario. It's impossible for humans to get animals pregnant or the other way around, so even if someone were to try to create a furry species that way it just wouldn't work.

Edit: To answer the thread question, I believe in the furry community ferals are not as accepted because they're not anthro, and without anthro features it's not the same thing as being a furry. I personally don't have issue with people having a feral 'sona, but I can see why by pure definition of what a furry is how it's probably not liked by some.


----------



## SLB-Portu24 (Feb 15, 2020)

Each one to their own thing, there's no need to bash on either side or claim that anthro is better than feral or vice versa just to get onto an utterly pointless morality pedestal. We're talking about fictional characters which aren't even human afterall so what real world morals inherited to mankind are even supposed to apply here in all fairness? We just have passionate creativity being manifested in distinct ways and we should cherish this diversity as it not only makes communities more interesting in general as also allows an increasing number of people to find their own relatable clinging point around its edges.

When it comes to character creation and nurturing, more so than in any other aspect related to the furry fandom, there really shouldn't be any ideological delimitations towards how a person has to construct their characters for the sake of appealing to the masses, this certainly isn't important for everyone. Cast whatever you identify yourself the most with, being it anthro, feral or something that can shift between both forms at will. There are already enough trivial subjective elements pulling people apart, let's not forge and feed new reasons to get into totally irrelevant interpersonal conflicts. I've had enough bad experiences with that by now and its simply not worth the hassle.


----------



## ConorHyena (Feb 15, 2020)

forums.furaffinity.net: Opinion on feral characters

We can all continue our dicking in there.


----------



## Kit H. Ruppell (Feb 15, 2020)

If they are, it's news to me.


----------



## Night.Claw (Feb 15, 2020)

Another thread with the exact same topic went silent a little more than a month ago... but round 2 then.

Feral art is alright. I have no isues with it, and certanly doesn't feel like it's being looked down upon. It's literally everywhere. How does it being looked down at? Animals on art are literally taking part in our life, art and everything since history can go back.
By art, you can find countless beautiful paintings, drawings, anything.
Feral art can be pretty and it's something that you use to create realism.

But if we are talking about the fandom, the question answer itself. When it goes to feral, people will order feral NSFW. Not everyone, but they will be marked with the rest. Just like foxes can only be subs, dragons are into vore, liking cub art means you're a pedophile and... liking feral art, you're marked as zoophile. You're an exception? Well, too bad, people won't see it that way.

So if it answers your question, anthro is more human like so it bothers less people, but feral will imidiately be considered zoophile. Feral art in things like movies and cartoon doesn't being looked down at. It is loved and accepted with no questions or second thoughts. But if you place it like "feral furry" people will see it as "I'm a zoophile". They won't think or ask. they state their opinion and doesn't allow discussion. That's why people think it's "being looked down at".

Edit: And to answer your moral state, if you state it like "critters doing other critters", don't be surprised if someone will mark YOU as "Yea, that guy wanna do those critters".


----------



## Deleted member 111470 (Feb 15, 2020)

But the question is... are ferals better at OwO and UwU than anthros? I think not.


----------



## SwiftDog (Feb 15, 2020)

Night.Claw said:


> Another thread with the exact same topic went silent a little more than a month ago... but round 2 then.
> 
> Feral art is alright. I have no isues with it, and certanly doesn't feel like it's being looked down upon. It's literally everywhere. How does it being looked down at? Animals on art are literally taking part in our life, art and everything since history can go back.
> By art, you can find countless beautiful paintings, drawings, anything.
> ...



Even if that is the fantasy, it shouldn’t matter. Some people like rape porn or rape yiff, yet no one accuses them of wanting to go rape women. (Some might, though.) It seems to mostly be a matter of blind, mass morality. The whims of the ignorant, plebeian public if you will.


----------



## SLB-Portu24 (Feb 15, 2020)

There's probably very vew strictly feral characters out there, in the sense that they display purely instinctive degrees of sentience equal to those of real world fauna. The vast majority of feral creatures people come up with are only given said designation due to their physical biology yet they display similar levels of cognitive ability and emotional disclosure which is a process of anthropomorphism in its own right, thus they aren't legitimately feral by the most acute meaning behind this word. This applies to the animals in the Lion King and Jungle Book universes who basically have humanlike minds within those (fairly) biologically accurate bodies. If possessing an ability to intricately rationalize about any given situation and provide clarified consent, then the term "feral" is stripped clean of its factual objectivity to define the matter. 

So taking this into account, what we have here going on is mainly a tug of war about what sort of physique is more interesting and that falls entirely down to subjectiveness, there is no right or wrong answer. Zootopia very effectively combines resembling anatomical aspects and a few instinctive traits related to the real world counterparts of its animal characters with a fully sentient mind which assumes the leading role on how they behave and interact within that universe. Personally, this is my favourite style, give them clothes and get them walking upright, you'll undoubtedly have a standard anthro fella, take those clothes away and have them dropping into all fours and its going to suddently look way more feral in design.


----------



## Doomer (Feb 15, 2020)

comes close to zoophilia


----------



## goldcatmask (Feb 15, 2020)

Please tell me this is supposed to be a joke of sorts and that you're not ACTUALLY trying to recreate Animal Farm within the furry fandom.


----------



## Deleted member 134556 (Feb 15, 2020)

Anthros drive cars, go to work, wear clothes, and use their thumbs to grab things instead of their mouths. This is why anthros are superior and allowed to eat at the dinner table while ferals beg for small morsels of our delicious, delicious food.


----------



## Deleted member 115426 (Feb 15, 2020)

Again I will say people who are trying to justify anthro porn while bashing feral porn are misguided af. They're both still animals. Just because having two legs make you feel better about your jerking habits does not make it any better than someone whose into feral.


----------



## Night.Claw (Feb 15, 2020)

Ovi the Dragon said:


> Again I will say people who are trying to justify anthro porn while bashing feral porn are misguided af. They're both still animals. Just because having two legs make you feel better about your jerking habits does not make it any better than someone whose into feral.


----------



## Baalf (Feb 15, 2020)

SwiftDog said:


> And why does it matter? Anthros think they ave the moral high ground, but they actually don't. here's why: Anthros are clearly the result of combining humans with animals, which as we all *hopefully* know, is illegal.  Ferals, on the other hand, are in their natural state, unmarred by nasty humans, just critters doing other critters, and as such are clearly the superior type of furry.
> 
> We must make sure anthro furries are put in their moral place!



But how do we talk if we aren't part human? I mean, I am just a highly evolved Rat, but what about you?


----------



## KimberVaile (Feb 15, 2020)

Ferals are ok, so long as you're not sexualizing them.
Anthros on the other hand, can bully the lesser ferals by their ability to pick up empties and pelting them with it and calling them names like bipedally challenged.
Hail to the king baby.


----------



## Kit H. Ruppell (Feb 15, 2020)

KimberVaile said:


> Ferals are ok, so long as you're not sexualizing them.
> Anthros on the other hand, can bully the lesser ferals by their ability to pick up empties and pelting them with it and calling them names like bipedally challenged.
> Hail to the king baby.


Nonsense. My birb can pick up empties and drop  them into the proper receptacles while airborne! The problem is, he's just as likely to empty *himself* while airborne, so his utility in litter management is a net zero.


----------



## Fentanyl (Feb 15, 2020)

Tough question. On the SFW side, nobody’s got a problem. You enter the war-zone when NSFW is involved. This is understandable because _most _people do not actually want to see sexualized (life-like) animals. However, I do not find all feral NSFW to be inherently zoophilic because it’s largely a case-by-case thing. I’ll give a bit of an example to explain what I mean:



Spoiler








Take this image above, for example. Porn of this wouldn’t really raise red flags for me. This is because the style of art clearly implies it is fictitious and non-lifelike. Second, you can see very human-like characteristics. If this same character were to be on two legs - nobody would bat an eye. 



Spoiler








On the other hand, porn of this image _would _raise some red flags. It shows no characteristics that separate it from a real-life animal. Seeing this image sexualized would be uncomfortable - at the very least.

All that being said, anthro doesn’t inherently make it less zoophilic. There are some awfully animalistic anthros out there that I’d argue are even more uncomfortable than the image above. It’s a tough situation because there is no clear line in the sand. I’d find a cartoon feral more comfortable to see sexualized than a hyper-realistic anthro. Furthermore, how do we even define feral? What if an anthro character who wears clothes, walks, and talks; has only the intelligence of a basic canine? Would it be zoophilic to sexualize that? What if a feral character - who walks on four legs - talks and interacts with the world in a human-like way. Is that more zoophilic than a hyper-realistic anthro? What if the character is an ambiguous creature with seventeen legs? Is that a feral or anthro character? 

All in all, people are too quick to assume to moral high ground without analyzing the situation in its entirety. Not all feral porn is zoophilic. Some, however, really is and that is very sad. I think, like with most things in life, it should be a case-by-case judgement. It is well within someone’s rights to despise feral and want nothing to do with it. It is equally within someone’s rights to appreciate it. I think we should strive to understand the person on the other side of the screen before passing potentially harmful judgments - while also respecting one’s own rights and comfort zones.


----------



## BlackDragonAJ89 (Feb 15, 2020)

I think the problem with ferals isn't so much that they're "hard to relate to"; obviously we have things like the Lion King and plenty of talking dog movies, shows, and books that prove the point otherwise, but rather the really bizarre territory of zoophilla that gets involved. There's been enough talk about that in which I don't think I have anything to add... But there is another thing I'd consider into why feral fiction/xenofinction is looked down for; _it all just feels the same.
_
Let's take two supposedly different stories: Black Beauty and Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron.

Black Beauty is a novel written around the Victorian age England that is about the titular stallion named Black Beauty. The story revolves around how Black was around different owners and the kind of ups and downs he's experienced. Some humans are bad, some are good, but all in all, a horse can never truly understand them.

Spirit is an animated movie set in the American west (ironically, in the same time frame as the Victorian Age, post US Civil War) that is about the titular stallion who really doesn't have a name because he's a wild horse. Either way, he experiences human interaction and the "domestication" of the west. Once again, some humans are bad, some are good, but all in all, a horse can never truly understand them.

Seeing a bit of a problem here?

Now how about movies, shows, and the like about cats and dogs? Isn't it funny how it's almost always about a rivalry between the two, what kind of shenanigans they get into when humans aren't looking, or a bit of both? 

Creating a feral anthropomorphic character is inherently limiting the kind of stories and situations you can play out. If you're simply playing as a fully sentient and intelligent character who just happens to be in a regular animal body, you could essentially get away with doing just about anything with some exceptions to what you physically could do (I couldn't imagine a parrot trying to play a piano with their wings or fix themselves up in a tie) and create some interesting situations. But to actually try to create a feral setting that applies non-human interpretations is really difficult and ultimately just winds up having the creators create very limited motives, actions, and stories for those feral characters.

After all, it was still a story being written from the saddle (or riding blanket) of a horse, not the heart of one...


----------



## TheCynicalViet (Feb 16, 2020)

I'm pretty sure most the replies to this thread are way off base than what OP wanted. Okay. So let's say that ferals and anthros both had human level intelligence, right? Well that's not gonna matter when you don't have the limbs to build tools. The reasons why humans rose to taking over the globe was that we were good at making tools and we were REALLY good at killing other things with these tools. Naturally, with anthros being closer to humans in terms of physiology, anthros will dominate simply because they will have the ability to build workarounds to any defenses and counters that the ferals may produce.


----------



## SwiftDog (Feb 16, 2020)

BennyJackdaw said:


> But how do we talk if we aren't part human? I mean, I am just a highly evolved Rat, but what about you?



If a feral talks, it basically already has human intelligence, feelings, thoughts, and actions.


Fentanyl said:


> Tough question. On the SFW side, nobody’s got a problem. You enter the war-zone when NSFW is involved. This is understandable because _most _people do not actually want to see sexualized (life-like) animals. However, I do not find all feral NSFW to be inherently zoophilic because it’s largely a case-by-case thing. I’ll give a bit of an example to explain what I mean:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



What’s weird is that strictly speaking, all furry porn is technically zoophilic. If someone likes furry anthro porn, it makes them a class II zoophile. If someone likes roleplaying aninals in the bedroom, it makes them a class I zoophile. If they like animal dicks and buying objects like fur and Bad Dragons, it’s full class III or IV. (Actual Sexual interest in animals or in actually doing stuf with them completes the next 4 classification levels.)

Within that classification, there’s no differentiation between feral and anthro. As far as one study is concerned, you’re already a zoophile if you like furry porn. 

www.academia.edu: A new classification of zoophilia


----------



## HistoricalyIncorrect (Feb 16, 2020)

Kinare said:


> Uhh... I assumed it was animals just evolving over time gaining human features and intelligence like Zootopia states, no zoophilia needed that way. Maybe I'm too innocent in that regard, or maybe everyone else is just a buncha sickos? Thing is, humans supposedly evolved from monkies and like all current lifeforms evolved from very basic stuff, so it's a somewhat believable scenario. It's impossible for humans to get animals pregnant or the other way around, so even if someone were to try to create a furry species that way it just wouldn't work.
> 
> Edit: To answer the thread question, I believe in the furry community ferals are not as accepted because they're not anthro, and without anthro features it's not the same thing as being a furry. I personally don't have issue with people having a feral 'sona, but I can see why by pure definition of what a furry is how it's probably not liked by some.


(Not connected to the topic)
Im afraid that humans can get other species pregnant. However, those putrid, hybrid abominations created this way usually do not survive more than 1 or 2 minutes due to enormous amount of health issue like bad sized hearts etc.

You can find evidence on internet but if you have weak stomach, are sensitive or are eating something then I urge you to reconsider...

But if we think about it? Mules are mutants themselves so in theory it is possible to create furry specie by the impregnation however I would prefer if it stayed only as a theory.


----------



## volkinaxe (Feb 16, 2020)

in the end of the day it is just art it`s not going to kill you


----------



## SwiftDog (Feb 16, 2020)

HistoricalyIncorrect said:


> (Not connected to the topic)
> Im afraid that humans can get other species pregnant. However, those putrid, hybrid abominations created this way usually do not survive more than 1 or 2 minutes due to enormous amount of health issue like bad sized hearts etc.
> 
> You can find evidence on internet but if you have weak stomach, are sensitive or are eating something then I urge you to reconsider...
> ...



Sorry, this is flat incorrect. Mules are only possible because donkeys and horses have a similar number of chromosomes, molecules responsible for carrying genetic information during reproduction. It's simply not possible for very different animals to get each other pregnant, any attempted coupling between the spaerm and egg cell is immediately rejected.


----------



## HistoricalyIncorrect (Feb 16, 2020)

SwiftDog said:


> Sorry, this is flat incorrect. Mules are only possible because donkeys and horses have a similar number of chromosomes, molecules responsible for carrying genetic information during reproduction. It's simply not possible for very different animals to get each other pregnant, any attempted coupling between the spaerm and egg cell is immediately rejected.


However mutants have this in common that they can not reproduce (Mules) and if you really say so then I suggest not to do the research for results (human x pig hybrid for  example). I would post them here but I'm afraid it would be against the rules of the website.


----------



## SwiftDog (Feb 16, 2020)

HistoricalyIncorrect said:


> However mutants have this in common that they can not reproduce (Mules) and if you really say so then I suggest not to do the research for results (human x pig hybrid for  example). I would post them here but I'm afraid it would be against the rules of the website.



I have a biology degree, hon. What you find are probably either very very unusual cases, or photoshopped nonsense.


----------



## HistoricalyIncorrect (Feb 16, 2020)

SwiftDog said:


> I have a biology degree, hon. What you find are probably either very very unusual cases, or photoshopped nonsense.


Yeah I expected answer like that hon-hon. I also know how useless a degree can be in hands of few people (I am using cane as my degreed doctors for years tried to cure a wrong disease -_-) but do not worry, I am not judging you.
I have no degree in that and do not really bother in getting one. Are those unusual cases? Well for sure they are, I do not hear about it everyday but that's why I also said it's just a theory.

But then again someone once told me of theory about compressing entire universe into the size of sugar cube so yeah, let's leave theories to themselves shall we?


----------



## SwiftDog (Feb 16, 2020)

HistoricalyIncorrect said:


> Yeah I expected answer like that hon-hon. I also know how useless a degree can be in hands of few people (I am using cane as my degreed doctors for years tried to cure a wrong disease -_-) but do not worry, I am not judging you.
> I have no degree in that and do not really bother in getting one. Are those unusual cases? Well for sure they are, I do not hear about it everyday but that's why I also said it's just a theory.
> 
> But then again someone once told me of theory about compressing entire universe into the size of sugar cube so yeah, let's leave theories to themselves shall we?



Not really theory, more biological fact. But sure.


----------



## HistoricalyIncorrect (Feb 16, 2020)

SwiftDog said:


> Not really theory, more biological fact. But sure.


Biological fact but even you said about unusual cases.


----------



## Jackpot Raccuki (Feb 16, 2020)




----------



## KimberVaile (Feb 16, 2020)

SwiftDog said:


> If a feral talks, it basically already has human intelligence, feelings, thoughts, and actions.
> 
> 
> What’s weird is that strictly speaking, all furry porn is technically zoophilic. If someone likes furry anthro porn, it makes them a class II zoophile. If someone likes roleplaying aninals in the bedroom, it makes them a class I zoophile. If they like animal dicks and buying objects like fur and Bad Dragons, it’s full class III or IV. (Actual Sexual interest in animals or in actually doing stuf with them completes the next 4 classification levels.)
> ...



Lol, it's reads like a Buzzfeed ad.
You're a zoophile if you like antrhompomhoric furry porn according to this one obscure study. Click to find out how!


----------



## KimberVaile (Feb 16, 2020)

Btw did you guys read that study by James Bovell and Edwin Hopper? You can perform a blood transfusion with milk according to their findings!
Wooo weee!


----------



## HistoricalyIncorrect (Feb 16, 2020)

Going back to the topic.

I am not looking down on feral characters. I am looking down at Mary Sues and bad creations as it should be.

I prefer anthro chars true but I had some fun moments when I tried to play as feral bobcat.

I have never before realised how much do I like to pretend that I do not like to be petted and to push things off the shelves ^^


----------



## ConorHyena (Feb 16, 2020)

Quoting myself here



ConorHyena said:


> [...] also I have in recent debates realized it's quite pointless - arguments like this turn into a circlejerk of the eventually obvious cub and zoo defenders appearing and then we'll end up debating if pedophilia is actually a bad thing like last time this appeared, and I'm _really _not interested in having this debate again. [...]


----------



## KimberVaile (Feb 16, 2020)

ConorHyena said:


> Quoting myself here


But don't you get it? We're all in this together! We're all cut from the same cloth man, I just linked you the reason why! But yes, you're probably right in this case, all jokes aside.


----------



## volkinaxe (Feb 16, 2020)

Smexy Likeok4 said:


>


how do you trun on the dark theme on ?


----------



## Kinare (Feb 16, 2020)

HistoricalyIncorrect said:


> (Not connected to the topic)
> Im afraid that humans can get other species pregnant. However, those putrid, hybrid abominations created this way usually do not survive more than 1 or 2 minutes due to enormous amount of health issue like bad sized hearts etc.
> 
> You can find evidence on internet but if you have weak stomach, are sensitive or are eating something then I urge you to reconsider...



Oof, that's gross af. I will refrain from Googling that considering I just finished eating... And I've seen enough scarring things in my time on the internets, I'm not that curious. x.x

I guess I'll switch my wording to while maybe we could "technically" get an animal pregnant... it's not a successful living creature so, unless science somehow intervened in drastic ways (which I hope they never do), it's not possible to just go out and make a real live anthro.


----------



## SLB-Portu24 (Feb 16, 2020)

This thread simply had to go down the sexual route, we're furries afterall. When looking at these examples, it certainly becomes difficult to believe that the fandom is in fact about a lot more than pure fetishism and pornographic material, for some it might but apparently not for the masses. I'm fine with that, just don't want to see misleading information constantly floating around. 

Anthro or feral, why does it matter so much? We're talking about fictional characters here and for as long as this attraction towards animal personas of whatever kind remains exclusively within a fictional realm then let each one enjoy their thing.


----------



## Fentanyl (Feb 16, 2020)

SwiftDog said:


> If a feral talks, it basically already has human intelligence, feelings, thoughts, and actions.
> 
> 
> What’s weird is that strictly speaking, all furry porn is technically zoophilic. If someone likes furry anthro porn, it makes them a class II zoophile. If someone likes roleplaying aninals in the bedroom, it makes them a class I zoophile. If they like animal dicks and buying objects like fur and Bad Dragons, it’s full class III or IV. (Actual Sexual interest in animals or in actually doing stuf with them completes the next 4 classification levels.)
> ...



I’d rather not be associated in any way with zoophiles. I like some furry porn. Hell, if it is an anthro-like feral, I’d even like that too. Never have I been attracted to a real-life animal nor would I like it to be implied that I am any “class” of zoophile.

Let us put this simply: do you feel sexual attraction to real-life animals/genitalia? If yes, you are a zoophile. If no, you are not a zoophile. It is really quite simple.


----------



## Deleted member 115426 (Feb 16, 2020)

Fentanyl said:


> I’d rather not be associated in any way with zoophiles. I like some furry porn. Hell, if it is an anthro-like feral, I’d even like that too. Never have I been attracted to a real-life animal nor would I like it to be implied that I am any “class” of zoophile.
> 
> Let us put this simply: do you feel sexual attraction to real-life animals/genitalia? If yes, you are a zoophile. If no, you are not a zoophile. It is really quite simple.


Tell that to all the people who are into knots and such.


----------



## Night.Claw (Feb 16, 2020)

How many times are we going to go through this? 
The answers are always the same, the people who protect it are always the same, the people who against it are always the same, and the idea around it is just being described in the exact same way over and over again, just with different words from different people. 

If everything would be such easy as "if you like feral, you're zoophile.", then it means watching discovery channels makes you a storage hunter, history channels makes you a WWII veteran, cooking shows makes you a master chef, and documentaries into experts.

Literally no reason to bring this topic up over and over again. We got it, you drool over animals, portrayed in the most realistic way possible. Keep it to yourself, like others do.

You know why anthro is more normal, why is it more accepted, and more healthy minded? Because it has human shapes, and human body parts, with human characteristics. You look at humans with animal heads and only a tail 95% of the time and not drooling over "critters doing other critters". You should think about this a tiny bit and let the idea take place in your ignorant mind. You can like animals mating and you can drool over it as much as you want. Don't normalize it, because it isn't normal.

But there is two side of this. One, who just likes the art and never really talk about it, and the other, who fight as hard as they can to normalise this, while it shouldn't be normalised.

And just a simple opinion. The ones who protect nsfw feral with their life, trying every pointless opinions with little to no logic, are the ones who actually are into irl animals, no matter how hard they are trying to refuse. Same goes to everything like this. I know so many people who are into that kind of stuff, yet i can't see them screaming on the top of their lungs to normalize things that shouldn't be normalized.

You can come to me how zoophile it is to like anthro, because it is made out of ferals combined with humans, but when you do, you just ignore the fact that it is made out of around 90% HUMAN. You know what humans are? You. You're a human. At least you're suppose to be. Bending your interest a bit towards animal based things? Not completely healthy, but KINDA okay. But to like living animals in sexual ways... that's the furthest away from normal possible.

Let the "But i know better, because feral is superior." responses come. It won't change much, if any...


----------



## Deleted member 115426 (Feb 16, 2020)

Night.Claw said:


> How many times are we going to go through this?
> The answers are always the same, the people who protect it are always the same, the people who against it are always the same, and the idea around it is just being described in the exact same way over and over again, just with different words from different people.
> 
> If everything would be such easy as "if you like feral, you're zoophile.", then it means watching discovery channels makes you a storage hunter, history channels makes you a WWII veteran, cooking shows makes you a master chef, and documentaries into experts.
> ...


You know how many people I see who like anthros but are heavily into paws? Paws litrally have no human part to them yet they drool over them. Are they zoophiles as well? There's a reason why people are into furry nsfw. If they weren't into the animal side they'd be jerking it to human porn. Why aren't all the people against feral doing stuff to human porn? If the animal part disgusts you, why are you looking at furry porn at all?


----------



## Night.Claw (Feb 16, 2020)

Ovi the Dragon said:


> You know how many people I see who like anthros but are heavily into paws? Paws litrally have no human part to them yet they drool over them. Are they zoophiles as well? There's a reason why people are into furry nsfw. If they weren't into the animal side they'd be jerking it to human porn. Why aren't all the people against feral doing stuff to human porn? If the animal part disgusts you, why are you looking at furry porn at all?


Would you like to try read it again and understand what i said? It would be great, since it seems like you failed almost completely.

If you will always ignore most of what you are commenting to, i recommend not commenting at all.


----------



## Deleted member 115426 (Feb 16, 2020)

Night.Claw said:


> Would you like to try read it again and understand what i said? It would be great, since it seems like you failed almost completely.
> 
> If you will always ignore most of what you are commenting to, i recommend not commenting at all.


Are you not going to respond to what I said? It is a common thing to respond to part of a wall of text and not all of it.


----------



## KD142000 (Feb 16, 2020)

Surprised this is happening again, but here goes:

Feral art of any kind is like marmite...you either love it or you hate it. It's that way with everyone. Some people like it, some people hate it. It'll always be like that, no matter what. It's a matter of personal taste and opinion.

If you like it, that's fine. Look at it and admire it in your own way.
If you don't, that's also fine. Don't look at it.

Me, personally? Fine with feral SFW but not NSFW, but that's just a matter of my own personal taste. That's all it is and I won't judge anyone if they love it or hate it...cos it doesn't affect me in any way. You do you.

And before anyone steps in with 'anthro art doesn't suffer the same kind of criticism'...look at non-furries or furry haters. I'm sure there's even some furries who don't like anthro art one bit.
Like I said, personal taste and opinion.

When this is so trivial, why bother getting into a heated debate or argument about it? Just not worth it at all.


----------



## Night.Claw (Feb 16, 2020)

Ovi the Dragon said:


> Are you not going to respond to what I said? It is a common thing to respond to part of a wall of text and not all of it.


I like how you're fighting out a response, so here. Be happy with yourself.
Let my try to explain then, because you're doing this again...

You were pointing out something that is basicly a bad example. For most people, paws are attractive, yes. Because "beans and fluffy and colorful". I personally don't like them. For multiple reasons. 1) it looks abnormal, 2) it is way too cartoony most of the time 3) it's deformed in many ways.

The anthro paws are abnormally bigger, much wider and significantly more flat, most of the time portrayed as feet with paw like proportions. Like beans and big, round toes connecting to a foot like base.

Feral paws are realistic, made for animals walk on 4 legs, and literally made to look real.

But that still not what my comment meant is about at all. As i stated, you ignore 95% of the human parts, to name one, that is similar to anmial parts. Would you like to talk about the body shape, the arms, the legs, hands, eyes, shape of the face, hair? Or you just going to ignore that all, and next time, name the ear, muzzle or tail?


----------



## Deleted member 111470 (Feb 16, 2020)

The way things are developing seem familiar.

*grabs popcorn*


----------



## Night.Claw (Feb 16, 2020)

Rimna said:


> The way things are developing seem familiar.
> 
> *grabs popcorn*


Always the same, Rimna. Always the same.

But this time, let me be the bad guy.


----------



## ZeroVoidTime (Feb 16, 2020)

Kinare said:


> Oof, that's gross af. *I will refrain from Googling that considering I just finished eating...* And I've seen enough scarring things in my time on the internets, I'm not that curious. x.x
> 
> I guess I'll switch my wording to while maybe we could "technically" get an animal pregnant... it's not a successful living creature so, unless science somehow intervened in drastic ways (which I hope they never do), it's not possible to just go out and make a real live anthro.


What? You do not want to eat your meal again?......... :3


----------



## SwiftDog (Feb 16, 2020)

KimberVaile said:


> Lol, it's reads like a Buzzfeed ad.
> You're a zoophile if you like antrhompomhoric furry porn according to this one obscure study. Click to find out how!



A study from a journal by Elsevier, nonetheless. You probably haven’t heard of them, if you haven’t been to university, which, judging by the quality of your posts, seems to be the most likely case. 



Night.Claw said:


> How many times are we going to go through this?
> The answers are always the same, the people who protect it are always the same, the people who against it are always the same, and the idea around it is just being described in the exact same way over and over again, just with different words from different people.
> 
> If everything would be such easy as "if you like feral, you're zoophile.", then it means watching discovery channels makes you a storage hunter, history channels makes you a WWII veteran, cooking shows makes you a master chef, and documentaries into experts.
> ...



Most ferals do not have interest in real animals. Usually, they watched too many Lion King and Balto movies when they were young, and that cartoon image is stuck in their mind as the “ideal figure.” 

Someone mentioned two different feral art images, one that indicted more concern to them, and one that indicated less concern. The difference you’re suggesting is far more stark, something like this:

Being attracted to this:


 

Vs being attracted to this:

 

Two very different images there. If we stood that feral on her back legs and gave her hands, you’d stop whining. 

That wolf on the other hand is nothing but a wolf, an actual animal. 

The person who is aroused by the first image is merely a class I zoophile, regardless of whether it’s feral or anthro, while the person who is aroused by the second is a class III.


----------



## KD142000 (Feb 16, 2020)

SwiftDog said:


> A study from a journal by Elsevier, nonetheless. You probably haven’t heard of them, if you haven’t been to university, which, judging by the quality of your posts, seems to be the most likely case.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that most people interested in feral art (SFW and NSFW) aren't zoophiles. Just a guess, as the vast majority of people know that's not an acceptable thing to do.

I like SFW feral art, mostly cos it's a cuddly animal (Most of the time). Cat videos were popular (and most likely still are) for a reason...human beings like cute animals. Of course, not everyone does and not everyone likes the same animals. Some people might find the sunfish cute...even though most probably won't.


Also, I'd like to somehow remind everyone that this is a fandom where anthropomorphic and feral characters are created by people as ways to express themselves and for other reasons, too. We should all be getting along. Sure, we all have our own opinions, but that's par for the course. There shouldn't be debates every other day, especially about trivial matters like this.


----------



## SLB-Portu24 (Feb 16, 2020)

Common sense shall prevail in the end...oh wait, this is the internet, nevermind then, people are going to make a fuss out of the smallest disagreements. Before things escalate any further, can't we just accept that artistic tastes on their own are harmless and don't provide any elaborate insight about someone's character so there's no need to foment any degrading personal prejudices towards preferring a specific thing over another? It shouldn't have to be like this...


----------



## SwiftDog (Feb 16, 2020)

KD142000 said:


> I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that most people interested in feral art (SFW and NSFW) aren't zoophiles. Just a guess, as the vast majority of people know that's not an acceptable thing to do.
> 
> I like SFW feral art, mostly cos it's a cuddly animal (Most of the time). Cat videos were popular (and most likely still are) for a reason...human beings like cute animals. Of course, not everyone does and not everyone likes the same animals. Some people might find the sunfish cute...even though most probably won't.
> 
> ...



I agree with the overall sentiment of your post. However, it’s not a perfect world. Ferals are indeed looked down upon, not everyone shares your inclusive notions. Many furries are so bigoted, they ban feral art from their chatrooms entirely, don’t allow feral roleplays, and you get called a zoo and banned the instant you mention you’re feral. 

But, Kero the Wolf is always there to help us remember how disgusting anthro furs can be, 10x more degenerate than any feral could hope to be...


----------



## ConorHyena (Feb 16, 2020)

Night.Claw said:


> Always the same, Rimna. Always the same.
> 
> But this time, let me be the bad guy.



I TRUSTED YOU!

*cries and draws lightsaber*

My allegiance was to the anthro NSFW, to yiff!


----------



## KD142000 (Feb 16, 2020)

SwiftDog said:


> I agree with the overall sentiment of your post. However, it’s not a perfect world. Ferals are indeed looked down upon, not everyone shares your inclusive notions. Many furries are so bigoted, they ban feral art from their chatrooms entirely, don’t allow feral roleplays, and you get called a zoo and banned the instant you mention you’re feral.
> 
> But, Kero the Wolf is always there to help us remember how disgusting anthro furs can be, 10x more degenerate than any feral could hope to be...


I would agree...except I don't know who Kero is. Though by the sounds of it, I probably shouldn't bother to find out, lest my sanity be lost forever.

Like I said, I'm not one to judge anything. I just get on with my own stuff and like what I like. Just wish we didn't have to go through the same debates over and over.


----------



## Deleted member 134556 (Feb 16, 2020)

SwiftDog said:


> A study from a journal by Elsevier, nonetheless. You probably haven’t heard of them, if you haven’t been to university, which, judging by the quality of your posts, seems to be the most likely case.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Hold up...So you're saying anyone attracted to just anthro is still a zoophile?

There is a vast difference between legitimate zoophilia and liking anthropomorphic animal art even in sexual situations.

Also, hasn't it been a goal of the fandom, for decades, to debunk the harmful myth that furries are a bunch of zoophiles?


----------



## Night.Claw (Feb 16, 2020)

SwiftDog said:


> A study from a journal by Elsevier, nonetheless. You probably haven’t heard of them, if you haven’t been to university, which, judging by the quality of your posts, seems to be the most likely case.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yea! You showed me!
But... actually you didn't... You just proved my point even further.
If you add that hand, change the body shape to more human, legs, face etc... that's not a feral anymore. You might forget to notice it in your own words, that you changed a feral into an anthro, which is different.

Both art shows a feral animals and both is great. Both has it's own good, but if you look at it, the only difference between the drawn art and the picture, is the cartoonish like face. Nothing else. So as long as it stays sfw it's good. As soon as it will turn into NSFW, that's where the issue starts.

I would like to point out to you too, that reading and understanding what you read is a great way to avoid issues. Since you missed it, let me copy it to you again. 

"If everything would be such easy as "if you like feral, you're zoophile.", then it means watching discovery channels makes you a storage hunter, history channels makes you a WWII veteran, cooking shows makes you a master chef, and documentaries into experts."

And after that quote i stated that it's fine as long as you are not trying to normalize it, and do it irl...


----------



## Fentanyl (Feb 16, 2020)

Is it typical for people to get so nasty and heated over trivial shit like this? We are literally discussing cartoon animals and getting angry over it. Live and let live.


----------



## SLB-Portu24 (Feb 16, 2020)

Its baffling to see that as soon as a thread starts gaining traction towards a rather dramatic outcome, more and more people start posting on it, some with no other intention than to further increase the tension between whatever conflicting divergent sides have been materialized along the way. Is this your idea of having a friendly and accepting fandom or does such mindset only apply when you agree or relate with what's being shared? Think that I know the answer by now...it was foolish to expect basic yet greatly disruptive defects in human nature to not find their way through the crevices of any subculture within society.


----------



## Night.Claw (Feb 16, 2020)

SwiftDog said:


> I agree with the overall sentiment of your post. However, it’s not a perfect world. Ferals are indeed looked down upon, not everyone shares your inclusive notions. Many furries are so bigoted, they ban feral art from their chatrooms entirely, don’t allow feral roleplays, and you get called a zoo and banned the instant you mention you’re feral.
> 
> But, Kero the Wolf is always there to help us remember how disgusting anthro furs can be, 10x more degenerate than any feral could hope to be...



7 out of 7 discord sever i'm on has feral parts, and i saw nobody ever attacked ferals. And we talk about over 10000 furries on those servers, where at least 200 is active daily.
I don't know where you get the idea of being banned, but that's also not normal to ban people because of their interest. You like the art and share it with others? Great. I recommend it. But if you try to force it on people or do something inappropriate, that will be the best solution the warn, restrict, then if continues, ban.

I don't know who or what that Kero person is, i never interested on looking it up. What i "heard" from others, he is a degenerate idiot. It just happened that he was part of the fandom. But marking anthroes or ferals because one defect is the exact same thing, what people would like to point out here. Just because one is wrong, doesn't means, that all of them are wrong. And about biase opinons... dude... read your own words. You're literally praising ferals over anthroes, while we all are humans, just with different interest. Ferals aren't better than anthroes, and the other way around, anthroes aren't better than ferals.


----------



## PercyD (Feb 16, 2020)

Fentanyl said:


> Is it typical for people to get so nasty and heated over trivial shit like this? We are literally discussing cartoon animals and getting angry over it. Live and let live.


Yea it's pretty par for the course. You get used to it.


----------



## Fentanyl (Feb 16, 2020)

PercyD said:


> Yea it's pretty par for the course. You get used to it.



Yikers. I see enough of that in my daily life. What a shame.


----------



## PercyD (Feb 16, 2020)

Fentanyl said:


> Yikers. I see enough of that in my daily life. What a shame.


It's called redirection. It's safer to quibble about shit that doesn't matter then have actual frank discussions about important shit.
But, obviously, most people aren't ready to talk about that yet. >u>


----------



## Night.Claw (Feb 16, 2020)

PercyD said:


> It's called redirection. It's safer to quibble about shit that doesn't matter then have actual frank discussions about important shit.
> But, obviously, most people aren't ready to talk about that yet. >u>


Make a thread about it, and bring up the super important topic, so we can talk about it. 

In all seriousness, all topic deserves discussion. Not just things that are top tier serious. Sometime these topics are needed to understand each others better. For me, i just learned what difference people see in art and irl feral.
If someone is bothered by these topics, they shouldn't get involve and annoyed/anxious etc over it. They should avoid it for their own well being.


----------



## Deleted member 115426 (Feb 16, 2020)

Night.Claw said:


> Yea! You showed me!
> But... actually you didn't... You just proved my point even further.
> If you add that hand, change the body shape to more human, legs, face etc... that's not a feral anymore. You might forget to notice it in your own words, that you changed a feral into an anthro, which is different.
> 
> ...


You know it's still an animal right? If it's not fully human it's an animal. So if jerking it to feral offends you maybe you should just watch normal human porn. No animals there whatsoever.


----------



## Night.Claw (Feb 16, 2020)

Ovi the Dragon said:


> You know it's still an animal right? If it's not fully human it's an animal. So if jerking it to feral offends you maybe you should just watch normal human porn. No animals there whatsoever.


----------



## GarthTheWereWolf (Feb 16, 2020)

Guys! Guys!

Can't we just agree on this? Anthro...Feral....

It doesn't matter.

They are all furry trash. <:


----------



## SLB-Portu24 (Feb 16, 2020)

PercyD said:


> It's called redirection. It's safer to quibble about shit that doesn't matter then have actual frank discussions about important shit.
> But, obviously, most people aren't ready to talk about that yet. >u>


Most people can't even be remotely civilised, transparent or pondered about highly trivial matters let alone when touching actual sensible and relevant topics, this is almost unheard of, especially online. Better to stay away from such topics altogether unless if amongst close trusted friends.


----------



## oappo (Feb 16, 2020)

KD142000 said:


> When this is so trivial, why bother getting into a heated debate or argument about it? Just not worth it at all.


This is true wisdom 
*sage nod*

 I've never been one for "debating" on the internet, especially very subjective things like this.


----------



## KimberVaile (Feb 16, 2020)

SwiftDog said:


> A study from a journal by Elsevier, nonetheless. You probably haven’t heard of them, if you haven’t been to university, which, judging by the quality of your posts, seems to be the most likely case.



Is that why his proposed system of classification caught on so well? Judging by your quality of posts, you sound like you graduated from a 'university' in the middle of bumfuck nowhere, lmao. Was it hamburger university you graduated from? I cringe to think that you are a graduate of any institution, especially with how you trumpet a single study over nine years old as definitive. One might say it comes off as a bit insecure.
I mean, without fail, the content of your posting history is about justifying feral porn or going to bat for cub porn, then stomping your feet at people who don't agree, this thread was no exception.

By the by, Elsevier, being a publisher that's not at all unpopular with most universities for shit practices, does not make the individual studies themselves. The quality of these approved studies wildly vary in quality because of that. Not to burst your bubble there, oh champion of morality.


----------



## Paws the Opinicus (Feb 16, 2020)

If I'm up in a ferris wheel or something, I'll feel free to look down upon whomever I damn well please.


----------



## Jackpot Raccuki (Feb 16, 2020)

volkinaxe said:


> how do you trun on the dark theme on ?


By combining the power of the forbidden memes and living in complete darkness, FFA was like "Okay you sad fuck, here's dark theme so you never burn your sweet sensitive eyes."



Rimna said:


> The way things are developing seem familiar.
> 
> *grabs popcorn*


I would say it's deja vu.
But it's more of insanity, the same argument over and over again; expecting something to change.



Fentanyl said:


> Is it typical for people to get so nasty and heated over trivial shit like this? We are literally discussing cartoon animals and getting angry over it. Live and let live.


----------



## MaelstromEyre (Feb 16, 2020)

I wasn't even aware that this was an issue. . .anywhere. . .ever.  I've had art done of my OC as both an anthro and a feral.

I mean, does it really matter?


----------



## volkinaxe (Feb 16, 2020)

Smexy Likeok4 said:


> By combining the power of the forbidden memes and living in complete darkness, FFA was like "Okay you sad fuck, here's dark theme so you never burn your sweet sensitive eyes."
> 
> 
> I would say it's deja vu.
> But it's more of insanity, the same argument over and over again; expecting something to change.


still don`t know how to u trun on the dark theme on


----------



## Telnac (Feb 16, 2020)

*sighs* This topic again. 

To each their own. Some creatures (dragons, unicorns, pegasi) are almost always drawn feral. In my opinion, intelligent feral creatures that are very obviously not just animals are ok to draw doing whatever. NSFW art featuring creatures that resemble ordinary animals and that aren't clearly intelligent gets too close to crossing the line into zoophilia for my comfort. But again, to each their own.

That's my opinion. Take it for what it's worth. I really don't care what you choose to fap to.


----------



## SwiftDog (Feb 16, 2020)

KimberVaile said:


> Is that why his proposed system of classification caught on so well? Judging by your quality of posts, you sound like you graduated from a 'university' in the middle of bumfuck nowhere, lmao. Was it hamburger university you graduated from? I cringe to think that you are a graduate of any institution, especially with how you trumpet a single study over nine years old as definitive. One might say it comes off as a bit insecure.
> I mean, without fail, the content of your posting history is about justifying feral porn or going to bat for cub porn, then stomping your feet at people who don't agree, this thread was no exception.
> 
> By the by, Elsevier, being a publisher that's not at all unpopular with most universities for shit practices, does not make the individual studies themselves. The quality of these approved studies wildly vary in quality because of that. Not to burst your bubble there, oh champion of morality.



I have actually worked at hamburger restaurants to pay the bills before, something called a work ethic. You seem like one of those children who find all the ways they can to get into trouble and insult people. Your sole goal is to insult people just enough to get under their skin, but not enough to break the rules and get in trouble. Maybe even crack a joke or two in an attempt to be popular. Popular among who, some horny internet furries? Move along, kid.


----------



## Deleted member 82554 (Feb 16, 2020)

Doomer said:


> comes close to zoophilia


Ding ding ding we have a winner!


----------



## Captain TrashPanda (Feb 16, 2020)

goldcatmask said:


> Please tell me this is supposed to be a joke of sorts and that you're not ACTUALLY trying to recreate Animal Farm within the furry fandom.


all furries are equal, anthros are just more equal then ferals


----------



## Deleted member 82554 (Feb 16, 2020)

GarthTheWereWolf said:


> Guys! Guys!
> 
> Can't we just agree on this? Anthro...Feral....
> 
> ...


_So much furry trash_.


----------



## Filter (Feb 17, 2020)

Because, with them being on all fours, they're not as tall as the rest of us.


----------



## KimberVaile (Feb 17, 2020)

SwiftDog said:


> I have actually worked at hamburger restaurants to pay the bills before, something called a work ethic. You seem like one of those children who find all the ways they can to get into trouble and insult people. Your sole goal is to insult people just enough to get under their skin, but not enough to break the rules and get in trouble. Maybe even crack a joke or two in an attempt to be popular. Popular among who, some horny internet furries? Move along, kid.


So, you cast the first stones, and then cried foul when the exchange didn't go the way you wanted. Sorry you didn't get to take free shots at me, but I appreciate the attempts at playing the victim. Contrary to your woe is me narrative, I don't sass off at others unless they give me a valid reason. All you've been doing in this thread has involved picking at people for not seeing your myopic perspective, but yes, clearly you're the poor oppressed victim here. If it's childish to not let you take snippy little shots at people, then I'd have to wonder what your incendiary and confrontational attitude in this thread implies then. Humor is just a natural extension of who I am, and the first method I use to alleviates stress, anything after that is a bonus. Though if it sates you, you can interpret that in a way that flatters yourself and makes for a nice salve. The "just in it for the glory" theory is quite a popular pick when it comes to such deluded fantasies.

I'd recommend that you grow up, but it'll fall on deaf ears. All you want out of this thread is to vindicate a dangerous agenda and to bring down those who won't comply. It is genuinely unsettling, how you act on this site.


----------



## Jackpot Raccuki (Feb 17, 2020)

Filter said:


> Because, with them being on all fours, they're not as tall as the rest of us.


I got to say, I was tempted to make a joke like this, however I'm still proud of my choice to go the meme route.
Hats off to you though.


----------



## SLB-Portu24 (Feb 17, 2020)

Is there an actual middle ground on this fandom where people can get along while being themselves without falling into constant futile disputes? We either have the vapid gibberish indulging side which offers nothing particularly constructive towards building and/or solidifying social relationships yet it gets brought up like there's no tomorrow or as soon as a more serious discussion topic comes along, all hell breaks loose and folks will cast aside elemental human decency and common sense in order to strengthen their stance on the matter. Does the fandom only thrive through walking the lines of fundamentalist extremes? Geez, this is becoming legitimately insufferable...

I assume things generally go a lot more smoothly during real life group interactions but here online, there's simply way too much absurdity to maintain an healthy emotional balance from submitting oneself to it. Just don't act surprised when posts appear on reddit or elsewhere criticising the furry fandom and immediately label their authors as bitter haters because aside those rather edgy and unreasonably degrading claims with an excessively broad targeting amplitude, there are some pretty accurate points being made and it clearly shows. For crying out loud, as ego boosting as it might be magnifying furries as these very accepting, friendly and open minded individuals from an inside perspective, that needs to be delivered in practice instead of simply being a nice motto to advocate for the layman masses.


----------



## Night.Claw (Feb 17, 2020)

I just realized today at work...
We have a picture in the factory i work at, of Micky Mouse leading Pluto on a leash. (We make dog harnesses, leashes and dog clothes).
That's when I realized why anthro is better. We anthroes keep ferals as pets.


----------



## Deleted member 132067 (Feb 17, 2020)

SLB-Portu24 said:


> Is there an actual middle ground on this fandom where people can get along while being themselves without falling into constant futile disputes? We either have the vapid gibberish indulging side which offers nothing particularly constructive towards building and/or solidifying social relationships yet it gets brought up like there's no tomorrow or as soon as a more serious discussion topic comes along, all hell breaks loose and folks will cast aside elemental human decency and common sense in order to strengthen their stance on the matter. Does the fandom only thrive through walking the lines of fundamentalist extremes? Geez, this is becoming legitimately insufferable...
> 
> I assume things generally go a lot more smoothly during real life group interactions but here online, there's simply way too much absurdity to maintain an healthy emotional balance from submitting oneself to it. Just don't act surprised when posts appear on reddit or elsewhere criticising the furry fandom and immediately label their authors as bitter haters because aside those rather edgy and unreasonably degrading claims with an excessively broad targeting amplitude, there are some pretty accurate points being made and it clearly shows. For crying out loud, as ego boosting as it might be magnifying furries as these very accepting, friendly and open minded individuals from an inside perspective, that needs to be delivered in practice instead of simply being a nice motto to advocate for the layman masses.


That post is funny, because instead of offering something constuctive to the current topic you instead went ahead to criticise the behavior of it's participants, not solidifying anything aside from your distaste of all the people on this forum (or generally furries on the internet) and casting aside your own decency to whine about something completely off topic.

Just don't act surprised when posts appear on here or elsewhere, criticising you and immediately labeling you as a bitter hater because you constantly make those rather edgy and unreasonably degrading claims with an excessively broad targeting amplitude.


----------



## Deleted member 134556 (Feb 17, 2020)

Filter said:


> Because, with them being on all fours, they're not as tall as the rest of us.


What about giraffes?


----------



## Deleted member 132067 (Feb 17, 2020)

[Nexus] said:


> What about giraffes?


Read up and see the truth, you're welcome. www.reddit.com: r/Giraffesdontexist


----------



## Deleted member 134556 (Feb 17, 2020)

ClumsyWitch said:


> Read up and see the truth, you're welcome. www.reddit.com: r/Giraffesdontexist


----------



## Tyno (Feb 17, 2020)

Becuase anthros are superior. With us standing upright we get big brain time and ferals get small brain time because they have to have stronger necks to support thier heads which means less stuff for the brain.


----------



## Skittles (Feb 17, 2020)

Reading this thread made my brain hurt. Can we nuke it?


----------



## ConorHyena (Feb 17, 2020)

Skittles said:


> Reading this thread made my brain hurt. Can we nuke it?



You wish to explode your brains?


----------



## Skittles (Feb 17, 2020)

ConorHyena said:


> You wish to explode your brains?


If I have to read more insanity here. Maybe. I meant the thread though


----------



## SLB-Portu24 (Feb 17, 2020)

ClumsyWitch said:


> That post is funny, because instead of offering something constuctive to the current topic you instead went ahead to criticise the behavior of it's participants, not solidifying anything aside from your distaste of all the people on this forum (or generally furries on the internet) and casting aside your own decency to whine about something completely off topic.
> 
> Just don't act surprised when posts appear on here or elsewhere, criticising you and immediately labeling you as a bitter hater because you constantly make those rather edgy and unreasonably degrading claims with an excessively broad targeting amplitude.


I suppose you went out of your way to quote me on this regard in order to add the constructive elements to the on going discussion which I clearly failed to deliver...oh wait no, you just tried your hardest to make me look bad so you could gain moral ground towards your own self centred ideologies just like everyone else here does. You're the definition of an hypocritical cunt and clearly too deluded or stupid altogether under those elegantly portrayed sentences to realise that you're just as much part of the problem as those you incessantly criticise and bash upon. Whilst I made it clear that my intentions were simply appealing to logical reasoning on each side and have this nonsensical overly dramatic bullcrap coming to and end once and for all and have people starting being more comprehensive and fair towards each other, there had to be some spiteful keyboard warrior asswhipe throwing more wood into the fire pit so the drama can continue unfolding because that's what many of you love and treasure isn't it? See if you can solidify your damn brain instead since its apparently made out of putrid mush.

Same goes for anyone who gets a dopamine rush when seeing shit like this happen. If there are any mods out there who don't review themselves on what's going on here, please lock the flipping thread already, do the half decent people on these forums a good favour and no, I'm not including myself on that lot as I'm clearly just another degenerate troublemaker. Don't fret though, I'll be arranging my departure right after writting this. I've had enough with conflicting, shallow minded and utterly idiotic people for the next decade or so. Would like to see you all act so defiant and confident in person...yeah right, you'll crumble like the spineless sacks of unethical sentient rubbish you are, only tough behind a measly digital screen, pathetic...oh btw, change your name to ClumsyBitch, it fits you better as the only dark magic you're able to do is causing people's faith in humanity to vanish completely upon witnessing the hypocrisy you vomit.


----------



## Skittles (Feb 17, 2020)

Ooof the hate and bile in that post scorched my fur... Kind of did vindicate Witchy though. You do sound just a teensy wincy (huge) bit bitter.


----------



## Night.Claw (Feb 17, 2020)

SLB-Portu24 said:


> I suppose you went out of your way to quote me on this regard in order to add the constructive elements to the on going discussion which I clearly failed to deliver...oh wait no, you just tried your hardest to make me look bad so you could gain moral ground towards your own self centred ideologies just like everyone else here does. You're the definition of an hypocritical cunt and clearly too deluded or stupid altogether under those elegantly portrayed sentences to realise that you're just as much part of the problem as those you incessantly criticise and bash upon. Whilst I made it clear that my intentions were simply appealing to logical reasoning on each side and have this nonsensical overly dramatic bullcrap coming to and end once and for all and have people starting being more comprehensive and fair towards each other, there had to be some spiteful keyboard warrior asswhipe throwing more wood into the fire pit so the drama can continue unfolding because that's what many of you love and treasure isn't it? See if you can solidify your damn brain instead since its apparently made out of putrid mush.
> 
> Same goes for anyone who gets a dopamine rush when seeing shit like this happen. If there are any mods out there who don't review themselves on what's going on here, please lock the flipping thread already, do the half decent people on these forums a good favour and no, I'm not including myself on that lot as I'm clearly just another degenerate troublemaker. Don't fret though, I'll be arranging my departure right after writting this. I've had enough with conflicting, shallow minded and utterly idiotic people for the next decade or so. Would like to see you all act so defiant and confident in person...yeah right, you'll crumble like the spineless sacks of unethical sentient rubbish you are, only tough behind a measly digital screen, pathetic...oh btw, change your name to ClumsyBitch, it fits you better as the only dark magic you're able to do is causing people's faith in humanity to vanish completely upon witnessing the hypocrisy you vomit.


Took you long enough to finally decide to leave, after spreading hate and bullshit for weeks, oh so fucking smart and special one.
Please be so kind, and grab the hand of the others with supremacy complex on this forum and take them with yourself on the way out.


----------



## Jackpot Raccuki (Feb 17, 2020)

You see, everyone here is defending ferals, but really ferals can't make memes.
Sorry, but I think ferals lost this game from the start. Imagine not being able to make memes and post them online.



Skittles said:


> Reading this thread made my brain hurt. Can we nuke it?


What sucks to hear is that you had a brain to hurt whiles coming here.
Typical rookie mistake, I always take mine out and put it in a jar when I browse any forums.


----------



## Skittles (Feb 17, 2020)

Smexy Likeok4 said:


> You see, everyone here is defending ferals, but really ferals can't make memes.
> Sorry, but I think ferals lost this game from the start. Imagine not being able to make memes and post them online.
> 
> 
> ...



Well. I had stored it in the jar whilst working. I took it out when riding home and fell into this shit flinging contest X)


----------



## Night.Claw (Feb 17, 2020)

Can someone ping a moderator to lock down the thread finally, please? My phone doesn't let me ping anyone.

Most of us, including me, left a lot of unwanted comments here, so it would be best to make this end.


----------



## Skittles (Feb 17, 2020)

I had thought about it.


----------



## Skittles (Feb 17, 2020)

But there's a side to me that wants to eat popcorn and watch more exploding.. I guess I should call my Lawful good side..


----------



## Skittles (Feb 17, 2020)

Connor J. Coyote said:


> @Skittles If people are upset, it's not a good idea to make fun of them, dude.


I am not making fun. I am however kinda amused at how this thread went from 1-100. But if it makes you feel better.

I SUMMON YOU @SSJ3Mewtwo from the darkest depths of the warp!!


----------



## Arishipshape (Feb 17, 2020)




----------



## Zerzehn (Feb 17, 2020)

It is rumored this song plays in this thread...


----------



## Tyno (Feb 17, 2020)

SLB-Portu24 said:


> I suppose you went out of your way to quote me on this regard in order to add the constructive elements to the on going discussion which I clearly failed to deliver...oh wait no, you just tried your hardest to make me look bad so you could gain moral ground towards your own self centred ideologies just like everyone else here does. You're the definition of an hypocritical cunt and clearly too deluded or stupid altogether under those elegantly portrayed sentences to realise that you're just as much part of the problem as those you incessantly criticise and bash upon. Whilst I made it clear that my intentions were simply appealing to logical reasoning on each side and have this nonsensical overly dramatic bullcrap coming to and end once and for all and have people starting being more comprehensive and fair towards each other, there had to be some spiteful keyboard warrior asswhipe throwing more wood into the fire pit so the drama can continue unfolding because that's what many of you love and treasure isn't it? See if you can solidify your damn brain instead since its apparently made out of putrid mush.
> 
> Same goes for anyone who gets a dopamine rush when seeing shit like this happen. If there are any mods out there who don't review themselves on what's going on here, please lock the flipping thread already, do the half decent people on these forums a good favour and no, I'm not including myself on that lot as I'm clearly just another degenerate troublemaker. Don't fret though, I'll be arranging my departure right after writting this. I've had enough with conflicting, shallow minded and utterly idiotic people for the next decade or so. Would like to see you all act so defiant and confident in person...yeah right, you'll crumble like the spineless sacks of unethical sentient rubbish you are, only tough behind a measly digital screen, pathetic...oh btw, change your name to ClumsyBitch, it fits you better as the only dark magic you're able to do is causing people's faith in humanity to vanish completely upon witnessing the hypocrisy you vomit.


----------



## Jackpot Raccuki (Feb 17, 2020)

Skittles said:


> Well. I had stored it in the jar whilst working. I took it out when riding home and fell into this shit flinging contest X)


You poor fool. You remind me of my young innocent self.
Well, as innocent as I could've been.



Zerzehn said:


> It is rumored this song plays in this thread...


The circus really did come early this year, didn't it?
I'm glad I wasn't the only one hearing it.


----------



## Skittles (Feb 17, 2020)




----------



## Tyno (Feb 17, 2020)

aww why isn't my gif working?


----------



## Skittles (Feb 17, 2020)

I guess this thread has broken down into the shitpost thread until it can be rectified. X)


----------



## Deleted member 82554 (Feb 17, 2020)

Mr. Fox said:


> _So much furry trash_.


I can't stress this enough.

We interrupt this broadcast to learn about the birds and the bees, furry edition!


----------



## Jackpot Raccuki (Feb 17, 2020)

Tyno said:


> View attachment 81300
> aww why isn't my gif working?


Man, people can't seem to download .gifs.
Had someone steal my "cringe" gif on discord and somehow screw it up that it's basically a pixelated jpeg.


----------



## SSJ3Mewtwo (Feb 17, 2020)

Locking this for review.


----------

