# I draw male characters partially clothed and female characters fully clothed. Opinions?



## Phoenixflaym_Eternity (Jun 28, 2020)

I draw cartoony anthros, and lately I've been drawing more male anthros in full clothing. This led me to wonder if I should draw all of them this way. Would it be distracting or confusing for some characters to wear full clothes and others not to? At the same time, I really like the look of partially-clothed males. It just feels right. Some of my characters I absolutely cannot picture wearing full clothing. No one has ever criticized or questioned the fact I (usually) don’t draw male anthro characters in full clothing. I don’t take issue with it, either.

I’ve been thinking about it from a logical perspective and it raises some questions of why the males wouldn’t wear full clothing. The pragmatic reasons are that I don’t enjoy designing male outfits as much, and I enjoy showing off the characters’ markings.

I can think of several instances where male anthro characters don’t wear full clothing and females do (Sly Cooper, Sonic the Hedgehog, Crash Bandicoot and Donkey Kong come to mind offhand.) Mickey Mouse doesn’t wear a shirt and Donald Duck doesn’t wear pants, but both Minnie Mouse and Daisy Duck wear full clothes. Likewise, Bugs Bunny is naked and Lola Bunny wears a shirt and pants.


----------



## Tendo64 (Jun 28, 2020)

I feel I should mention Animal Crossing's rules on clothes are totally inconsistent. We have most wearing only shirts, some wearing full clothing, and then we have the nudist K.K. Slider.

Anyway, draw whatever you want. It's your art, if it feels right to you, then do it.


----------



## Frank Gulotta (Jun 28, 2020)

Cartoon clothing obeys no particular rule that makes much sense, you should do what you like!

I mean, picture that for instance : Donald Duck wears no pants. Loses his shirt. Somehow covers his groin area in shame because he's… naked I guess…?


----------



## Jaredthefox92 (Jun 28, 2020)

I actually do the same, I mean characters like Grief are naked but that's because he's supposed to give off the Knuckles vibe, but most of my characters I love to give nice costumes to and soldiers always are in uniform.


----------



## Nyro46 (Jul 1, 2020)

Tbh this is one of my pet peeves, and feels like a very outdated design choice, and I think that if you’re gonna have characters that don’t wear full clothing that it shouldn’t matter on the gender. But you do you I suppose


----------



## Jaredthefox92 (Jul 1, 2020)

Nyro46 said:


> Tbh this is one of my pet peeves, and feels like a very outdated design choice, and I think that if you’re gonna have characters that don’t wear full clothing that it shouldn’t matter on the gender. But you do you I suppose



Except, there are a lot of characters who like being their gender. IRL there are ladies who like dresses and men who like looking manly.


----------



## KD142000 (Jul 1, 2020)

From my perspective (as a non-artist and someone who commissions art), it really is up to the artist.

I agree it doesn't make sense and I can't find any real reason for it happening. I suppose it may have to do with what the designers of those characters (Sly Cooper, Sonic, etc.) took their inspiration from. If I recall, the early Disney cartoons had Mickey in dungarees and a cap and nothing more. Whereas, Donald was in his sailor's uniform, but didn't have any pants.

Perhaps do what you're used to doing? It is your artwork and your choice in how to depict the characters you make.

If you're drawing for someone else, it becomes subject to what they want (within your own rules and T&Cs).


----------



## Nyro46 (Jul 1, 2020)

Jaredthefox92 said:


> Except, there are a lot of characters who like being their gender. IRL there are ladies who like dresses and men who like looking manly.


Doesn’t really have to do with the type of clothes they wear, though. They can wear partial or full clothing and still wear masculine/feminine clothing. But usually (not necessarily always, though) when characters have the “partial / no clothes for males, full clothes for females” thing, the female characters have way more human-like bodies than the males. I feel like the main reason this has been a thing in media to have the girls wear full clothing is because it’s “indecent” or “cover up the lady bits ™” which is just more poor design choice imo, and the way female characters are portrayed in a lot of these old media is a big reason why I never really liked most female characters from these media. You can make a character recognisably female without giving them a human curvaceous body with big tits, or otherwise overly and stereotypically female


----------



## Jaredthefox92 (Jul 1, 2020)

Nyro46 said:


> Doesn’t really have to do with the type of clothes they wear, though. They can wear partial or full clothing and still wear masculine/feminine clothing. But usually (not necessarily always, though) when characters have the “partial / no clothes for males, full clothes for females” thing, the female characters have way more human-like bodies than the males. I feel like the main reason this has been a thing in media to have the girls wear full clothing is because it’s “indecent” or “cover up the lady bits ™” which is just more poor design choice imo, and the way female characters are portrayed in a lot of these old media is a big reason why I never really liked most female characters from these media. You can make a character recognisably female without giving them a human curvaceous body with big tits, or otherwise overly and stereotypically female



Most females themselves do not want to reveal their chest, and to be more realistic then you would have a curvy body, as it is the majority and not the minority in terms of the entire world's female population. If anything, I'd say old cartoons from the 90's were less curvy and sexualized, a lot of cartoons I grew up with had women with no visible chests even though they're fully adults and they would dress like men with shirts and pants. It's a design choice, is the show for kids? Then women will be more kid-friendly and less sexually structured. Is it for adults? Then they will be naturally more curvy (like in Futurama.)


----------



## Phoenixflaym_Eternity (Jul 3, 2020)

Tendo64 said:


> I feel I should mention Animal Crossing's rules on clothes are totally inconsistent. We have most wearing only shirts, some wearing full clothing, and then we have the nudist K.K. Slider.
> 
> Anyway, draw whatever you want. It's your art, if it feels right to you, then do it.



I didn't think of Animal Crossing. You're right that there are no consistent clothing rules for them (I always thought it was weird that K.K. Slider didn't wear any clothes when everyone else wears at least a shirt, other than the sheep, who wear scarves.)


----------



## MainHammond (Jul 3, 2020)

I usually draw females partially clothed because breast physics are hard.
I can draw males but not fully naked, because I refuse to draw genitals


----------



## Raever (Jul 3, 2020)

Didn't know.
Don't care.

Aesthetic is what matters. 
If you like it, you draw it.


----------



## Gemi42 (Jul 4, 2020)

Phoenixflaym_Eternity said:


> I draw cartoony anthros, and lately I've been drawing more male anthros in full clothing. This led me to wonder if I should draw all of them this way. Would it be distracting or confusing for some characters to wear full clothes and others not to? At the same time, I really like the look of partially-clothed males. It just feels right. Some of my characters I absolutely cannot picture wearing full clothing. No one has ever criticized or questioned the fact I (usually) don’t draw male anthro characters in full clothing. I don’t take issue with it, either.
> 
> I’ve been thinking about it from a logical perspective and it raises some questions of why the males wouldn’t wear full clothing. The pragmatic reasons are that I don’t enjoy designing male outfits as much, and I enjoy showing off the characters’ markings.
> 
> I can think of several instances where male anthro characters don’t wear full clothing and females do (Sly Cooper, Sonic the Hedgehog, Crash Bandicoot and Donkey Kong come to mind offhand.) Mickey Mouse doesn’t wear a shirt and Donald Duck doesn’t wear pants, but both Minnie Mouse and Daisy Duck wear full clothes. Likewise, Bugs Bunny is naked and Lola Bunny wears a shirt and pants.



In the case of classic cartoons, it's usually how a character is to be viewed in the audience.

  IE. Lola Bunny was introduced to be sexy, so it makes sense that she'd hit more of a 'human' vibe which resulted in her with more noticeable curves. So,
with that in mind, it'd make more sense for Lola to be fully clothed.

 In contrast, Minnie Mouse is supposed to be viewed as a family-friendly female character, using an overabundance of round circles in her visual design. As a result, her overall appearance is more abstract,
less like an actual woman. In her case, the clothing is used a tool to communicate her personality. In the early days of her appearances, she was basicly like a 'female' Mickey, were she only had the most basic clothing
to communicate that, a hat with a flower, a skirt and high heels. She didn't have a top for a while yet, because of how Walt wanted her to be viewed by the audience, he didn't have any 'sexualized' elements in her design.
So, in that case a top wasn't really necessary!

Anyway, that was a bit of a long dialogue.

To sum it up, the examples that you chose were of characters that were specifically created to appeal to an audience. In the case of a furry/fursona,
you can go to your own rules!

I hope this helps!


----------



## Phoenixflaym_Eternity (Jul 4, 2020)

Frank Gulotta said:


> Cartoon clothing obeys no particular rule that makes much sense, you should do what you like!
> 
> I mean, picture that for instance : Donald Duck wears no pants. Loses his shirt. Somehow covers his groin area in shame because he's… naked I guess…?



I feel like this has happened before in a Disney cartoon.  I don't know exactly which one offhand, but it probably has happened at least once. 

On a related note, I remember in Zootopia that Judy was very perturbed by animal nudity in the scene where she visits the nudist colony. I forget if the characters wore pants in that movie or not, but few if any of them wore shoes.


----------



## Frank Gulotta (Jul 4, 2020)

Phoenixflaym_Eternity said:


> I feel like this has happened before in a Disney cartoon.  I don't know exactly which one offhand, but it probably has happened at least once.
> 
> On a related note, I remember in Zootopia that Judy was very perturbed by animal nudity in the scene where she visits the nudist colony. I forget if the characters wore pants in that movie or not, but few if any of them wore shoes.


One of the characters in that Canadian cartoon from the 80s too


----------



## Phoenixflaym_Eternity (Jul 4, 2020)

Frank Gulotta said:


> One of the characters in that Canadian cartoon from the 80s too


That's very vague. What cartoon do you mean?


----------



## Frank Gulotta (Jul 4, 2020)

Phoenixflaym_Eternity said:


> That's very vague. What cartoon do you mean?


Lol, I couldn't remember the name just now, just that the characters are raccoons. But it's just named "the raccoons".


----------



## Phoenixflaym_Eternity (Jul 6, 2020)

Jaredthefox92 said:


> I actually do the same, I mean characters like Grief are naked but that's because he's supposed to give off the Knuckles vibe, but most of my characters I love to give nice costumes to and soldiers always are in uniform.



Can I see some of your artwork? I think I want some of my male anthros to be fully clothed and others not to be, but I'm trying to make it make sense aesthetically.


----------



## Jaredthefox92 (Jul 7, 2020)

Phoenixflaym_Eternity said:


> Can I see some of your artwork? I think I want some of my male anthros to be fully clothed and others not to be, but I'm trying to make it make sense aesthetically.


----------



## PercyD (Jul 7, 2020)

Back in the day, they had to put Sally in a vest because people were uncomfortable with a girl without clothes. There are a lot of gendered clothes to help people realize that the character is a girl as well, so, thats where that came from.

Male fashion hasn't really moved that much in the past few decades either. Unless you're REALLY into it, designing clothes for male fashion either doesn't have that much variance, or requires extra details that you don't need...?

I mean, putting a boy in some goucho pants and a newsie hat communicates something different then putting a boy in a 3 piece suit. So there is some variance, but it take a bit of creativity. Boys with bow ties are considered quirky, while the straight tie may be considered more business. 
I dunno, the more I talk about it, the more I'm seeing possibilities. 

Any way, boys make up for lack of clothes with actual character stylizations. Girls always get the same shape face with clothes being the only differentiation. It may be good for you to switch this up- give the girls more varying features and give the boys more varying clothes.


----------



## Phoenixflaym_Eternity (Jul 9, 2020)

KD142000 said:


> From my perspective (as a non-artist and someone who commissions art), it really is up to the artist.
> 
> I agree it doesn't make sense and I can't find any real reason for it happening. I suppose it may have to do with what the designers of those characters (Sly Cooper, Sonic, etc.) took their inspiration from. If I recall, the early Disney cartoons had Mickey in dungarees and a cap and nothing more. Whereas, Donald was in his sailor's uniform, but didn't have any pants.
> 
> ...



I used to always draw male characters partially clothed, though I've been drawing more and more fully clothed. Some characters look better one way or the other. I'm considering drawing a mix fully clothed and partially clothed males, but I wonder if people would think "Why does X wear pants and Y doesn't? Why does A wear shoes and B doesn't, and C doesn't wear shoes or pants?" 

I've considered this with female characters, but partially clothed (or unclothed) female anthros in a world where most the characters wear some clothing don't look right to me. I've never seen it done well. They simply look so much better with clothing.


----------



## RailRide (Jul 11, 2020)

More to read:

--Pantsless Males, Fully-Dressed Female
--Half-Dressed Cartoon Animal

The very fact these entries exist show that some _have_ questioned this. Whether it is "right" or "wrong" is still subjective. Logic doesn't enter into it.

Myself, I draw clothes on all my OC's save for one who is a naturist by choice. Everyone else, I draw clothes (and shoes) well enough that people can recognize specific real-life styles I draw, so that's my incentive. My character models aren't "toony" though, so YMMV.

---PCJ


----------



## Phoenixflaym_Eternity (Jul 20, 2020)

Nyro46 said:


> Doesn’t really have to do with the type of clothes they wear, though. They can wear partial or full clothing and still wear masculine/feminine clothing. But usually (not necessarily always, though) when characters have the “partial / no clothes for males, full clothes for females” thing, the female characters have way more human-like bodies than the males.



I've noticed this before, even when I was a kid. My male and female anthros are fairly equal in how humanoid their figures are. I've experimented with drawing female anthros with no clothing or partial clothing, and it simply doesn't look right to me.  I think that's because of the breasts. It just looks odd to have them exposed and hanging, even if it's "clean/safe for work" nudity.

The Archie Sonic the Hedgehog comics had an extremely wide mix of male and female characters, some with semi-realistic anatomy and some with small-body-skinny-arms Sonic anatomy, with different clothing styles. Some males wore partial clothes and some wore full clothes. The males with semi-realistic anatomy usually wore full clothes and the males with more cartoony bodies usually wore partial clothing (though there were plenty of exceptions for either.) Some females wore partial clothes (Sally Acorn and Julie-Su come to mind) and it just didn't look right to me aesthetically. Even as a kid, it made me question "Why doesn't Sally wear anything under her jacket? Why doesn't Julie-Su wear pants?"


----------



## Sugarygulp (Jul 21, 2020)

I do this too! I draw art of me and my boyfriend, and I always draw myself with some sort of clothing but my bf is always nude (anthro husky). I think it may just be because I like fashion so I always want my sona to look cute when I draw her haha


----------



## KemoNova (Oct 5, 2022)

Oh boy, I've just thinking about Sonic characters and idk what to think about it. Really is random to do/to choose as what your character should be/should look like.
Mines are technically clothed by fur. Simple as it sounds. (╯▽╰ )

My boyfriend told me having a weird feeling experience seeing my female fursonas because of the female silhouette it gives and he feels like "this should be hided" but for me I didn't have the need to "hide it" and/or feel that way. Really is a individual random reaction at this point? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


----------

