Furry
noun/adjective
>One can be said to be A furry, and one can be said to DO things that are describable AS furry.
"Furry" encompasses Animals with anthropomorphic aspects, and people who are interested in animals with anthropomorphic aspects.
Things like animals using spoken language, reading/writing, holding cups with their fore-[~]hands[/~]hooves, and assorted other human-like behavior that is otherwise not associated with the native creature.
Like ponies. Specifically, My Little Pony ponies.
Yes, ponies ARE definitively furry.
And, one can like furry things without identifying AS a furry,... but....
Tl;dr ITT OP tries to divest horsefuckers from their denial of being furries
/sp/ - Football
Yea, for the Denver Broncos are Football Now and Forever
File (): AABAF51433BFEC1E2D4A9D0AAC58975E-69374.jpg (67.7 KB, 569x438, 4cr9qr.jpg)
File (): ED38594C8D05920BEA38780A4FB94305-52184.jpg (51.0 KB, 1080x560, Screenshot_20230506_112003_Google.jpg)
614 replies and 116 files omitted.
>>22104
>IS definitively furry in that it centers around/toward anthropomorphized ponies
On what basis do you imply that the ENTIRE archetypical concept of anthropomorphizing animals is furry? It's a literary concept that exists independently of the furry fandom. It's as old as humanity itself, since long before the "furry" fandom came about.
Next you're going to tell me that ancient Egyptian priests, practitioners of most other pagan religions (99.9% of humans in history), Greek poets like Aesop, speculative evolution science fiction writers, cave painters, Japanese monks cataloguing Yokai, all of the Roman empire, all Hindus, and basically anything else that
>IS definitively furry in that it centers around/toward anthropomorphized ponies
On what basis do you imply that the ENTIRE archetypical concept of anthropomorphizing animals is furry? It's a literary concept that exists independently of the furry fandom. It's as old as humanity itself, since long before the "furry" fandom came about.
Next you're going to tell me that ancient Egyptian priests, practitioners of most other pagan religions (99.9% of humans in history), Greek poets like Aesop, speculative evolution science fiction writers, cave painters, Japanese monks cataloguing Yokai, all of the Roman empire, all Hindus, and basically anything else that
>>22103
The OP doesn't specify the degree to which those criteria apply.
Is Imhotep a furry? He talked about anthropomorphized animals a lot.
Is Aesop a furry?
Were Dacians furries?
How much do you have to be interested in anthropomorphized animals do you need to be? What kind of interest must it entail? How anthropomorphized do the animals have to be?
The OP doesn't specify the degree to which those criteria apply.
Is Imhotep a furry? He talked about anthropomorphized animals a lot.
Is Aesop a furry?
Were Dacians furries?
How much do you have to be interested in anthropomorphized animals do you need to be? What kind of interest must it entail? How anthropomorphized do the animals have to be?
File (): BBAD23FB65680C2A428037A0FEAA712F-3998463.jpg (3.8 MB, 2245x2246, Miles_the_Denver_Broncos_Mascot.jpeg)
>>22104
Are Broncos Fans furries?
Are ALL sportsball fans with an animal mas ot furries, since they identify with a group and that group is associated with an anthropomorphic animal?
Are all Christians furries, due to Christ being repeatedly referred to as a lamb in symbolism?
Are all Hindus furries, because they're fully committed to an identity that involves anthropomorphic animal figures?
Are fans of Hesiod's works furries?
Are African Magic Warriors furries? They don't use fursuits, but they have fancy masks.
Are people who celebrate Easter furries, because of Peter Rabbit?
Are fabs of LotR furries, because it has anthropomorphic dragons and spiders?
What's the criteria?
Are Broncos Fans furries?
Are ALL sportsball fans with an animal mas ot furries, since they identify with a group and that group is associated with an anthropomorphic animal?
Are all Christians furries, due to Christ being repeatedly referred to as a lamb in symbolism?
Are all Hindus furries, because they're fully committed to an identity that involves anthropomorphic animal figures?
Are fans of Hesiod's works furries?
Are African Magic Warriors furries? They don't use fursuits, but they have fancy masks.
Are people who celebrate Easter furries, because of Peter Rabbit?
Are fabs of LotR furries, because it has anthropomorphic dragons and spiders?
What's the criteria?
File (): 80BB2488E6FF0143326E209241AEC003-1208272.jpg (1.2 MB, 3965x4096, 8a02c286d86df9216a2bcc6a6d6efe12-1.jpg)
>>22105
No, that would make them fans of furry content. Did u miss the part about self-identification?
>ppl dont identify bronies as furries
In ignorance
>>22106
>on what basis do you hurr nurr
By the definition. Dont take my word for it, look it up.
>all that historical shit
Predates the establishment of furries,as being a thing.
Wanna know what DOESNT predate the establishment of furries being a thing?
Mlp
>>22107
See this post
>>22108
The criteria being, establishment of concept. Also, weak attempt at broncoposting. You wanna know who has a bronco brand on both sides of her ass, and who THEN got those brands tattooed so the colors are correct?
Adeline did. It took 2 different sessions under an anti-magic screen, but nigger look lively, shes a cow who has matching bronco.cutie marks on both sides. Cuz you know why? As much as she has contempt for many in the periphery, she absolutely loves Mlpol and the Denver Broncos. You wanna know who DOESNT love Mlpol and the Denver Broncos? Jews, for starters.
No, that would make them fans of furry content. Did u miss the part about self-identification?
>ppl dont identify bronies as furries
In ignorance
>>22106
>on what basis do you hurr nurr
By the definition. Dont take my word for it, look it up.
>all that historical shit
Predates the establishment of furries,as being a thing.
Wanna know what DOESNT predate the establishment of furries being a thing?
Mlp
>>22107
See this post
>>22108
The criteria being, establishment of concept. Also, weak attempt at broncoposting. You wanna know who has a bronco brand on both sides of her ass, and who THEN got those brands tattooed so the colors are correct?
Adeline did. It took 2 different sessions under an anti-magic screen, but nigger look lively, shes a cow who has matching bronco.cutie marks on both sides. Cuz you know why? As much as she has contempt for many in the periphery, she absolutely loves Mlpol and the Denver Broncos. You wanna know who DOESNT love Mlpol and the Denver Broncos? Jews, for starters.
File (): 23544E072677FE1DA204ED436C48B8F6-138836.jpg (135.6 KB, 1080x1349, 3c5b99b5c1ad783b1f66ea53bf9234fd.jpg)
>>22112
What you're missing is that furries are just a recent subset of worship of the Egyptian gods of Anubis, Heh, Kek, Tefnut, Set and others. They came first.
What you're missing is that furries are just a recent subset of worship of the Egyptian gods of Anubis, Heh, Kek, Tefnut, Set and others. They came first.
>>22112
>By the definition.
The definition is vague, and has no exact parameters.
>Predates the establishment of furries
Why does it matter that it predates them? If it's "by the definition" timeline shouldn't matter. You're moving the goalpost.
Also several sportsball teams were post "furry fandom".
>By the definition.
The definition is vague, and has no exact parameters.
>Predates the establishment of furries
Why does it matter that it predates them? If it's "by the definition" timeline shouldn't matter. You're moving the goalpost.
Also several sportsball teams were post "furry fandom".
>>22112
How is a fan of "furry content" different from a fan of pony content in terms of self-identification?
A pokemon fan is a fanatic for Pokemon. A pony fan is a fantastic for ponies.
How is a fan of "furry content" different from a fan of pony content in terms of self-identification?
A pokemon fan is a fanatic for Pokemon. A pony fan is a fantastic for ponies.
>>22112
>Predates the establishment of furries,as being a thing.
>Wanna know what DOESNT predate the establishment of furries being a thing?
So, what you're saying is that all instances of anthropomorphic animals before the "furry fandom" are non-furry by seniority, but all instances of anthropomorphism after the fact are furry by-default?
>Predates the establishment of furries,as being a thing.
>Wanna know what DOESNT predate the establishment of furries being a thing?
So, what you're saying is that all instances of anthropomorphic animals before the "furry fandom" are non-furry by seniority, but all instances of anthropomorphism after the fact are furry by-default?
File (): 02D2A0A7FF26E35F8B67010D50026697-207837.jpg (203.0 KB, 707x1000, 1568603578054.jpg)
File (): F8C17D5A23BBC00CEA8E1F5BDE370626-3736529.gif (3.6 MB, 3600x4000, 2631942.gif)
>>22101
>This is due to the fact that furries were objectively defined long before MLP even came out. You can criticize the overly generalized definition of furries all you want - plenty do - but that doesnt change the fact that all MLP activity - whether the individual self-identifies AS a furry - is furry in nature.
I think you're working from a flawed definition of what a "furry" is, either that or I am. My understanding is that a furry is someone who identifies as an animal, either in the sense that they literally believe themselves to be an animal "on all levels except physical, I am a wolf. *barks*", or as part of an elaborate role-playing fantasy or sexual kink. The furry "fandom" isn't related to any particular media franchise, but they have a general interest in any media franchise that involves animal characters.
Bronies, or horsefuckers, or whatever the preferred term is these days, are a group of people specifically interested in MLP and its world. There is plenty of crossover since it stands to reason that MLP would appeal to furries along with just about any other cartoon that features animal characters, but most of the bronies I've encountered don't fit the definition of being furries.
Examples:
>image 1
Nice feet.
>image 2
Nice hooves.
If you can't tell the difference between these two types of characters and the audience they appeal to, you are literally retarded.
>This is due to the fact that furries were objectively defined long before MLP even came out. You can criticize the overly generalized definition of furries all you want - plenty do - but that doesnt change the fact that all MLP activity - whether the individual self-identifies AS a furry - is furry in nature.
I think you're working from a flawed definition of what a "furry" is, either that or I am. My understanding is that a furry is someone who identifies as an animal, either in the sense that they literally believe themselves to be an animal "on all levels except physical, I am a wolf. *barks*", or as part of an elaborate role-playing fantasy or sexual kink. The furry "fandom" isn't related to any particular media franchise, but they have a general interest in any media franchise that involves animal characters.
Bronies, or horsefuckers, or whatever the preferred term is these days, are a group of people specifically interested in MLP and its world. There is plenty of crossover since it stands to reason that MLP would appeal to furries along with just about any other cartoon that features animal characters, but most of the bronies I've encountered don't fit the definition of being furries.
Examples:
>image 1
Nice feet.
>image 2
Nice hooves.
If you can't tell the difference between these two types of characters and the audience they appeal to, you are literally retarded.
>>22113
I wont contest that there may be furries who iconographically view... specific (or general) furries as... being consistent with pagan/polytheistic dynamics,... but Im gonna need a citation.
And then, breakdown the demographics of who believes this shit versus practice.
Cuz lets not pretend that it isn't 10 to 1 (or worse) ppl who claim to be christian versus are.
>>22114
No, the definition is GENERAL.
>>22115
Pony content IS furry content. Until you can argue that pony content doesnt involve anthropomorphized animals, ur in the detention box.
>>22116
More or less
>>22117
Oh wow, you're exceedingly wrong.
The ppl who identify as having been an animal in a previous life are known as Therians. The ppl who identify as being an animal in an incorrect body (not u like certain transgenders,... we'll get to that) are referred to as Otherkin.
Literally speaking, from the definitive meanings of the word:
Bronies are a specific term pertaining to a specific aubset of fandom that is WELL within the established definition of what is "furry".
I wont contest that there may be furries who iconographically view... specific (or general) furries as... being consistent with pagan/polytheistic dynamics,... but Im gonna need a citation.
And then, breakdown the demographics of who believes this shit versus practice.
Cuz lets not pretend that it isn't 10 to 1 (or worse) ppl who claim to be christian versus are.
>>22114
No, the definition is GENERAL.
>>22115
Pony content IS furry content. Until you can argue that pony content doesnt involve anthropomorphized animals, ur in the detention box.
>>22116
More or less
>>22117
Oh wow, you're exceedingly wrong.
The ppl who identify as having been an animal in a previous life are known as Therians. The ppl who identify as being an animal in an incorrect body (not u like certain transgenders,... we'll get to that) are referred to as Otherkin.
Literally speaking, from the definitive meanings of the word:
Bronies are a specific term pertaining to a specific aubset of fandom that is WELL within the established definition of what is "furry".
>>22119
Wew, you got a 2 minute response time! Better grt those numbers down, I was at sub 30 seconds
Wew, you got a 2 minute response time! Better grt those numbers down, I was at sub 30 seconds
>>22118
>Until you can argue that pony content doesnt involve anthropomorphized animals, ur in the detention box.
Ponies are barely anthropomorphized at all. They have human-like personalities, but their bodies are fully pony. They're closer to xenos/aliens than anthros.
>Until you can argue that pony content doesnt involve anthropomorphized animals, ur in the detention box.
Ponies are barely anthropomorphized at all. They have human-like personalities, but their bodies are fully pony. They're closer to xenos/aliens than anthros.
>>22121
Uh, did you miss the whole speaking fluent english, havig things like libraries and shops and vendors, witch-doctors even?
Do horses have those?
Oh wait, no
Uh, did you miss the whole speaking fluent english, havig things like libraries and shops and vendors, witch-doctors even?
Do horses have those?
Oh wait, no
Anonymous
No.22126
>>22123
That doesn't make them anthros in the way furries are generally attributed. They're distinctly different.
That doesn't make them anthros in the way furries are generally attributed. They're distinctly different.
Anonymous
No.22127
File (): A1A64EEAC7B278499A1E565F7D6C4C6D-142536.gif (139.2 KB, 240x240, 1498289733392.gif)
>>22118
>pony content doesnt involve anthropomorphized animals
They literally aren't. They are just horses, with cutesy features like thick legs and big eyes. They have no human features
>pony content doesnt involve anthropomorphized animals
They literally aren't. They are just horses, with cutesy features like thick legs and big eyes. They have no human features
File (): E3E0D0406C415EA77390FDB8D0F602F5-43869.png (42.8 KB, 720x444, Screenshot_20231017-221129~2.png)
And in today's edition of "didnt read/comprehend what I said" we have (you)
Anonymous
No.22130
>Thinking that "furry" doesn't mean, at mimimum, giving human physical features to animals
>>22128
No. I read it. I just reject the premise that furries own the entire archetype of anthropomorphization since their conception.
No. I read it. I just reject the premise that furries own the entire archetype of anthropomorphization since their conception.
>>22141
No, but transfags seem to think they can defy objective reality in a comparable manner.
They think how they identify changes things
No, but transfags seem to think they can defy objective reality in a comparable manner.
They think how they identify changes things
File (): E01F93FEBE8A115789FF7DF54C6151C4-626302.gif (611.6 KB, 498x382, mlp-my-little-pony.gif)
>>22144
Oh? People pretending that their personal perception that defies objective reality is different in vases of bronies who arent furries versus transgenders who are abominations? Do tell. Tell me about how your refusal to accept being a furry is different from their refusal to accept biology. Go on
Oh? People pretending that their personal perception that defies objective reality is different in vases of bronies who arent furries versus transgenders who are abominations? Do tell. Tell me about how your refusal to accept being a furry is different from their refusal to accept biology. Go on
File (): A4D35F4255CB57C9D31C9C553401BEF7-6801280.png (6.5 MB, 4000x2250, Furries Worship Anubis.png)
File (): 8B78A79BCA5CFE63ACC07AB4137F8F63-409945.png (400.3 KB, 800x480, More.png)
File (): D34E3EDD12AEEEE10FA4905968D3BFA5-767958.png (750.0 KB, 955x616, Discord Fears Anubis.png)
File (): 519EEFBE72528637259A763C44356000-249747.jpg (243.9 KB, 538x388, Still more.jpeg)
Anyways, we've already established that the Ancient Egyptians were the first to anthropomorphize animals. So furries and bronies are just subsets of the Egyptian religion
File (): 23E29181B761BED2CCD97F1B3768C72F-228079.jpg (222.7 KB, 939x1390, sculpture-of-celtic-goddess-epona-FD84AM.jpg)
>>22145
I think the better comparison is trannies trying to say everything revolves around trannies (Trixie, Minecraft Bee, Samus, etc) is like furries hell-bent on calling anything that even vaguely references anthropomorphic animals "furry".
>>22147
I am willing to compromise and say that bronies are actually a subsect of Roman/Celtic Epona-worshippers, as our cultural practices, beliefs, and rituals line up.
Also note how Epona is depicted as either a woman or a sapient mare, but never a grotesque hybrid. Ponies are the same vein.
I think the better comparison is trannies trying to say everything revolves around trannies (Trixie, Minecraft Bee, Samus, etc) is like furries hell-bent on calling anything that even vaguely references anthropomorphic animals "furry".
>>22147
I am willing to compromise and say that bronies are actually a subsect of Roman/Celtic Epona-worshippers, as our cultural practices, beliefs, and rituals line up.
Also note how Epona is depicted as either a woman or a sapient mare, but never a grotesque hybrid. Ponies are the same vein.
[Reply] [Last 50 Posts] [Last 100 Posts] [Last 200 Posts]
You are viewing older replies. Click [View All] or [Last n Posts] to vew latest posts.
Clicking update will load all posts posted after last post on this page.
Post pagination: [Prev] [1-50] [51-100] [101-150] [151-200] [201-250] [251-300] [301-350] [351-400] [401-450] [451-500] [501-550] [551-600] [601-650] [651-664] [Next] [Live (last 50 replies)]
664 replies | 133 files | 34 UUIDs | Page 9