Splitting techicalities, being furry would mean you
have a liking or leaning towards furry art (written,
draw, created however). You don't need a "fursona" to
be furry, though you would to "be a furry".
Term generalisation is something like: anthro is
charaters displaying both human and animal
characteristics (eg, TV characters like Disney,
Warner Bros etc). Furry is anthro with a sexual
nature (eg: James M Hardiman, Desiree Lee, etc). You
are correct though in saying people (and furs?) like
to stereotype and place in categories. Sense of
belonging thing that "makes people feel safe" is my
guess.
Mundanes are anti-furry. They dislike the concept of
anthropomorphic animal sex and anything more than
Donald Duck (who doesn't wear pants!) is considered
offensive by them.
General agreeance with this outline?
Scrapper, Black Dragon, who is aware that he doesn't
have fur, but is still a furry!
--- venomsymbiote_69 <venomsymbiote_69_at_yahoo.com>
wrote:
> I don't consider myself a furry either. I love the
> art, and the way
> the furry's are basicly nice to everyone. But I'm
> not a "furry". Not
> that being one is bad, which it isn't.
> > --- In SkunkworksAMA_at_y..., Jason Canty
> <jason_canty_at_y...> wrote:
> > > Mundanes? Hmm
> > >
> > > To me that just sounds like another way to draw
> up even more artiifical divisons between people.
> Humans
> > > have enugh "us" and "them" mentality as it is
> > > regarding race or sexual prefrence.
> > >
> > > But thats just my view. I'm not a furry and
the
> > > people that know (or know of) me defently would
> > > (not) call me mundane. LOL.
> > Jason.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Sports - Coverage of the 2002 Olympic Games
http://sports.yahoo.com
Received on Sun Feb 17 2002 - 18:14:27 CST