• Suddenly unable to log into your ZooVille account? This might be the reason why: CLICK HERE!

Why do furries hate so much on feral drawlings vs anthro?

Furries have been accused of being zoophiles since they hit mainstream attention in the early 90s. It continues to this day.
 
It's just a bunch of puritanical winging and insecurity. Humans love to pile on the "other" to puff up their ego. Furries get a lot of flak from normies, and they push the abuse a rung down the social ladder to feel better about themselves.

There's no reason to it, so you can't reason with them about it.
 
ashy said:
It's just a bunch of puritanical winging and insecurity. Humans love to pile on the "other" to puff up their ego. Furries get a lot of flak from normies, and they push the abuse a rung down the social ladder to feel better about themselves.

There's no reason to it, so you can't reason with them about it.
Click to expand...
Pretty much shows that: Being able to talk/write ≠ Being a rational specimen
 
One thing that amuses me is this:
some furries are okay with feral drawings, so long as they are not drawn "too realistically".
So a cartoony piece with few details is okay, but a detailed piece that someone pored over for days and honed their skills for months to create gets thrown out.
So they're basically saying, "You can draw it, just don't draw it well or accurately". :ROFLMAO:
Also pretty rude toward the artist who put in so much effort to become so talented, if you ask me.
 
The 'hate' surrounding zoophilia within the furry fandom is growing from what I am seeing. The most common furs that are vocal about being 'anti-zoos' are all younger furries. But the increased hate is driving out a few good people I know.

One friend of mine has been active within the fandom for a long time. Not an artist, but they commission a shit ton of furry art (anthro, as well as feral), and have a wonder fursuit of their fursona. It hasn't been a problem for years. Then suddenly, the art they commission is an issue. They've been attacked repeatedly, alienated.
They stopped. I have never seen happiness fade from someone after so long. She would give you the shirt off of her back. Bend over backwards to help you if you needed it. Only to get shit on. Now, they hardly post anything anymore. No new art commissions to their galleries. No new fursuit pics/vids. They just stopped. It was too much.
I know the fandom is moving in a different direction now that it used to when I first joined In the mid 2000s. But, the amount of hate now. Furry used to be about acceptance. You fit in with furries, even when you may not fit anywhere else. This fandom was a home for me when I joined because of how much acceptance there was and the love of the community. Too many furs back then would move mountains to help you if you needed it. Now... no. It's hate. It's division. Furs that I know who are some of the sweetest and nicest people I know are being bullied for no reason. Other than ideologies have changed. It's sad. It makes me worry where the furry fandom will be in 10-15 years. Because at the rate of hate I see, there will only be more division.

It saddens me. That same hate has killed the light in a good friend of mine. Has destroyed their love for creating and posting art/content. All because they have their fursona drawn feral or with feral bits.
 
Alot of furs who aren't even zoo like feral art but have hidden the fact they like feral content now as these new furs put em on blast as possible zoos which they don't wanna be affiliated with , even furs who talk againt feral have liked some feral yiff at some point like wtf , hypocrites
 
horseguy249 said:
Furry used to be about acceptance. You fit in with furries, even when you may not fit anywhere else.
Click to expand...
It ia curious how fandoms that have in their core nice values such as acceptance, mutual respect, friendship, etc end up having such toxic people in them. Such a shame, really.
 
Years ago I was totally surprised when I found the whole "If you are a furry and come by my city, you are welcome to stay at my house". Even places you could ask fellow furs at the zone you were going to travel and contact them beforehand

I can only imagine nowadays there will be "buts" where there used to be "butts" and a lot of "not if" conditions
 
I realize that this mostly applies to furries that you would see in the comments section of e621, and not to most furries that you would meet in public, but I consider it to be worth mentioning anyway.

Sometimes I feel like it's not even right to say that some (non-zoo) furries are sexually attracted to 'animals' per se, even though I understand where that sentiment comes from.
It seems like most furries are attracted to a sort of fantastical creature; I don't mean a dragon or something like that, but rather a creature that only loosely has any basis in reality, which is constructed with a greater helping of human-grounded normalities and weird fetishizations than of actual animal matter. They might call it a "wolf", or a "lion", but it really only bears a passing, surface-level resemblance to whatever animal it is labeled as.
The truth is, they have pretty much traded real animals for a strange sort of chimaera, or something that Dr. Frankenstein might put together.
Whenever you see a reptile with breasts and external testicles, or a tiger with a 6-inch penis, or a female hyena with a canine vagina, or a cat with only two nipples, or a dog whose sheath only retracts 1/5 of the way down the penis, then you realize that animals are not the center of the furry attraction. Animals are not 'sexy' enough for them, and they feel the need to make modifications.
If furries were actually sexually attracted to animals, they would default to... I dunno... actually drawing animals like they were. It is a very odd and somewhat perverse situation when being inaccurate is held as the default. The fact that furries do not draw animals as they are, and even moreso the fact that non-zoo furries know little to nothing about the anatomy, sexual or otherwise, of the species they are allegedly attracted to, shows that real animals do not cross their mind. They want something 'idealistic'.

The part about this that bothers me is calling the creature something it is not. That creature with scales, whose breast and butt are hard to differentiate, is not a 'lizard', and yet it gets labelled as one, even thought it is like 15/16 human and 1/16 lizard at best (which, by the way, implies bestiality five generations back ? ).
I do not mean to start a species Apartheid here, but it seems highly inappropriate to open the floodgates and allow any old lump of putty to be called any species, no matter how many details are off. And of course, the only difference between a detail and a focal point is how much attention a viewer pays to it. Calling the subject a 'reptile', or trying to relate it to any natural species, is simply a profession - a vapid title - since the species is really a hybrid whose lineage would take one convoluted cladogram to describe.
Hey, I thought of an easy title for a reptile with hyper breasts and a green human vagina - an abomination :p - lol, just kidding.

The main difference I would highlight between non-zoo furries and zoophiles is this:
Zoophiles appreciate real animals for what they are, and are sexually attracted to creatures in their natural form. A zoophile could actually be sexually satisfied by what they could go outside and find without needing to resort to the Internet.
Non-zoo furries start with a sexual attraction to humans, and then build off of that base (but only a few feet off of it) by giving them a few animal parts here and there, where they suit the creators'/viewers' sexual desires, in an effort to craft something similar in essence to a 'waifu' (i.e. when they shorten a canid's snout to make it have a more humanoid face, give it plantigrade feet, remove the pawpads, widen the hips, shorten the fur, make the breasts engorged even when not lactating, et cetera).

Furries, it seems reasonable to say, are cogitophilic: attracted to figments of the mind. (I made that word up)
 
Last edited:
One of the things that annoys me is when furries say on their profile "Anti-Zoo" as if that was something integral to their personality, and was worth stating on their 'about me' section. That shows that it either means quite a lot to them to stand up as anti-zoo, or they feel like zoophiles have a chance of interacting with them (since they probably know around 17% of furries are zoos) and they would like to put up some sort of 'ward' against them in case they do.
Well hey, at least it quickly lets us know who the jerks are that we should not support the work of.

I have seen several furry artists on this site who apparently feel comfortable enough to use the same username here that they do elsewhere.
A funny story about that - there was an artist who drew realistic feral content on e621, and got their work criticized by antizoophiles in the comments section. So, they denounced zoophilia. But a few months later, I actually found out they had an account on ZooVille. So you can't always trust when someone says they are antizoo on a furry site, because it may be dishonest.
 
They are extra zealous because they want to prove to the whole world that they are not "filthy dog molesters". A bit weird yes when so much furry art focuses on realistic animal genitalia.
 
DeerLover69 said:
It's kinda strange that's where the line is drawn for alot of furries, yet at the same time they will get the most hyper realistic drawling of a dog cock.
Click to expand...
Because they for some reason draw issue with the line between furry and beastiality/zoo. So stupid
 
mythicalcreations said:
It's indeed funny that furries hate zoophiles. I remember creating an account on fur infinity forums. I mentioned something about zoophilia and people started flaming me. I was there for only 2 minutes and already wanted to never come back, lol. I think anybody who has the need to condemn and judge others without even being provoked lacks maturity. It's pretty well-know that the majority of the users on fur infinity act like 12 year olds, so maybe that just says something about them and how they think. It's ok to be a furry, but if you are also into the real thing then all of the sudden there is something wrong with you? Gotta be pretty close-minded to think that way.

Any sexuality is ok and you should just be yourself and focus on your own journey. If you can accept yourself and others that's maturity. We all learn, grow and enjoy life in our own way, hating and judging others will get you nowhere. If that's how they want to spend their time, let them, I don't see it doing them any good. I just ignore people like that, it's their proble
Click to expand...

When I was on twitter was a chat going on about how all zoo's should be put in jail and just left to die. I made a response simply stating that wont happen since even in jail you have the right for food and water everyone in jail no matter the crime get at least 1 meal a day and water. I was told I was a zoo supporter and a zoophile. Funny thing most people agreed with my comment and soon after poster deleted the tweet.
 
Well they just seem to wanna be completely distinct from zoos. But it's odd. I have an Insta account that pretty obviously promotes bestiality. Mostly it's just fellow zoos or interested people who message me.

So I had this guy from the furry Fandom message me recently. He described himself as being "neutral" in his stance on bestiality. I asked him relatively early on if he thinks there's any overlap between zoos and furries and he was trying to say no there's no overlap WHATSOEVER.

Then 2 or 3 messages later he mentions "taking the knot". I asked why someone neutral to bestiality would know such a term and he says they use those terms in the furry fandom.

All in all, it paints a confusing picture. Furry messages zoo, furry proceeds to tell zoo "we furries don't associate with zoos, there are no similarities". Then immediately starts highlighting similarities?? To me it seems like they're in denial. Like they're all actually into bestiality(on some level) but they're too scared to admit it

But anyway, the feral vs anthro thing seems to be "where they draw the line" coz they obviously had to draw it somewhere. If it seems arbitrary, it's probably because it is arbitrary?
 
It's similar to your white picket fence gays. It's a way to draw a line in the sand so that when you get criticized, you can point to a different group and say, "But I'm not like those people."
 
DeerLover69 said:
It's kinda strange that's where the line is drawn for alot of furries, yet at the same time they will get the most hyper realistic drawling of a dog cock.
Click to expand...
It's the same mindset as when they were trying to distance themselves from anything sexual in the fandom and all trying to say the fandom is wholesome. They wanted to distance themselves from furry=mursuit sex thing back during the CSU episode days and it took how many years for that stigma that adult stuff happens in the fandom? It's the same with feral art. They want to distance themselves from all the zoos that have made mainstream headlines so much that anything related they are going to go after because they don't want the fandom associated. It's gonna prolly take a few years for this kind of treatment to stop as well. Might take less if people keep pointing out that the bright pink and multicolored dog dick dildo is still a dog dick and doesn't matter how many times they slap the word fantasy on it, it's still exactly a dog penis just tye dyed.
 
this is one of the funniest/most nonsensical ones yet
artists not able to draw anthro.png
saying that artists only draw ferals because they dont have the skills to draw anthros. lol.
at least they are honest in the first two sentences.
the fact it got 6400 likes is disappointing though
 
Furry fandom have always been publicly stigmatised so I guess it's a manner to defend ourselves to comments and how people think, a lot of them are still not zoo's
 
I feel like people fear anything 'other' and enjoy deluding themselves with anything even slightly closer to what they perceive themselves as.
 
Murrsuiter said:
Because they for some reason draw issue with the line between furry and beastiality/zoo. So stupid
Click to expand...
No, society does as a whole. Then you've got the fact that pretty much all commercialized zoo porn(the kind of porn that normies think we like) is basically rape films.

Furries who aren't zoophiles don't want to be categorized as something they're not, especially if that tag comes with serious societal repercussions. Imagine if your coworkers found out you were a zoo. That would be a fucking disaster, right? Many furries are open about being furries and they don't want people to just assume that means they fuck dogs, especially if they don't. It's not an unreasonable position to have, it's basic survival instincts lol.

Technically feral isn't even always zoophilia. There's lots of feral on feral porn. That's just mating lol. I watch horse mating videos, that's not technically zoophilia either. That's just me being a weirdo watching horses fuck x3
 
In the first place: Because the majority are adolescents or young adults who are around 25 years of age. An age more prone to drama and disorder of ideas.

Second: Because they don't know how to appreciate the good things in life!
 
stinkyskunk said:
No, society does as a whole. Then you've got the fact that pretty much all commercialized zoo porn(the kind of porn that normies think we like) is basically rape films.

Furries who aren't zoophiles don't want to be categorized as something they're not, especially if that tag comes with serious societal repercussions. Imagine if your coworkers found out you were a zoo. That would be a fucking disaster, right? Many furries are open about being furries and they don't want people to just assume that means they fuck dogs, especially if they don't. It's not an unreasonable position to have, it's basic survival instincts lol.

Technically feral isn't even always zoophilia. There's lots of feral on feral porn. That's just mating lol. I watch horse mating videos, that's not technically zoophilia either. That's just me being a weirdo watching horses fuck x3
Click to expand...
Enjoying the mating of animals is something zoos often do, but there's a specific word for it that's better than zoophilia, faunoiphilia!
 
  • Like
Reactions: pes
Sheppermutt said:
I think most furry Anthro art is really hard to call 'furry'. They're basically drawn as humans, just with colored skin and an animal head/maybe a tail. Some artists are good at creating characters that bridge the gap; they're humanoid but the fur is well defined and they have more non-human features than human features.

I also think theres a double standard going on with furry art. It's common to draw the guys with animal dicks. But a lot of the time, even with ferals, the girls are drawn with a slit instead of a cookie.

I think it's a lot of denial over what people want. Think, "I like animals in that way. But not real animals, I mean humans that have animalistic features only! Liking real animals that way is bad. I am not bad." I think it should be OK to find some animals features hot/sexy without being a zoo at all.
Click to expand...

It's 'funny', but in the early 2000s, when feral art was a rarity and even most anthro still had human penises, zoo wasn't back-slashed as today. Even in 2010 when I joined the furry fandom, dog penises kind of become the norm in anthros, but cookies were frown upon. And only a few artist made feral porn (like TaniDaReal), but it wasn't as explicit and realistic as today, mostly cartoony. A few years ago cookies become more common in anthro and feral art exploded, and not just cartoony, but realistic too, specially now with 3D renders and AI . Maybe the line became each time closer to real zoo, and they freaked out.

It think the line still exist in fantasy vs real. But don't having sex with real dogs, doesn't make you non-zoo, if you are still attracted to dogs, you are a zoo, maybe just a repressed one. Maybe lots of them are in denial, and defining that line it's their way too deny it. I know because I had a phase of guiltiness of several years, where I left behind zoo thoughts and porn, and secluded myself into the furry community, specially in the feral one. But I never was an hypocritical like those. I understand those that make their furry side open to their public life, don't want to be associated with zoos, but at least be neutral about it, specially if you are one too (the problem again, it's that lots of them are probably in denial).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top