Bronies = Furries

This isn't quite accurate. Scalies in the furry fandom are named for their preference for creatures with scales. Bronies as a group are (mostly) only interested in ponies of the MLP:FiM kind, not ponies as a whole, thus I wouldn't say it's fair to say we're on the same terms of 'furry' as a group such as scalies.

This being said, I think it's kind of unfair for us to judge us based on the fact that the show we like are about partially anthropomorphic ponies. Does this make sonic fans furries? Starfox fans? I think it's not a good measure of comparison.

 

What I find interesting is that this all hinges on the whole "If it sounds like a duck, walks like a duck, looks like a duck, then we might be centring in on this whole problem, chaps!" line of logic. I'm trying to think why and the best I can think of is this idea that maybe the perception is coloured by the key similarity of both groups being generally unwelcome.

On another point, I cannot think of any part of Furry culture that attempts to encourage a general idea of harmony between it's members and everyone else outside of it too as a core ideal.

 

Science backs that up. The human brain is almost preprogrammed to find human like qualities in objects. Think about, for example, the front of a car. If you look, it appears to be a menacing face of some kind. That's not necessarily an accident, that's car makers specifically using that little nugget to help sell cars. We'll buy a machine with an angry face, apparently.

You could also draw a comparison between the anthropomorphising of your dog by asking it what's wrong and the anthro art work of blurring the lines between human and animal.

 

Flawless logic, how could I forget.

I think you misunderstood my point. The MLP:FiM ponies are plenty anthropomorphic, but not to the scale that the furry fandom is most known for. While I'm sure a lot of bronies have and will either come from or turn to the furry fandom due to its similarities at some point, I'd hazard a guess to say that a great deal of bronies (maybe going so bold to say a majority) wouldn't identify with them. It begs to question that a great deal of popular artwork in the brony fandom are of humanizations; to me it seems we prefer humanized ponies over anthro ponies. I think that says a great deal about us as a fandom, assuming my points lean toward the facts rather than opinion, that at best we can be considered a 'branch' from the furry fandom. If MLP:FiM was a different cartoon with a cast of humans rather than ponies then we'd not even be having this discussion, which is an important point to consider.

 

I know, I found it funny since Krystal is what made me a furry. Emotion is poorly conveyed through text.

That's my point exactly. They want to avoid being called furry. If we equate that all bronies are part of the furry fandom because the show we like is based on ponies then I think that's an unfair generalization.

 

Very true. After all, it's an asthetic choice, mostly. Apart from choices of colour and art style, what else defines something as a Furry or as a Brony piece? Is there anything else underneath it all that can be defined as a difference?

With Furry, not necessarily but Brony might. I'm not sure what.

Also, it was Tails for me, not Krystal. Not sure what that says about me... Definitely not in the same way, I'd imagine...

 

But there has to be a threshold on both sides of that blur where you can clearly define something as one of each, correct? So, what defines something as Furry or Brony?