With all honesty I can truly say that all furries no matter what species whether its a wolf to a mouse are family and we all stick together and I say screw anyone who believes in dating a furry with the same species so I support cross species relationships ^_^ all furs are family much like bronies and pegasisters are! If yoire a furry I salute you for dealing with all the hate much like the brony community has done *hugs everypony and everyfur*
Does some furries actually believe in only dating someone that has a fursona that is the same species as their own? Maybe because he wants to have a serious discussion about this?
I like the sentiment at least. Pro-tip: for there to be a discussion, there often has to be a question to start bouncing ideas off of. Otherwise, we get a little confusion. For example: Why would there be animosity between Furries and Bronies? Within either community, have you ever experienced this kind of racial pairing of persona characters and why? Does it honestly matter? Stuff like this starts you off to then have a nice conversation. Now, I'm going to assume that a debate was what you wanted. Otherwise, this would have done better on your blog. I'll leave this thread be if peeps want to try and answer my two questions. If not, well, lesson learned I guess.
Furries as in fans of anthropomorphic animal characters or furries as in the people who wear fursuits?
Moreover, do anthropomorphic renditions of ponies count, or do those get a special case? Sent from my SM-P600 using Tapatalk
Does it really matter? There's more to anthropomorphism than just appearance, and I would argue that Equestrian ponies are indeed anthropomorphic animal characters.
Let me tell you why that's bullsh#$. By definition, a creature that is "anthropomorphic" shares both mental capacity and some physical traits with humans. This is an example of an anthropomorphic creature: Notice that the above has a bipedal stance and opposable thumbs. These are human characteristics. Equestrian ponies, on the other hand/hoof/paw/tentacle/talon/etc., only have human intelligence, and have more in common physically with real horses than humans. TL;DR A creature needs to at least partially resemble a human to be classified as "anthropomorphic," and Equestrian ponies do not look remotely human, therefore they are not anthropomorphic. Sent from MAH BOI using DINNER
Aaaaaactually, your definition is off. Anthropomorphism is defined as "having human or human-like traits". Sentience, speech, society, higher intellectual functions and the technological advancements in Equestria all are human or human-like traits, and thus they do, in fact, fit under the definition of anthropomorphic. In fact, something as simple as attributing a motive or an emotion to an inanimate object, such as "my computer hates me" would be anthropomorphism. The word is simply misused very frequently online.
Also, just look at the faces of the MLP characters and their expressions. You'll find that they have more in common with (admittedly stylized) human faces than with actual ponies. So yes, they are anthropomorphic characters, too, if a bit less overt than Sonic and the like.
Actually, that particular example is personification; attributing humanlike traits or emotions to non-human objects. Anthropomorphism is a strict superset of personification, manifesting more specifically in the form of physical attributes which are similar to that of a human. The first point however, is entirely correct. Equestrian ponies are very much anthropomorphic, however, it is as a result of them being personified into having technology, culture, etc., compounded with the otherwise impossible (for equines) range of motions and actions they take, including grasping objects, facial expressions, and yes, speach.
