fchan

discussion

a/ Furry Armpits?

Pages:1
1Report
Gena at 12 Oct 2007: 23:31

So, I was looking through a/ for things I like, and I see this... Furry armpits. And I'm like... Does that make any sense?
Not criticizing any artist or anyone, but I know there are a lot of people who know anatomy really well, and I like opinions, so...
Would a furry have armpit hair?

2Report
at 13 Oct 2007: 02:15

>>1
Yes, because I'm an artist and I say so. 

I freely allow the option (even the necessity) of other artists to decide for themselves what anatomical quirks their anthos will or won't have. 

Some goes for leg styles, sheaths, animal-like genitals, skull-sizes and shapes, etc. 

If it looks good, and maintains a good sense of verisimilitude, then there's nothing anyone can claim an anthro should or shouldn't have. 

Claims to the contrary is quite firmly in the realms of bullshit-pseudo-science until such a time that someone has a real, dead or alive, anthropomorphic critter to show off and say "Look, right there, no tufts of under-arm fur/hair, so ha!"

3Report
at 13 Oct 2007: 02:17

>>2
And the following "neener-neener-neener!!" is completely optional of course, I forgot to mention. 

4Report
Pee Wee Herman at 13 Oct 2007: 22:38

Verisimilitude

That's today's Secret Word!! Ding! Ding! Ding! Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!!

5Report (sage)
at 13 Oct 2007: 23:42

>>4
If I expanded your vocabulary for you, you're welcome, and I'm glad I could help.  If you're simply mocking me, I am sad.  :(

No, not really. 

6Report
at 14 Oct 2007: 00:29

There are a few things that just make no sense and I don't see how the artist possibly thinks they do:

1. Pubes on fur(durrr doesn't happen in real life)
2. Human cocks(as in, totally external)


If you do either of those, draw humans because that's what you're really attracted to.

7Report
at 14 Oct 2007: 04:14

>>6
Wonderful.

While we're at it, lets get rid of human/animal hybrids altogether, because people can only be attracted to (and should therefore only draw) either humans, or animals.

8Report
at 14 Oct 2007: 07:09

>>6
I should hope that humans are what all of us are really attracted to o.O

9Report
at 15 Oct 2007: 23:23

>>6
Well, if we go the BS-pseudo-science route, I could think of plenty of reasons why a furry might have pubes where animals do not, but then, some guy with a bigger biology degree than I will come along and shoot them all down. 

The usual progression these conversations go is to follow the current ideas about how humans evolved, and why humans would have developed trait X and didn't maintain trait Y as compared to our (nearest, theoretical) evolutionary 'relative', and that might be all well and good, except that there's a few sticky points re: "anthros and evolution" that pretty much F the whole argument. 

The primary of these points are that evolution obviously doesn't encompass or support the idea of human/animal hybrids as idealized in the furry fandom, thus the obvious lack of real life anthros for said 'realism nazi' naysayers to point at and go nya-nya-nya-na! 

In other words, most current thinking about evolution and how humans developed over the eons would make the presence of anthros completely unrealistic, which is why applying them to an essentially imaginary creature is stupid. 

The second point is only semi-related, and goes back to the idea of artist as god, and should be a huge hit with the theists in the room - God has no rules.

So if we're already discounting evolution and the related stuff, we might as well ignore the 'fact' that anthros wouldn't (according to 'smart' people like you, who apply logical reasoning and science to something that's obviously merely a fictitious fligft of fancy in the first place) have pubes and human-like cocks as well.  The artist/creator/god likes pubes, ergo anthros have pubes in their world, and you're free to go play in your own. 

Frankly, I'm surprised people like you, who have this kind of hard-headed oh-So-Real approach to things, even bother with the furry fandom, fantasy or science fiction at all, as you're just setting yourself up for disappointment when unreal things happen in unreal worlds with unreal ideas - None of it 'makes sense' in any sort of real-life, scientific 'logical' sense, it merely has to be internally consistent or (at least) amuse the creator for it to be, so getting bent out of shape about it seems sort of silly. 

10Report
at 17 Oct 2007: 22:35

>>1

They already do.

Also, it would appear that the razor wasn't invented until sometime during the mid to late 80's.

11Report
at 17 Oct 2007: 23:11

>>10

Do you know if they at least have the decency to douche once in a while?

12Report
at 17 Oct 2007: 23:19

I think the point is armpit and pubic hair is horrible. Thats why so many people shave/wax. Fur on the other hand feels good. So personally I (like most people here I think) would rather have fur than hair on myself or a partner. Anyway genetic engineering will make it happen one day.
Like all porn, there is good furry and bad furry. Good is faptacular.

13Report
at 18 Oct 2007: 00:52

>>9


There's a difference in suspension of disbelief that "Oh, I could see how that might work." and "Wow, that's totally stupid. There's now ay that could happen"


Example for the first one: Light sabers in Star Wars. Everyone sees how that could possibly happen although it is actually impossible to build one, ever.

Example for the second one: Pubes on things that are already covered in fur. It just doesn't make any sense. At all. Pubic hair is left over fur. So, there's no reason for it to ever happen. Hence, suspension of disbelief fails for this and it's just extremely stupid.



And saying "oh it's evolutionary impossible for it to happen anyway so let me draw like a retard" is just a cop out. Nothing is entirely evolutionarily impossibly aside from things like fur growing out of other fur.

14Report
at 18 Oct 2007: 07:03

>>13
I don't see why you're making a big deal out of this.  They're human/animal hybrids, meaning artists are going to take the parts of each side they like the most and combine them into one being.  That's why some people draw "anthros" that look like humans in body paint and some draw borderline bestiality.  There is no standard other than, "Does it have animal and human traits?"  If a particular artist likes pubic hair, they'll draw pubic hair.  Period.  Arguing about if it's evolutionarily possible is just retarded because it's usually an arbitrary decision on that specific artist's part weither to include it or not.  People will draw what they want, and you telling them it's "impossible" isn't going to stop them, no matter how much you think it is.


Next I guess you'll be saying that furries shouldn't have hair on their head a different color than the fur on thier bodies, or even have hair at all.  I mean real animals don't have hair like we do, so why should creatures who are human/animal hybrids have it?

15Report
at 18 Oct 2007: 08:01

>>13
Actually, no. You can't see how light sabers could possibly happen, because the damn things don't follow any laws of physics.

It's just an arbitrary decision of George Lucas that they should have physics-defying sticks of light that cut through everything, just like they have the "force" which is absolutely ridiculous.

16Report
Poodle at 18 Oct 2007: 10:04

This discussion is funny. X3

Maybe on an anthro the armpit/pubic hair would appear in the form of over-long guard hairs?

Besides, even if it's not biologically possible, you can do whatever you please in art. :3

17Report
Bizzle at 18 Oct 2007: 10:11

>>15  Hey, Silent Bob can use the Force, so it has to be real!

18Report
at 18 Oct 2007: 15:55

>>13
Yes, of course the idea of certain hair/fur being longer than the surrounding fur is ridiculous.  Especially calling it pubic hair/fur, as if any sort of hair/fur growth is related to puberty in real life...  I mean, that's why baby lions are born with manes if their boys, and without if their girls. 

And I've never seen a mane on any other animal either...  Horses, boars, certain breeds of dogs...  Nope.  Every animal I've ever seen has has completely uniform hair/fur lengths over their entire bodies.  Amazing but true!   

To think otherwise, I'd obviously have to suspend my belief as much as anyone with a clue about physics would have to do to accept light-sabers in star wars. 

Just one question for you:  Do your own preferences in things cause this much angst and stupidity from you in other areas of your life, or just furry porn? 

If you can't see how different lengths of fur 'might work' in the idea of human/animal hybrids, then there's really no hope for you.  Go join some anti-imagination commune somewhere, and save yourself some grief.  :P

19Report
SkyCroc at 18 Oct 2007: 19:33

>>6

BAAAAAWWWW

Fuck, who cares if what we draw isn't like real life? Furries aren't real and will never be. I don't draw sheaths or slits because I find them to be utterly disgusting and I don't give a shit if you don't like cuz I don't draw for your lil whiny self :)

20Report
Mr Swede at 19 Oct 2007: 02:43

>>6 >>13

Animal-like creatures who can actually walk upright, communicate with each other through the verbal use of English, and have opposable thumbs with which to operate such things as books, computers and thermo-nuclear rocket launchers?
Durrr... Doesn't happen in real life!!11!

Fchan would be a much happier place-that-doesn't-really-exist-except-as-binary-code-interpreted-by-our-web-browsers without pseudo-intellectual garbage who use illogical logic and faulty argumentation to further their own pathetic views on other people's fantasy (an endeavor which is, incidentally, completely pointless).
For all our sakes, gtfo.
Thank you.
 

21Add Reply
Name Sage? - captcha =
First Page - Last 40 - Entire Thread

Powered by: Shiichan Version 3956
The contents of this page are asserted to be in the public domain by the posters.
The administrators claim no responsibility for thread content.
Manage