Ahhh, the sorted issue of gender.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 1:38 am

SnowWalker wrote: If a real female wolf can get away without having huge breasts hanging off her midsection, then i'd like a werewolf to get away with the same thing! (unless she was pregnant and then I can see how SOMETHING would be dangling, but nothing like human breasts).

I hope that might explain what I meant, but i bet it' probably just made it more confusing.

~Snowy

I think your assumptions are incorrect about the design of the females, I don't believe that their breasts would be hanging, or "dangling" for that matter. If we are to assume that a female werewolf has more muscle mass than an normal human female, then that would mean that their breasts are held in place by the breasts mucles, and are firm. The females in this movie could be designed to have such firm breasts, even when pregnant. I don't think the lower breasts will be dangling and noticable, since they would be smaller than the chest ones.

Now onto another thing regarding Gender, which I believe that no one has discussed but needs to be addressed. There is one key characteristic that seperates human males from females..... facial hair. Now I know that this is contridictory, how can a female not have facial hair/fur? There are two solutions to this problem:

1)have the hair/fur stretch all the way to the back of the cheeks, and the face is pigmented during transformation to match more closely the color of the fur.
2)Have facial hair, but a thin layer, only enough to color, and nothing thick on the cheeks, to further distinguish the females from the males.

The only thing I would hate to see in either gender is an excessive amount of fur on the cheeks, doing so make the characters look cartoonish, like a weasel or skunk. I would hope from some seriousness in their form. Also facial hair may reduce the visiable expressions that can be seen if the fur is too thick, such as smiling, or moving the lips to the side as a facial response, which moves the cheeks as well. Just some food for thought.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 1:44 am

There is another difference that can be made to further distinguish the species. Natural eye lid color. suppose that the pigmentation of the skin around the females eye lids changes, to complement the fur and hair. This could be a biological trait, in the same way as certain birds of certain species have elaborate ornamental feathers as a sign of sex appeal, and to compete with other males. Having the female have "natural makeup" could only enhance her appeal as a female, since it is a noticable characteristic of human females as well.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 9:48 am

In either case I would like to see some muscular definition in both genders when transfromed and transforming

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 10:07 am

For the female side, I think the females can have a bit of enlargment in the chest.. just nothing like watermellons...slight expansion of nipples ot look slightly more like teats....and the difference in female and male wolfs could be a bit in coloration or texture of fur...or the way the fur is in places..longer around the neck for males...kinda like a thick mane... which a female could lack... the male should be larger and when transforming can have noticable swelling of the chest, arms, legs, buttocks...thighs, calfs..ect... though I hope his feet grow to sizable paws to support alll that uptop.. and I think it would be ok to see the male wolfs sheath and ballsac but not all the time... they would probly enlarge too i feel but nothing hung like a horse so to say.. malybe a tuft of fur above the groin to be considered pubic fur, and can provid a good modesty at times..

Winter · Post by **Winter** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 10:10 am

:::For the female side, I think the females can have a bit of enlargment in the chest.. just nothing like watermellons...slight expansion of nipples ot look slightly more like teats....and the difference in female and male wolfs could be a bit in coloration or texture of fur...or the way the fur is in places..longer around the neck for males...kinda like a thick mane... which a female could lack... the male should be larger and when transforming can have noticable swelling of the chest, arms, legs, buttocks...thighs, calfs..ect... though I hope his feet grow to sizable paws to support alll that uptop.. and I think it would be ok to see the male wolfs sheath and ballsac but not all the time... they would probly enlarge too i feel but nothing hung like a horse so to say.. malybe a tuft of fur above the groin to be considered pubic fur, and can provid a good modesty at times..:::

Was my post... I forgot to log in X_x

TakeWalker · Post by **TakeWalker** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 10:31 am

SnowWalker wrote:I want my werewolf to be lupine!

Just to be snotty and make a counterpoint, I want *my* werewolves to be human.

Nevertheless, I couldn't realistically see a female werewolf with huge knockers. That would be both silly and ineffective, as well as smacking of fanservice. Even if the woman is rather well-endowed in human form, I do think that some of that would be 'eaten up' so to speak by the shift in body mass. Certainly, the supportive tendons would tighten and pull the breasts closer to the chest. A werewolf with breasts that are too large would probably end up on the wrong end of something she couldn't run away from eventually; it's kind of a Darwinist idea, to be sure.

ebonmuscle · Post by **ebonmuscle** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:03 pm

My take on how the werewolves should be is very simple. It should depend on the individual. Most werewolf films and shows follow a central template a la "American Werewolf," "The Howling," and "Werewolf." By doing this, the identity of the lycanthrope remains mysterious. Look at the respective transformations of Serafine in American Werewolf in Paris and Nina in Angel, two perfect examples. Those beasts were strong, agile and fierce and gender never became a factor.

There's several ways to distinguish gender beside what everyone else has said:

1) Torn clothing--Concerned about nudity, cover the furry body with shredded cloths. Bras, panties, tops expanded to their limit or ripped sightly all make the grade, plus, they accentuate the transformation to everyone's liking.
2) Nudity-- We all know that nudity is almost never an issue with males because your only concern is below the belt and that's easily concealable, regardless of build. When a male transforms into or reverts from a wolf, there's so much flexiblity in what you can do. Altered States is a great reference for a nude hairy werecharacter that could go across well along both gender lines. For women nowadays, the bottom line is that unless sexuality is involved, nudity isn't done with the same objectiveness. A tremendous exception was Cat People with Nastasia Kinski. The way the director had her prowlng around nude as a woman and using the camera shots to cover the perspective of the creature was awesome.
3) Multiplicity-- As far as I'm concerned, and this point is an extension of number one. The only time you should be specific in deignating a werewolf character(s) is if he/she is the protagonist, leader of a group, antagonist etc. You know, for distinction purposes sake. Any film depicting large groups of werewolf characters, be it in a town or such usually has a default template.
4) Story-- What's the film going to be about? You don't have to tell me per se, but, let's consider story for a second. Most characters are designed depending upon their dispositon. Take the Lion King , Mufasa was large, proud, a booming voice, clean and pure. Scar on the other hand was rugged, a scar over his eye, a nappy mane, in between build and a sinister expression. That could go far in determining how the filmmakers do the creature. If the protagonist is a skinny nerdy girl for example, then perhaps the werewolf character is buff and strong, accentuating her inner self. If the character is loose and extroverted, regardless of age. That person would embrace being a werewolf and look forward to it every month, even naked on a cold day.
5) My preferences-- I like physically strong athletic lupines that are practically unstoppable, like American Werewolf 1 and 2, The Howling, even Underworld was cool as well. Male, female it doesn't matter. The beast is usually going to be consistent with his/her character traits, unless of course the person loses control in their wolf form.

There you go, that's my take. What do you guys think?

M.K.

Lasthowl · Post by **Lasthowl** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:07 pm

I have no objection to breasts as long as they're reasonable/practical. Werewolves tend to be fairly lean, so we're not likely to see large ones. If a werewolf is plumper in human form, perhaps, but there's a certain redistribution to take into account. They'd be perhaps a little more prominent/perky, but I'm not seeing them being very dangly.

I'm absolutely in love with long manes on female werewolves. Just a quirk of mine.

ANTIcarrot. · Post by **ANTIcarrot.** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 1:14 pm

Um, there isn't any delicate way to say this... But if you actually look at a female canine her dangly bits are not completely hidden by fur, and in fact petrude beyond it. The vagina sticks out in whole or (more often) in part. It has to, or she'd make a mess of her fur every time she urinated. Though this is possibly going into a bit too much detail.

This is kinda why I favour a lupine bases for external features; it provides an unquestionable roadmap and make all these questions go away. ^.^

Personal opinions aside, I will remind our learned moderator that nothing good has ever come from design by comeette. Let your artist come up with a design that looks good in the same way wolves look good, and leave it at that.

ANTIcarrot.
PS: But please, show it all or hide it all, don't go half and half.

WolvenOne · Post by **WolvenOne** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 1:35 pm

Personal opinions aside, I will remind our learned moderator that nothing good has ever come from design by comeette. Let your artist come up with a design that looks good in the same way wolves look good, and leave it at that.

I'm going to agree with this one statement here. I think the movie-makers have a general idea of what we'd like to see, so, let an artist tackle the problem instead of us silly masses.

PS: But please, show it all or hide it all, don't go half and half.

I don't see any reason to show it all or hide it all. If you hide it all, then it becomes extremly difficult to tell the male and female wolves apart, and the creatures become a bit less believable, and if you show it all, you potentially wierd out the audience.

These are issues an artist could tackle, but I would leave the half-and-half option open to the artist, as that's a potential solution.

NightmareHero · Post by **NightmareHero** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 3:02 pm

ANTIcarrot. wrote:Um, there isn't any delicate way to say this... But if you actually look at a female canine her dangly bits are not completely hidden by fur, and in fact petrude beyond it. The vagina sticks out in whole or (more often) in part. It has to, or she'd make a mess of her fur every time she urinated. Though this is possibly going into a bit too much detail.

This is kinda why I favour a lupine bases for external features; it provides an unquestionable roadmap and make all these questions go away. ^.^

Personal opinions aside, I will remind our learned moderator that nothing good has ever come from design by comeette. Let your artist come up with a design that looks good in the same way wolves look good, and leave it at that.

ANTIcarrot.
PS: But please, show it all or hide it all, don't go half and half.

I disagree, Werewolves are more muscularly built than canines, at least, this is the general conception of most movies. If the female is built muscularly, her breasts would be firm and close to her chest, sort of how female bodybuilders in real life who work out their chests. That is not to say that the designers cannot take some artistic liscense with the characters. And I believe that the movie is made for US and the general public, if our tastes are sensible, then those tastes could reflect those of the general public as well. Maybe the real reason they made this board is because the creators of this movie feel that werewolves as characters have never been done justice, have always been portrayed as monsters. People of the transformation community or who do werewolf art, at least some, maybe most, have come to their own conclusions which does not always necessarily paint the werewolves as monsters, but rather sometimes as beatuifull mythical creatures, as is the case in Goldenwolfen's artwork.

The creators of this movie must have recognized this, maybe by accident or inquirey, and want to see if a more realistic interpretation that does not always dipict the wolves as cannibals can be made. That is why I believe this message board was created for.

Oh and don't always stick to what has been established and defined, or what already exists in real life. Rules and more importantly, CONCEPTIONS are made to be broken.

The very best I could hope for, DARE I say this, is that the werewolves would not only look sexually appealing to their opposite sex parteners, but artistically beautiful to the audience as well.

Well let me reitterate, I prefer if this movie broke new ground, with an R rating, and showed more femanine werewolves than have ever been seen in movies. Thus I feel that Breasts would make them more realistic and appealing. Yes I also DO NOT want to see them dangling, but rather firm. A balance must be struck where everyone gets something that they like.

WolvenOne · Post by **WolvenOne** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 3:33 pm

I disagree, Werewolves are more muscularly built than canines, at least, this is the general conception of most movies.

Quick little blurb here. A female werewolf should be musculer, but not to the point of looking like she's been taking steroids. I've seen some female body builders that're so built that it's difficult to tell thier gender at a glance.

Moderation in all things is probably a good rule of thumb for werewolf design.

NightmareHero · Post by **NightmareHero** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 3:42 pm

WolvenOne wrote:
I disagree, Werewolves are more muscularly built than canines, at least, this is the general conception of most movies.
Quick little blurb here. A female werewolf should be musculer, but not to the point of looking like she's been taking steroids. I've seen some female body builders that're so built that it's difficult to tell thier gender at a glance.

Moderation in all things is probably a good rule of thumb for werewolf design.

Yes that is true, there has to be a balance which both dipicts power as well as feminity. I would love to see a well defined back on a female though while she was transforming, or when pulling her hair up to show her back side to a male, maybe as a tease.

There are a few artist that pull of a good balance between muscularity and feminity. One of these I know of is the comic book artist known as Chris Morea. He also does female and male werewolf art. If anyone would like me to post some pictures here, I will do so but they feature NUDITY.

NightmareHero · Post by **NightmareHero** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 8:07 pm

Lasthowl wrote:I have no objection to breasts as long as they're reasonable/practical. Werewolves tend to be fairly lean, so we're not likely to see large ones. If a werewolf is plumper in human form, perhaps, but there's a certain redistribution to take into account. They'd be perhaps a little more prominent/perky, but I'm not seeing them being very dangly.

I'm absolutely in love with long manes on female werewolves. Just a quirk of mine.

I agree, I also think long manes are appealing, and if possible, have them maintain their human hair

NightmareHero · Post by **NightmareHero** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 8:43 pm

Ok I just had another thought, if this movie's intention is to get an R rating, then the nether regions should be showen textured NOT covered with fur. And I think there should be no sign of "pink", save of course if there is an intention to implement a love scene. I for one wouldn't want to see anything grotesque, or that was oversized, But I would want to see it apparent, though with a fine texture of fur of course

Also I think we've been talking enough about the females, but not about the males in general. Would they have the same lower features as normal canines do? If their thingies are pointing up, instead of dangling down, then they should be inside the skin and covered by a sack. Also unlike cannines that are always on all fours, and to be more human, their nether regions should be as close to between their legs as possible. There is one problem with this, an that is that of doing "number 1" when relieveing themselves. this could be solved by allowing some flexibility in their tendons when not aroused.

WolvenOne · Post by **WolvenOne** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 9:17 pm

If, werewolves are by default standing creatures that can shift stance to accomadate 4 legged movment.....

Then it'd make sense to me that they'd, er, dangle. If they're built too similerly to canines, then they'd end up pointing in a direction counter-inuitive to, er, relieving themselves.

Though honestly, I don't want to watch a Werewolf movie just to examine thier plumbing.

NightmareHero · Post by **NightmareHero** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 10:14 pm

WolvenOne wrote:
Though honestly, I don't want to watch a Werewolf movie just to examine thier plumbing.

Or lack thereof.....

Winter · Post by **Winter** » Sat Dec 04, 2004 12:27 am

http://vcl.ctrl-c.liu.se/vcl/Artists/Den/

NightmareHero · Post by **NightmareHero** » Sat Dec 04, 2004 4:43 am

http://www.goldenwolfen.com/archive/200 ... re=wen.jpg
http://www.goldenwolfen.com/archive/200 ... NoMore.jpg

And here's a very good example of how I would prefer the breasts on the female to be/look like:
http://www.goldenwolfen.com/archive/200 ... enhowl.jpg

Here's another example of femanine form:
http://www.goldenwolfen.com/archive/200 ... iesack.jpg

More good examples:
http://www.goldenwolfen.com/archive/200 ... otarun.jpg
http://www.goldenwolfen.com/archive/200 ... votion.jpg

Winter · Post by **Winter** » Sun Dec 05, 2004 1:13 pm

I think the female and male wolfs shouldt show off when unclothed...visably male sheath and what is just underneath them..proubly much larger then when human form...his body well built...even more built if he was perhaps the alpha to a pack of weres...the stronges....larges, most hung of all of them...but he has alot of experince perhaps? Visable battle scares on his body to show off that he has been tested many times... i think the alpha male would have a large mane around his neck...visable muscle tone...well dfined chest, stomach, arms and legs...rump as well... no fear in his eyes... but nothing like some slobbery dominant beast... kinda like the wolf you have posted on the top of the board...wouldnt mind seeing him with more fur exposed as well as the female... they seem to be close to what people are desc here.

NightmareHero · Post by **NightmareHero** » Sun Dec 05, 2004 1:43 pm

Winter wrote:kinda like the wolf you have posted on the top of the board...wouldnt mind seeing him with more fur exposed as well as the female... they seem to be close to what people are desc here.

Actually I would prefer if the female is built like the ones in Goldenwolfen's art, not as normal human woman, that way she would seem powerful, and looks as if she could rip out of cloths when transformed, unlike the pic above the forum gives me the impression of. Obviousely the male would be more built than the female to show that he is the domanent one physically, though mentally that is another story....

Goldenwolf · Post by **Goldenwolf** » Sun Dec 05, 2004 2:36 pm

Ahem.

OMG Bewbs!! (just so you know, this is a joke pose I did for a graphical chat)

I've always sort of gone back and forth on the issue of female breasts on an anthro wolf or werewolf. The definetly scream female, and are creepy in a sort of cool way. I guess for werewolves, being half human, they would definetly have them, and because they are half wolf there would be multiple sets. I guess it depends pretty much on the person. Me, I think they're funny, and therefore fun

Figarou · Post by **Figarou** » Sun Dec 05, 2004 2:52 pm

Goldenwolf wrote:Ahem.

OMG Bewbs!! (just so you know, this is a joke pose I did for a graphical chat)

I've always sort of gone back and forth on the issue of female breasts on an anthro wolf or werewolf. The definetly scream female, and are creepy in a sort of cool way. I guess for werewolves, being half human, they would definetly have them, and because they are half wolf there would be multiple sets. I guess it depends pretty much on the person. Me, I think they're funny, and therefore fun

Whoa!!!

*places thumb on screen monitor*

Nice. I like. Its a stop and stare situation. More to hold/squeeze.

Er...um...Ooookaaaay...I'm getting carried away here.

Argyros · Post by **Argyros** » Sun Dec 05, 2004 4:40 pm

I have deranged visions of a werewolf wearing multiple bras :shock:
Doesn't it really depend on how many pups/kids/larvae/whatever they have at a time? Because if they have litters like wolves, the mother's going to have to have six in both forms... or not... I don't know, really, maybe she just wouldn't shapeshift when pregnant or nursing. Dude, I am on a wierd train of thought now...[/i]

Apokryltaros · Post by **Apokryltaros** » Sun Dec 05, 2004 4:44 pm

Goldenwolf wrote:Ahem.

OMG Bewbs!! (just so you know, this is a joke pose I did for a graphical chat)

I've always sort of gone back and forth on the issue of female breasts on an anthro wolf or werewolf. The definetly scream female, and are creepy in a sort of cool way. I guess for werewolves, being half human, they would definetly have them, and because they are half wolf there would be multiple sets. I guess it depends pretty much on the person. Me, I think they're funny, and therefore fun

On the one hand...
Part of me wants to shriek and go "Eeep!"
On the other hand,
Part of me wants to scream out "Jump up and down! Jump up and down!"

THE PACK Message Boards

Ahhh, the sorted issue of gender.

Ca dapend...