THE PACK Message Boards

Berserker wrote:Maybe somebody somewhere has already answered this. But how come there are so many foxes, wolves, bears, tigers, dragons, *insert other favorite animal here* within the therian community? Where are the giraffes, aardvarks, hippogryfs, and other more obscure animals? That's another thing which raises a red flag for me.

I'm going to surmise that most therians, like furries, choose either animals that they admire, or that they identify with. In the case of the former, we tend to admire animals with qualities we wish we had, and in the case of the latter, we tend to focus more on the aspects of ourselves which we are most proud of. Either way, the identity of the therian is bigger and better than that of the person who conceived of it.

I can't speak for the therians, but I've noticed among furries that what few obscure animal fursonas are present were chosen just because they were so obscure. In the furry community, you can get away with stuff like that because it is a very creativity-driven community where you can choose a fursona for whatever reason you want, if any reason at all -- we might question your reasoning, but it's still your character to do whatever the hell you want with, and besides, fursona species are never final anyway.

Therians, on the other hand, I think tend to be more serious, so choosing an animal just for the sake of being different might betray the fact that they're using therianthropy as a means of social exclusion. It's true that a lot of people identify themselves as therians for just that reason, but none of them will ever admit it.

Terastas wrote: I'm going to surmise that most therians, like furries, choose either animals that they admire, or that they identify with. In the case of the former, we tend to admire animals with qualities we wish we had, and in the case of the latter, we tend to focus more on the aspects of ourselves which we are most proud of.

Most of the therians I've talked to claim to have no choice in the matter. They were born with a specific animal spirit which they claim to uncover through things like dreams or "feelings." Thus my extreme skepticism whenever I read "I found out I'm a wolf!" so many times on the internet. I never ever see "I found out I'm a mule deer!" Regardless of the plethora of unique personality traits that might be acquired from other animals, the most popular ones are still prominent.

If what you say is true and therians choose which animal represents themselves, (which I think most of them do anyway, regardless of whether or not they can admit it,) then there's really no way to adequately separate therianthropy from furry fandom.

Therians, on the other hand, I think tend to be more serious, so choosing an animal just for the sake of being different might betray the fact that they're using therianthropy as a means of social exclusion. It's true that a lot of people identify themselves as therians for just that reason, but none of them will ever admit it.

Exactly. It seems to me that therians wind up being popular animals like wolves and foxes so they can be part of the "in" crowd. Since so many of them are wolves, to say "I'm a wolf" is socially legit. This further points to the idea that therianthropy has become primarily a social (rather than spiritual) phenomenon.

MattSullivan wrote:I think what my initial gripe and any subsequent agreements boil down to this. There are people who enjoy certain topics, in this case werewolves, who see other people with the same interest taking it to what they may feel is an unhealthy or embarrassing lengths.

Some fans may hear this and think "Well what makes you so friggin high and mighty? What gives you the right to criticize the behavior of others?"The answer is nothing. Nothing. We're really no better than anyone else. But I can give you an example from my own point of view.

It's the most extreme behavior that gets all the attention.

People see videos like this and assume ANYONE who likes werewolves is like that. I have always liked critters. That includes animals, toons, anthropomorphic animals, dragons, fantasy creatures...you get the point. I USED to just sit and draw this stuff willy-nilly in my teen years. Then I went to college ( animation school ) and some upper classmen quip "So, you like furry art eh?"

I blinked. Furry WHA? This was 1991. The internet barely existed. NOBODY KNEW WHAT A FURRY WAS. I sure didn't.

I'm taken to a cubicle and told stories. Horrible stories about big fat hairy men who dress up in costumes and do...deviant acts inside hotel elevators. The way they described it, these were walking, talking poster boys for what you really don't want to be associated with. As if that wasn't enough, there were a few notorious furries who liked to stalk the halls of CalArts ( my school ) and if they saw ANY animal drawings tacked up, they would find their way to the artist who drew it and "introduce themselves" as a means to "recruit"

Turns out I was one of those artists they approached.

They told me they liked my art. I beamed with pride. A compliment! How glorious! They offered to show me their own work. I said "sure". After all, what could it hurt?

Hard...core...Disney and Bluth pornography.

I was shocked. So shocked and appalled that all I was able to muster was "You guys sure can draw". These guys were also in their fifties! I was nineteen and something about the whole situation felt really gross. After they left I ran downstairs, removed my art from the display walls, and cowered in my cubicle. I was thoroughly embarrassed, thinking "all this time people have seen me as one of these furries." It damn near wrecked all the self confidence I'd built up and left me unable to draw the things I once enjoyed. I almost didn't write my werewolf movie script for the same reason.

Now I know not everyone is as sensitive as I was but the point is behavior leaves an impression. I barely draw anything critter or monster related anymore. And even if I do I hide it, lest someone think "furry!" Nowadays, if you say werewolf you're almost CERTAIN to have someone say "oh, furry stuff", having loped werewolf fans in the with more extreme members of furry fandom. THAT is where the criticism of certain behavior comes from. Not hatred or a feeling of superiority, but from a fear that we'll all be judged as one.

My two cents.

That story reminds me of this picture:


Therians and furry's please don't be offended, this is the internet. You have to admit its pretty darn funny.

I’ll agree that the whole therian things has gotten me confused as well. I mean, look at cultures that have a tradition of spiritually associating themselves with animals (Native American, etc). While predatory animals like wolves are common for an individual or a section within a tribe to associate themselves with, so are other species. Ravens, fish, etc. I would expect that if this was legit there would be more variety and less focus on the “cool” animals. I don’t even know how they usually explain it. Born with the soul of an animal or something? It should be really random if it works like that.

Leonca~ wrote:I’ll agree that the whole therian things has gotten me confused as well. I mean, look at cultures that have a tradition of spiritually associating themselves with animals (Native American, etc). While predatory animals like wolves are common for an individual or a section within a tribe to associate themselves with, so are other species. Ravens, fish, etc. I would expect that if this was legit there would be more variety and less focus on the “cool” animals. I don’t even know how they usually explain it. Born with the soul of an animal or something? It should be really random if it works like that.

It would be easy to just simply say "I admire," "I look up to" or "I like to think of myself as a" whatever. The problem with that is, as Morkulv just demonstrated, a lot of furries will describe how they feel about the fandom that way too.

Something I've noticed plenty of times before but was previously hesitant to bring up, in all seriousness, is that a lot of therians describe therianthropy as being just like the furry fandom, only without any toony / yiffy freaks.

Or more accurately, it's like furry, only more exclusive.

I think that's where the whole "born with a soul" thing comes in -- from people trying to separate themselves from the fandom by trying to make it sound like so much more than just a personal inclination. There are some people that may have started off feeling spiritual to that level, but I think most therians that take it to that extreme do so to try and overcompensate for their furriness.

In other words, the same people that give therians a bad name are the people that used to give furries a bad name.

Hmm...I found something interesting on WikiFur. (Link)

Wikifur wrote:Therians differ from the furry lifestyle in that they do not feel a need to costume themselves or pretend to be their animal--they feel they already are their animal, inside, and must cope with this rather than promoting it to the world. Furry lifestylers wish to become and behave like their animal, while therians believe they already are their animal. This is not to say someone cannot be both! There are a number of therians in the furry community (and of course, vice versa). Being therian is not a lifestyle choice, but being furry is--a therian can make that choice as well.

Therians also do not, in any way, choose their animal side. Most believe they are born with it. It may take a lot of introspection and soul-searching for some therians to come to terms with their animal nature. The therian nature is not based on stereotypes (such as a wolf howling at the moon, or a lion's courage), but instead reflects the living animal's behavior more closely.

Therian nature is distinct from aspects of shamanism or working with totem spirits. Therians do not acquire their animal traits from outside of themselves, via invocation of a spirit.

Gevaudan wrote: Therians also do not, in any way, choose their animal side. Most believe they are born with it. It may take a lot of introspection and soul-searching for some therians to come to terms with their animal nature. The therian nature is not based on stereotypes (such as a wolf howling at the moon, or a lion's courage), but instead reflects the living animal's behavior more closely.

Yep, that's what me, Leonca, and Terastas have been saying. The "therian nature" seems to contradict the therian reality, which is that despite not "choosing" their animal side, therians seem to inexplicably be popular and favorite animals like wolves. I have never encountered a therian who was a hippopotamus or a beaver. PariahPoet is the most interesting one I've seen so far, a jaguarundi.

Furthermore, these same therians tend to be self-satisfying and self-fulfilling. "Oh I found out I was a wolf because I love the outdoors, I like to eat rare meat, and I'm so protective of my pack, especially my girlfriend! One day I found myself even growling at one guy who was looking at her!"

See how convenient that scenario is? I'm not sure how anyone could read that and not feel embarrassed at how contrived it is. It's like, "How To Be A Wolf Therian In Four Easy Steps."

Step 1) You have traits that are completely human, but you really like wolves, and you associate those traits with them.
Step 2) One day you read about therianthropy on the internet, and after going down your list of personality traits, you "discover" that you must be a wolf!
Step 3) Since you already have expectations about how wolves should act from pop culture, you start shoehorning those expectations into your day-to-day behavior.
Step 4) Finally, you can feel comfortable sharing your experiences with other therians who will understand you and give you attention.

You are now part of the therian community and therefore socially valid.

For every 1 internet therian who isn't like that, there are 100 who are.

It'd be more accurate to say that therians claim to have been born with it. Therians will change their species, but they won't say they decided to try another; they'll claim the former was a misunderstanding and that they have since had their eyes opened to the fact that they are actually the new one.

Terastas wrote:It'd be more accurate to say that therians claim to have been born with it. Therians will change their species, but they won't say they decided to try another; they'll claim the former was a misunderstanding and that they have since had their eyes opened to the fact that they are actually the new one.

Hah, this too!


I'd imagine that the therian community is starting to see the same kind of self-loathing and discontent that is now prevalent in the furry community, with some members denouncing it entirely even to the point of questioning their own beliefs. Even if I was dead-set in my idea that I did in fact have an animal soul, the ridiculousness of the scene as a whole would infuriate me.

Interestingly enough, the same thing can be said about any exclusive belief that becomes populist.

My post got lost. -_-

PariahPoet wrote:My post got lost. -_-

I think it did >.>

I feel like such an incredible geek/stickler but

the same thing can be said about any exclusive belief that becomes populist

I thought populist was 'a believer in the rights, wisdom, or virtues of the common people'. Does it have synonyms I'm unaware of now? . I can't be going around using it incorrectly.

Wselfwulf wrote:I feel like such an incredible geek/stickler but

the same thing can be said about any exclusive belief that becomes populist

I thought populist was 'a believer in the rights, wisdom, or virtues of the common people'. Does it have synonyms I'm unaware of now? . I can't be going around using it incorrectly.

Populism has come to mean "representing the view of the masses," which is basically the same thing you said.

When used to describe something that was once elite, niche, or esoteric that has now become the domain of a mass or population of common people, the connotation can be negative, given that the "view of the masses" is often decidedly dumbed-down, quantitative, or appealing to the lowest common denominator.

Berserker wrote:

Wselfwulf wrote:I feel like such an incredible geek/stickler but

the same thing can be said about any exclusive belief that becomes populist

I thought populist was 'a believer in the rights, wisdom, or virtues of the common people'. Does it have synonyms I'm unaware of now? . I can't be going around using it incorrectly.

Populism has come to mean "representing the view of the masses," which is basically the same thing you said.

When used to describe something that was once elite, niche, or esoteric that has now become the domain of a mass or population of common people, the connotation can be negative, given that the "view of the masses" is often decidedly dumbed-down, quantitative, or appealing to the lowest common denominator.

Beat me to it. Any belief system, exclusive or otherwise, doesn't become corroded by the core true believers, but by the people who try to associate themselves with it and dumb down the definition of said belief system for their own interests.

This isn't unique to therians; it can apply to anything with a spiritual slant, from the tenants of Christianity to the philosophical undertones in an episode of Star Trek.

The only difference between the above examples and therianthropy is that fanatical Christians tend to get shoved aside and disregarded as an inaccurate representative. Same goes for Trek -- even if you're seeing it for the first time, it's easy to tell that the predominant themes are discovery and diplomacy, so anyone that tries to tell you otherwise is going to get the cold shoulder as well.

Therians (like furries), on the other hand, are much more reclusive with their beliefs, so their lunatics are all front and center. They're not accurate representations either, but until somebody else is willing to come forward, that's all the media has to work with for now.

The majority of all people are not spiritual, but the majority also like to claim that they are. That's why anything spiritual in nature is easily diluted.

So, random musing time, does anyone mind... ?

One thing I've noticed about humans, as a species, is that our young imprint in much the same way that birds do, so factors of admiration or hate might be based on their environment and/or parental units.

For example, if a child has a close bond with their parents, they'll pick up on their parent's hatred of spiders and likely end up with arachnophobia too. There's always going to be something that a child will imprint upon, and that's going to stay with them their whole life, and it's going to seem like it was always that way.

I know it seems that way to me, but I understand that this is the most likely reason for it.

This could explain the popularity of, well, not so much "cool" animals, but "common" animals, the kinds of animals that people would regularly know about due to how much they're covered by the media. I would argue against the idea that Wolves could be conceived as a "cool" animal by most people simply because their tenets are simply a family-based lifestyle and looking out for all of the members of a pack. That's admirable to me, but hardly cool. I'd think a cool animal would be something big and powerful, like a Lion.

Sorry for the unexpected segue into a different topic there, to paraphrase the good Mr. Gillien, I had a bit of a thinky-think and I wanted to walky-talk. I'll get back on track, now.

The point I'm getting at is that in my youth, for various reasons, I found Wolves admirable and imprinted on them, and as time went on they became increasingly important to me and thus my desire grew to be more Wolf-like in and of myself, this eventually came to a head as I realised that in all my efforts, I'd ended up with a Wolf-like personality and outlook on things anyway. Mission-achieved, at least on the inside.

And that's how I believe it works, for some people. There are those who believe that they have an animal's spirit, I'm not sure whether that's strictly therian or not but I refuse to take thhat away from them, that's their belief. There are some who see the therian way as simple animalistic shamanism, whether intrinsically linked to a specific animal or not.

Either/or, this might go a ways to explaining the commonality of "common" animals to groups like furries and therians. Because as has already been pointed out, there are those who pick an obscure animal just to be cool, but whenever I've quizzed someone on those choices, they've been vague. I often find that the type who pick a common animal, aren't fire-demons (or w/e), and back away from Godlike role-playing that have the most reason for the animals they chose.

The common grey Wolf furry is always going to have much more reason for it than the spectral, prismatic, tri-horned, butterfly-winged, sparkly collared peccary that rides on rainbows*.

And it's funny how that works, really.

* In my time on MUCKs, I've seen it all, including this... I think.