Definitely not. My mate and boyfriend are furry, and we all share that, but we're really not out to others.

The reason for us has less to do with furriness itself and more to do with other furries. A lot of the furries we know IRL are immature, unable to hold down a job, unable to function in the real world, and not well socialized. Part of that could be age because we live in a college town, but honestly, non-furries we know at the same age function just fine.

I dunno. I can't explain it even to my own satisfaction, but I don't want to come out and be associated with some of the other furries in my own local community. :/


Family and friends know.

I was aware of a furry club at college. I chose to avoid it, but I wasn't exactly shy about who I was on campus. [1] [2]

So I do wonder if I ever talked to anyone from that club.


Munkelzahn said:
Do you happen to live south of the Great Trump Wall?
Where men are still macho and women would never have sex with donkeys

Yep, though there's no Famous Great Trump Wall yet, men are fat macho and/or narcos or wannabe narcos and women and donkeys aren't on the same place :D

tbh I've never seen a donkey around here. Horses yeah, donks rarely...

like, if someone lives in Somerton we could pretty much be neighbors. I'm that close to the border

Thinking a bit more, out of the 100% of the population over here, I'd say that 5-15% know what's a furry


I don't see any reason to keep it secret. If anyone asks about my hobbies and they see my art, they'll figure it out. I also used to wear furry costume parts for special occasions and a suit for Halloween. If anyone had anything negative to say about it, they've never told me to my face.


Yes. 12 years ago Word got around the school and someone decided to accuse me of making passes at literally everyone and their dog. Yes literally. Lost a lot of childhood friends who called me a freak. The conversation went:

"You a furry?"
"What's a furry?"
"People who like animals that are like humans."
"Oh, then yes."
"He has a gun!"
"What ar-"

And then I blacked out,


I'm a pervert, but I wouldn't consider myself a specific anything beyond that.

I'm very choosy, though if you look at the number of favorites I have you may think otherwise.

When it comes to this site, however, I browse it primarily because there's such a vast array of artistic talent that goes through it and it's all amazingly easy to find.

I don't know, some people like Van Gogh, and go to places like the Louvre for their art, me, I enjoy looking at random erotic pieces from all manner of artists.

I really wish there was a non-furry e6. This is easily the best-sorted booru on the internet. You can find pretty much anything you might want to find simply and easily.

Yet, I digress. For me it's a minor fetish, not something I immerse myself in. For other people, however, it is part of their life. They go to cons, they buy animtronic tails and ears, and they live a whole culture surrounding this because it feels natural to them and they feel included and happy in it. If this is a part of your life then, yeah, it's probably a good idea to let those that care about you know this about you. It's better if you explain it than let them discovering it and getting the wrong idea, after all mainstream media has done nothing to make furries look good in any light.

Yet, that's just my two cents.


For the love of god, no! Nothing wrong with it but... I'm not just furry, I'm a lot of things, furry, otherkin, dragonkin, pagan, general hellspawn. Nothing illegal, I just don't think anyone else needs to know.


No. To be frank, I'm not even sure if I'm a furry. I don't even have a fursona or an OC.


IndigoHeat said:
No. To be frank, I'm not even sure if I'm a furry. I don't even have a fursona or an OC.

Not necessary. People joke that there are "The 9 circles of Furry". Just liking the style would be at the top.


IndigoHeat said:
No. To be frank, I'm not even sure if I'm a furry. I don't even have a fursona or an OC.

I didn't have a character until late 2014 or early 2015. I accidentally joined the IRC, got harassed by Ratte, somebody asked what my sona was -

2-3 years later, I think this might be terminal.


Knotty_Curls said:
I didn't have a character until late 2014 or early 2015. I accidentally joined the IRC, got harassed by Ratte, somebody asked what my sona was -

2-3 years later, I think this might be terminal.

That's how it starts. Then before you know it you're waking up in the middle of the zoo wearing nothing but a foam cat head.


I'm not a furry, since I don't have a fursona or anything. I just like the porn/NSFW stuff, that's it.


iihg said:
I'm not a furry, since I don't have a fursona or anything. I just like the porn/NSFW stuff, that's it.

Oh, have I got news for you.


iihg said:
I'm not a furry, since I don't have a fursona or anything. I just like the porn/NSFW stuff, that's it.

This might be the main reason why I don't like grouping people as "furries", similar to "gamer".

There's simply so wide range of differend kinf of people who fall under it. There are many who only like anthromorphic animal designs more than human ones, but never create fursonas or do cons.


^ Same for most labels applied to people, AFAICS. It's necessary to use them sometimes, but they tend to be misleading more than they are informative.

I prefer to be explicit whenever possible -- eg 'people who like anthro artwork'. And insist that what I said is what I meant, at least closer to what I meant than the label could possibly be (ie. if you want to boil it down to 'furry' in your own mind, then that's your business, but if you then go on to respond as if 'furry' is obviously the same thing as 'people who like anthro artwork', then we'll have a disagreement. The content of labels is rarely obvious.).

Umbrella terms in my observation also serve as a kind of hedging mechanism -- because they are overly general, if someone objects to the term, then you can respond (passive-aggressively, AFAICS) with 'well I didn't mean THAT, I meant <this particular subset of X, usually with a no-true-scotsman tacked on>'.


Oh wow, people still commenting on this thread.

iihg said:
I'm not a furry, since I don't have a fursona or anything. I just like the porn/NSFW stuff, that's it.

Yeah, I think that still counts as being furry for most people.

savageorange said:
^ Same for most labels applied to people, AFAICS. It's necessary to use them sometimes, but they tend to be misleading more than they are informative.

I prefer to be explicit whenever possible -- eg 'people who like anthro artwork'. And insist that what I said is what I meant, at least closer to what I meant than the label could possibly be (ie. if you want to boil it down to 'furry' in your own mind, then that's your business, but if you then go on to respond as if 'furry' is obviously the same thing as 'people who like anthro artwork', then we'll have a disagreement. The content of labels is rarely obvious.).

Umbrella terms in my observation also serve as a kind of hedging mechanism -- because they are overly general, if someone objects to the term, then you can respond (passive-aggressively, AFAICS) with 'well I didn't mean THAT, I meant <this particular subset of X, usually with a no-true-scotsman tacked on>'.

All the more reason why it sucks that furries have to be grouped as people who like animals having sex to the media.

CCoyote said:
Definitely not. My mate and boyfriend are furry, and we all share that, but we're really not out to others.

The reason for us has less to do with furriness itself and more to do with other furries. A lot of the furries we know IRL are immature, unable to hold down a job, unable to function in the real world, and not well socialized. Part of that could be age because we live in a college town, but honestly, non-furries we know at the same age function just fine.

I dunno. I can't explain it even to my own satisfaction, but I don't want to come out and be associated with some of the other furries in my own local community. :/

I like to think that I'm decent when it comes to social interactions.

Knotty_Curls said:
I didn't have a character until late 2014 or early 2015. I accidentally joined the IRC, got harassed by Ratte, somebody asked what my sona was -

2-3 years later, I think this might be terminal.

Once you go furry, you never go back.


m8 I've been around for a hell of a lot longer than that, like 2008 or so, but ye


UnseenPanther said:
All the more reason why it sucks that furries have to be grouped as people who like animals having sex to the media.

Eh, It's not just that. It's "so.. you want to be an animal?" or.. things about liking kid's cartoons too much ... or "What's wrong with being human?" or something like that.. it's not just sexy animals... i'ts just..

I think there are like, 2 extremes and some shades of gray in the middle: on one end you have people who get really passionate about... whatever their thing is: Maybe it's Harry Potter fanfiction, maybe it's Steven Universe or my little pony, or Dark Souls and Legend of Zelda, or Pokemon or Glee or K=pop bands, Star trek or fanfiction, fan art, cosplay .... whatever. Whatever it is, they get really into it. It's part of how they enjoy a thing.

and on the other hand you have people who... don't. They're the ones who say that their favorite TV show is X, but don't know the title of the best episode, and when you start telling them about it "oh, I might have missed that one." That's okay. They have other things they're passionate about, I'm sure.

But between those two extremes, you've got several shades of gray. Most of us? are over htere on the fannish side. Maybe we're not specifically zootopia fans, or whatever, but we're "into" something in a way that the other side just can't wrap their mind around. They're just not INTO things like we are.

So... it can be hard to understand "fandom" from the outside.


SnowWolf said:
Eh, It's not just that. It's "so.. you want to be an animal?" or.. things about liking kid's cartoons too much ... or "What's wrong with being human?" or something like that.. it's not just sexy animals... i'ts just..

I think there are like, 2 extremes and some shades of gray in the middle: on one end you have people who get really passionate about... whatever their thing is: Maybe it's Harry Potter fanfiction, maybe it's Steven Universe or my little pony, or Dark Souls and Legend of Zelda, or Pokemon or Glee or K=pop bands, Star trek or fanfiction, fan art, cosplay .... whatever. Whatever it is, they get really into it. It's part of how they enjoy a thing.

and on the other hand you have people who... don't. They're the ones who say that their favorite TV show is X, but don't know the title of the best episode, and when you start telling them about it "oh, I might have missed that one." That's okay. They have other things they're passionate about, I'm sure.

But between those two extremes, you've got several shades of gray. Most of us? are over htere on the fannish side. Maybe we're not specifically zootopia fans, or whatever, but we're "into" something in a way that the other side just can't wrap their mind around. They're just not INTO things like we are.

So... it can be hard to understand "fandom" from the outside.

That makes sense, I remember trying to tell a guy about the furry fandom, but just settled for a simple definition because everything was apparently going over his head, even though it made perfect sense to me.


UnseenPanther said:
I like to think that I'm decent when it comes to social interactions.

I don't know you, so I'm obviously not commenting on you individually.

That said, look at the comments on nearly any drawing or painting on this site, and you'll see examples of the poor social skills I spoke of. Look at the debates over social issues. Look at the furries defending Nazism. And this holds true for nearly every online furry environment from here to FA to Tapestries and beyond.

I realized quickly that nearly every online community, furry or otherwise, has individuals who behave this way. And maybe there's a quieter majority of decent people that we just don't get to observe. So I looked for that.

I connected with my local furry community to see what it's like to be furry offline, thinking perhaps it would be different. What I found were two people besides my mate and I who had made successful lives for themselves. Dozens of others couldn't hold stable jobs; they made racist jokes and refused to acknowledge it was a problem; they were misogynistic toward women; and they spent tons of money they didn't have on furry art, suits, and conventions, then turned around and complained about never having any money. In other words, they acted offline the same way they act online.

Online or offline, it can be very unsettling to me. People go to conventions and bowling nights and parks and public spaces dressed up in fursuits. I think it's amazing that they're being themselves and celebrating their fantasies, but I also notice the un-suited furries around them who are being outed by their peers' suits while the suiters are the ones who get to remain anonymous.

I'm committed to not broadbrushing the furry community. But at the same time, every attempt I've made at looking for wide swaths of considerate, thoughtful, well-adjusted people has met with failure. I'm grateful for the good individuals I have encountered along the way. I just wish I'd found more of them. The fact that I haven't makes me uncomfortable naming myself openly as a member of the community, so I don't. I like furry stuff, but I don't think of myself as a part of the group.


CCoyote said:
Stuff

All valid reasons unfortunately. Sucks, wish you could have met more responsible independent furries who don't act like children. I know I've met some like that online. Try going to a convention sometime, people tend to be way more tame there (Though I can't speak for what happens behind closed doors).


Me being a furry is on a need-to-know basis. I don't hide it - my Discord icon and phone background are my fursona - but I don't talk about it or tell anyone unless they ask.


Maxpizzle said:
Oh, have I got news for you.

Mairo said:
This might be the main reason why I don't like grouping people as "furries", similar to "gamer".

There's simply so wide range of differend kinf of people who fall under it. There are many who only like anthromorphic animal designs more than human ones, but never create fursonas or do cons.

UnseenPanther said:
Yeah, I think that still counts as being furry for most people.

Fair enough. I perceive that to be a furry, you have to consider yourself one (which I do not, at least for myself). I think that the whole "Like anthro art? BAM you're a furry whether you like it or not." mentality inaccurate, because with that logic, every man, woman, and child who likes that type of art is a furry.

That's just the way I see it, and I could be totally wrong. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


Xch3l said:
Thinking a bit more, out of the 100% of the population over here, I'd say that 5-15% know what's a furry

That % seems really high to me. Maybe if there was a terrorism-related fatality at a convention, public awareness of "furry" would hit 10-20%.

Maybe I'm wrong, but it's not like the Pew Research Center is going to do a poll on it. I think we are making up numbers here.


iihg said:
Fair enough. I perceive that to be a furry, you have to consider yourself one (which I do not, at least for myself). I think that the whole "Like anthro art? BAM you're a furry whether you like it or not." mentality inaccurate, because with that logic, every man, woman, and child who likes that type of art is a furry.

That's just the way I see it, and I could be totally wrong. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Hm, can't help but remember the argument of a person who plays basketball but not think of themselves a basketball player. If your sufficiently into something, then people will call you out for it. A person who plays one basketball game with friends may not be a basketball player just like a person who likes Zootopia may not be a furry, but you have created an E6 account, liked furry porn, and even chat with furries on forums, so I just can't see you not being a furry.

Lance_Armstrong said:
That % seems really high to me. Maybe if there was a terrorism-related fatality at a convention, public awareness of "furry" would hit 10-20%.

Maybe I'm wrong, but it's not like the Pew Research Center is going to do a poll on it. I think we are making up numbers here.

With all the furry conventions and events that exist, is it too unreasonable to think that 10% of people are at least AWARE of furries, even though they may not know what it's called.


I tell people when they ask.

Otherwise it's whatever.

Besides one of my brothers, who is a dick, no one has ever given me shit.


UnseenPanther said:
Hm, can't help but remember the argument of a person who plays basketball but not think of themselves a basketball player. If your sufficiently into something, then people will call you out for it. A person who plays one basketball game with friends may not be a basketball player just like a person who likes Zootopia may not be a furry, but you have created an E6 account, liked furry porn, and even chat with furries on forums, so I just can't see you not being a furry.

For one thing, the definition of 'basketball player' is far more settled than 'furry'. If you ask $random_member_of_public to define $term, and they can't, then $term is being used for the purposes of the community in question, not for the general public.

ie. If the general public fails to define 'furry' coherently, then it may be wrong (misinforming) to use the label when speaking to a member of the general public. While, within the context of the furry community, it may still be perfectly sensible to refer to that person as furry -- since the furry community are likely to have a more solid definition.

There's actually three distinct identifications here:

  • How I identify myself.
  • How the community identifies me.
  • How the public identifies me.

Taking my particular case:

  • It'll be a cold day in hell before I personally identify myself with any group. I think that's a Bad Move (even though I appreciate people get various things, like a sense of belonging, out of it). Not a programmer, not a furry, not an artist. No.
  • I don't mind if the community identifies me as furry *within the community*. It's mildly annoying but I can easily see it's predictive (eg. a 'furry' probably can appreciate and perhaps critique furry art, may know various community injokes and be aware of prominent community members)
  • I don't want the community to refer to me as furry *to the general public*, and I don't want the general public to refer to me as furry, because the general public haven't got a clue AFAICS.

So that's basically my way of pointing out that the definition of 'be a furry' is relative to who you are speaking to, and it's not helpful to use a label that the recipient is likely to misunderstand.


savageorange said:
For one thing, the definition of 'basketball player' is far more settled than 'furry'. If you ask $random_member_of_public to define $term, and they can't, then $term is being used for the purposes of the community in question, not for the general public.

ie. If the general public fails to define 'furry' coherently, then it may be wrong (misinforming) to use the label when speaking to a member of the general public. While, within the context of the furry community, it may still be perfectly sensible to refer to that person as furry -- since the furry community are likely to have a more solid definition.

There's actually three distinct identifications here:

  • How I identify myself.
  • How the community identifies me.
  • How the public identifies me.

Taking my particular case:

  • It'll be a cold day in hell before I personally identify myself with any group. I think that's a Bad Move (even though I appreciate people get various things, like a sense of belonging, out of it). Not a programmer, not a furry, not an artist. No.
  • I don't mind if the community identifies me as furry *within the community*. It's mildly annoying but I can easily see it's predictive (eg. a 'furry' probably can appreciate and perhaps critique furry art, may know various community injokes and be aware of prominent community members)
  • I don't want the community to refer to me as furry *to the general public*, and I don't want the general public to refer to me as furry, because the general public haven't got a clue AFAICS.

So that's basically my way of pointing out that the definition of 'be a furry' is relative to who you are speaking to, and it's not helpful to use a label that the recipient is likely to misunderstand.

I like the way you think. You've done a good job analyzing the issue.


savageorange said:
For one thing, the definition of 'basketball player' is far more settled than 'furry'. If you ask $random_member_of_public to define $term, and they can't, then $term is being used for the purposes of the community in question, not for the general public.

ie. If the general public fails to define 'furry' coherently, then it may be wrong (misinforming) to use the label when speaking to a member of the general public. While, within the context of the furry community, it may still be perfectly sensible to refer to that person as furry -- since the furry community are likely to have a more solid definition.

There's actually three distinct identifications here:

  • How I identify myself.
  • How the community identifies me.
  • How the public identifies me.

Taking my particular case:

  • It'll be a cold day in hell before I personally identify myself with any group. I think that's a Bad Move (even though I appreciate people get various things, like a sense of belonging, out of it). Not a programmer, not a furry, not an artist. No.
  • I don't mind if the community identifies me as furry *within the community*. It's mildly annoying but I can easily see it's predictive (eg. a 'furry' probably can appreciate and perhaps critique furry art, may know various community injokes and be aware of prominent community members)
  • I don't want the community to refer to me as furry *to the general public*, and I don't want the general public to refer to me as furry, because the general public haven't got a clue AFAICS.

So that's basically my way of pointing out that the definition of 'be a furry' is relative to who you are speaking to, and it's not helpful to use a label that the recipient is likely to misunderstand.

That's fair. I've known about this issue before too, but it never bothered me. I just think of furries as people who like anthro animals, but it's true that blanket terms such as "furry" is still being argued as to their coverage as well as being misunderstood by many still.


Part of me wants to let people know, but on the other hand, some people may not be as accepting to it as I know of people who believe everything the internet says about them, so...