>> |
Anonymous File :-(, x)
>>411970 So far as I can tell nobody cares if a creature is anthropomorphic, by which I mean it's our classic monster girls (and a few monster guys) so long as the face is left unchanged (IE: NO SNOUTS). The difference being that a naga/lamia/spider-girl/etc is a human who has been modified to be animal like, but a furry is an animal who has been modified to be human like. (Modification as in the sense of how the creature was derived in the creators mind.) It seems to me that the backlash against furries is two fold: firstly a few of them whine like you wouldn't believe AND JUST WON'T SHUT UP, and secondly I get the sense that since many furries wish to be other creatures instead of human this is seen as some sort of betrayal of the human race. I dunno, I'm no mod, nor expert on furries.
>>411997 Well, vore is itself a rather large and strange topic. Seehttp://orz.4chan.org/d/res/411343.htmlfor more info. But as a voraphile who does like nagas (although not quite as much as I like catgirls, and not nearly as much as I like human females) I think that nagas a liked by vores because it allows certain types of positions and situations that are not really "realistic" (lol at using that word in regards to a fantasy fetish) with creatures that had their bellies in their human torso.
|