#misnomers

Furries are just fans of cartoon animals, but I noticed that a lot of art is called ‘furry’ despite not qualifying of that label. Instead, the art may be of:

realistic animals

monsters

aliens

mythical creatures

characters based on animals but are not animals proper

non-animals being subject to cartoon tropes (inflation, flattening…)

One example is @pallanophblargh, who complained that people reblogged her art with the ‘furry’ tag. In reality, her art is of her world and the fantasy creatures inside. While the fantasy creatures (being based on animals) would appeal to furries, they do not form furry art because they are not cartoon animals, but realistic fantasy. My impression is that she is a world builder and a character designer. (I think this also stemmed from people thinking that her Pallanophs are wolves… which was lost on me, given that Pallanophs look too different from wolves to me. After all, you would not mistake a squid with an octopus, wrong?)

Another example is @furioustheowlboy, who made an thropomorphic version of Gesh, a cryptid character. From what you can see from the comment, Furious commented that anyone would see the picture and call Furious a furry. Once again, though, I thought differently. Maybe that is due to:

Gesh already being a shapeshifter

Gesh having an ‘owl’ form that has such a supernatural apperance

Gesh’s owl forme reminding me of Mothman instead

…but I never got the impression that Furious was a furry, but, rather, a liker of cryptid creatures. Furious draws a lot of animal art (which would appeal to furries), but the styles and themes vary and are do not make all of Furious’ art.

On why this happens, I think this is due to a combination of acceptance of external influences and cross-appeal. Cartoon animals are a staple of film and television (not least due to Disney, Looney Tunes, and Hanna-Barbera), giving someone plenty of material and, therefore, opportunities of appeal. There is also a low barrier of entry here: you do not have to have a costume, badge, commission, or even a FurAffinity account; all you can do is watch some cartoons. There is also a freedom of contribution here; opposed to say, a fandom based on Free!, you are not dependent on an external entity or an external canon, nor do you have to worry about copyright. Instead, you can just upload your drawings or animations, since cartoon animals are a general concept, not a franchise. This environment contributes to members of all edges of life while being an effectively neutral platform where a wide variety of people can participate and contribute. In fact, this environment encourages variety. In turn, this variety invites other subjects that mingle with a medium that benefits from outside influence. (A person who likes Monster Rancher, or again, someone who aspires to run a zoo, would feel right at home here.) Similarly, cartoons are amendable to many styles, inviting a variety of artists, who, in turn, have their own influences.