People DO Understand Anthropomorphism

[The Past]

Just recently I read a post on this forum that reminded me of a rather ridiculous trend that's been going on in the fandom: Many furries have this mentality that non-furries have no understanding of anthropomorphic animals. They believe writing a story or drawing a picture of an anthropomorphic creature just goes WAY over the average person's head, and they judge or simply "don't get it".

I honestly don't understand this. Apparently these furries aren't aware that anthropomorphism has been an artistic element for thousands of years. This concept is NOT new and exclusive to the furry fandom. You see this stuff every day. Think of all the stories and other media that have shown anthropomorphic animals: Redwall, Winnie the Pooh, Loony Tunes, Garfield, Franklin, Little Bear, Bear in the Big Blue House, even, I could go on! If these can be read and shown regularly and be understood and enjoyed by everyone, how will people "not get it" when you write a story with anthropomorphic animals in it? They would have no trouble understanding it at all, unless they are some stuck-up or troll.

Ever since I began expressing my creativity, drawing or text form, I have used anthropomorphic animals in most of my work. Not a single person was ever confused or judgmental about my work. Nearly every story I wrote for my creative writing class had anthropomorphic characters in it, and my teacher loved them the same.

So relax, write your stories, draw your pictures, show them off, and don't be afraid that people won't get it. They do!

[Ventus Fall]

I agree, not only that, but I see a lot of artists around explicitly mentioning they are not furry artists, while they do draw antro-art.
So I think this has also, so to speak, 'upset' non-furries too.

The most ancient of (recorded) civilisations had some form of antropomorphic art to their mythology, this just proves your points even more.
I'm glad you mentioned this, hopefully more people will realise this that haven't already

[NovaAurora]

The problem is not that people don't understand anthropomorphism I've found, they just literally don't know what "anthropomorphic" means. If that's the term you use with them you can see the little gears turning in their heads trying to figure out exactly what you're talking about, and like Ventus said some of them might draw it themselves but not know that's the technical term for it. If you just say "cartoon animals" or "animals with human traits" it seems to get the point across faster. Of course that only goes for if you have to explain it verbally to them, otherwise I agree just show them the artwork and they'll have no problem with it.

[Ventus Fall]

Ah yes, you can always mention this:
Anthromorph, comes from the Greek words; Anthro (man/human), morph (form/base).

[The Past]

Yeah, I understand that. I've had the same problem when explaining to people. But I'm not talking about the term. I'm talking about the concept.

[Ventus Fall]

Yes, I agree, the concept is a frustrating one by itself alone, but it is true (alas).
All I can hope for is that you won't experience this (as much) any longer, or just accept it and let people be like that. I wouldn't want to see anyone get upset about something they cannot help or prevent ^^;

[The Past]

Now you're confusing me. What I said was I was how people understand the concept of anthropomorphism, whether they know the term "anthropomorphism" or not. The concept is very easy to understand. I just wish other furries accepted that they don't "own" it. :I

[BakaFawkes]

Aesop wasn't a furry artist, but he has the most historically known talking animals ever. Disney owns countless anthropomorphic characters that every child knows, but that's not a furry themed company.