TinyVoices wrote:But ears have only ever shown a level of comfort or discomfort. How would this communication even help, anyway? [...] So, why have ears or a tail that show emotion?
Because ears and tails show far more than "comfort or discomfort." Particularly among dogs, ears and tail motions are part of a significant non-vocal language, which we apply a bit to anthropomorphized animals as well. Important concepts like dominance and submission, fear, aggression, and alertness are also conveyed (at least partly) through the stance and motion of the ears and tail. These concepts are important particularly for social animals, but some amounts of nonverbal communication are useful to virtually every animal (upright ears, stiff legs, raised hackles, and shown teeth are signs of aggression in pretty much every animal except man). Less social animals would tend to have fewer pieces of nonverbal communication; animals whereas are more social would logically have more.
Dogs also have domestication to account for, which helps emphasize reactions that humans judge important or useful -- it's why dogs bark and wolves don't. A happily wagging tail was viewed as a valuable or amusing trait, so it was emphasized as dogs domesticated.
You bring up some interesting things to think about TinyVoices.
I've seen it sometimes backfire of course, sometimes a dog may get testy with another dog when the other is showing affection and the other wants to be left alone and I've even seen the same with cats.
Of course Anthro's bring the potential of cultures close too or greater then humans in fiction. So it wouldn't be surprising that their wild sided nature might have an effect on their culture as much as their culture would have on them or even the environment in which they live.
To put it plainly, looking at our own history, is it really much different with how humans went from desserts, to caves to gradually larger cities? Technically, the development of culture will always be a progressive that will affect how we interact with one-another and what behavior is considered appropriate and when. Some things may maintain their meaning, but will be allocated to being only appropriate at the right time. This will vary greatly in which case the setting takes place. But I think it's rather plain that Schrodinger is right, Red went a little too far there. Even if he didn't know.
Rafe wrote:I have no idea if Tom knows of it or not, but there are precedents in literature for females with tails having this kind of "modesty reaction" panic scene. I can think of at least two - Hersent the she-wolf in the epic Reynard the Fox, and Sharp-Ears in Rudolf Tesnohlidek's The Cunning Little Vixen. Both are hilarious. Maybe I'll dig them up later for you.
... It was Eric that stroked Flora's tail, he got the business end of her claws for it and rightly so. I think this video illustrates the point: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUxribpvKTo Tails are sensitive and you shouldn't go around molesting young girls.
In other observations I think Raine just crushed [DE]'s sternum.
I dug up my copy of The Cunning Little Vixen and found the part I was thinking of. A little intro - The Cunning Little Vixen is not a book for kids. Although it was written back in the 1920s, and is full of humor, it's also got its share of sex. violence, and profanity. Early in the story, Sharp-Ears the vixen is separated from her family and comes to live among humans, specifically with a forester named Bartos, whom she refers to as her "adopted father". One of the few animals that she could relate to was the forester's dog, a romantic dachshund named Catcher, who developed a hopeless crush on her. Sharp-Ears was friendly, but considered herself superior to him in every way, and thought him "a mere schoolboy in the ways of love." From the book:
"Sharp-Ears didn't know much about love either. Her knowledge of the facts of life came from overhearing the arguments of a family of starlings who lived in a tree over her native den.
The starlings' married life was very disorderly, especially in the days before the new separation and divorce laws were passed, and quarrels and fights were a common occurrence in their nest. The couple accused each other of all sorts of immoral and indecent doings. From their shouting, Sharp-Ears gathered that the husband was a shameless philanderer, that he took part in all sorts of improper things... {omitting a little graphic description here]
"...Sharp-Ears, bearing all these things in mind, kept Catcher's advances within limits. She let him play games, but her sharp teeth were ready to attack his throat any time he tried to go too far. If that failed to stop him, she knocked him down and rolled him in the dust. That shameless dog sometimes became very daring: once he even grabbed hold of her tail with his whole mouth. Sharp-Ears made such an uproar that Catcher crawled away to the rubbish heap, ashamed to the bottom of his soul. Seeing him repentant and genuinely sorry, Sharp-Ears went running to him. To prove she had a good heart, she curled up beside him and dozed off in a childlike embrace. But she kept herself alert and on the lookout for her maidenly virtue."
Though on Red's side of this altercation, I wonder how Red will react to all this.
If he flips out and blows his top, he might kill any chance he had with her. Though if he keeps his cool, he might show he has enough redeemable character to continue developing a deeper relationship with Raine.
Eh, never know what to focus on. But TinyVoices did mention a few things.
On the first paragraph, ''the human and dog versions of happy''? Euh, both dogs and humans have very distinctive personal tendencies. I don't personally think the dog has a more dog-like behavior than any particular human because the human doesn't have a tail. If the human had a tail, well. For me most similar behaviors are atleast partially learnt. Such as human speech. If spoken language defines humans, then why do they sometimes grow to only understand one or two of them? (What makes a sentient species-bound, anyways?)
For me human spoken language is a form of advanced specialization. Humans start out with more basic forms of communication. Gesturing, body stances, and that weird stuff of facial expressions. (Which is less reliable.)
When it comes to social survival on less physical things. Where one could lie or deceive, more complex or hard to simulate things are quite used. So humans are weird; they sometimes value things that are vain in immediate survival, and actualy gather possesions that can be stolen, etc. Which is exceedingly rare amongst animals that don't have a social mating strategy. But humans have that, and also ensure their individual survival through social competetion. Humans are much like wolves, who are opportunistic, but often work in teams to hunt down larger prey. As social animals, humans often have their own pecking orders of sorts. More or less restrained depending on the situation.
Anyhow, for positive emotions vs negative ones, must say I don't care for the good vs bad standard. Whining is useful, situationally, as are most common behaviors. Generally speaking, you don't beat up the guy who submits to you quite as much, beyond a certain point, atleast. Social pity is something of a luxury though; one can only give what one can spare. So I don't think having emotions is necessary or better than having none, but it happens, and it happens again. The idea of evolution is that self-replicating things survive better the better adapted they are, it doesn't imply anything weak will promptly dissapear. Or that the generally best will always survive.
Again, I doubt of how people take things as granted or simple. It appears that many people are content that something works, reliably. And don't care to check just how much that reliable thing depends on their favored situation, or luck, if you will. Far as I know, one of the main things that distinguishes humans from other animals is their reliance on the environment or their community, and the fact that they compete against each-other so much. I mean, most big predators have a predator/prey relationship. The natural evolution and behavioral survival of both predator and prey are interdependant.
If all of the predators vanished, or they were collectively resisted in some fashion, then the prey species could get overpopulated, and have way less control of its diseased or otherwise enfeebled population. Which tends to bring a breaking point, which may or may not get to another equilibrium.
So whatever for my harebrained self. I'd just like to say that I don't believe the concept of evolution much matters on individual behavior or assesment. It does, indirectly. But such ideas permit that anything that happens subsist until it dies out, which can be a long time. And there are also many discret or random factors that aren't cared for when people assess things. For me, cultural variance is personal, not group based. The group based part is secondary, and usually streamlined for group-coordination purposes. And as many ''modern'' cultures seem to be more global and less communal, it may seem that verbal standards and grammar are gaining 'importance' nowadays. Understanding people in more subtle manners seems completely optional at times, even. Despite the absurdity of it. Anyhow, 'simple' communication bores me too much at times. Moreso in a society that favors personal expression as being a private matter.
Anyhow, whatever for the useless stuff. As avwolf mentioned; dogs are domesticated animals. Also, wolves ressemble humans in some hunting aspects; they attack larger prey they simply could not without teamwork, and they rely on group tactics and skill a lot. Whereas many big cats use atleast some form of sprint that could work without much cooperation, wolves attack things they could hardly kill on their own, if ever. I'm no expert on hunting practice, but a lot of the big cats I've heard of can actually hunt on their own; they just get poor odds at it. Also, wolves are omnivores. Living in packs might be more improvement than sheer necessity, although most humans and wolves do live in groups. Still, wolves are very social, and I've noticed a lot of random anthros tend to be wolves, or some sort of cool animal, but with rather human behavior. And really, wolves remember people, but don't behave as much as young pups as dogs do. (Or modern humans, for that matter.)
Uhh, anyhow. If one would ask about a correct portrayal of an anthro. I'd have to ask what a correct human is. From my experience, many live human fall into being 'unbelievable', as some say it. One of the reasons I tend to like 'furry' comics is that they tend to be less ecstatic in a way. A lot of stories or art things seem to insist on something out of the ordinary. There are conspiracies or one shot events, or some fantasy magic or unsual species or something. A lot of the furry thing are actually somewhat more normal, as they tend to give us pseudo-science less often then some 'hard' sci-fi things do. Alot of thse tend to play with interpersonal relationships in some, experimental manner? It just looks like one of those seperations, where you can just act around and it's no problem. Much like Reynard's fables, or whatever. I don't think most people who do about anthro things wish to be very confrontational in a headstrong manner. But they do speak of people who have inate difference a lot at times.
But to close on that. Red is just being childish; hopefully his resilience is well trained from previous experience. Also, yea, that tail grab was probably not something he planned with care or anything. Aheh. Red might need to learn to expect or anticipate things with his mind, because I'm not sure if he usually ever does. Also, dog tails and whatever, are generally sensitive, but that doesn't mean they can't bear contact with objects, notably hitting stuff around. But there's much about sensing and touchy-feely stuff. Raine probably isn't used to having a tail all that often. And the rest is to speculating about,.. about.
Besides which, if Red is knocked out for a bit, he might wake up surrouded by three Keidran stuck fighting each other, or even worse. Who knows? Some ideas are just too laughable to be just crudely presented, I believe. Whatever Red does, let's hope he continues upon the path of confusion for a while, as it befits him.
Dodge-fighting emotions. Also, whenever you ask, I am thinking about you.
--Life; 0/0
I... can't even reply to this, for two reasons: I can't fully understand what you meant in certain parts, and so I'd be guessing and roughly translating what you said through the entire response, and for two the last time I argued with someone like you, I lost because I couldn't make my posts as sophisticated as my opponent.
I will, however, respond to the Avwolf thing.
avwolf wrote:Because ears and tails show far more than "comfort or discomfort." Particularly among dogs, ears and tail motions are part of a significant non-vocal language, which we apply a bit to anthropomorphized animals as well. Important concepts like dominance and submission, fear, aggression, and alertness are also conveyed (at least partly) through the stance and motion of the ears and tail. These concepts are important particularly for social animals, but some amounts of nonverbal communication are useful to virtually every animal (upright ears, stiff legs, raised hackles, and shown teeth are signs of aggression in pretty much every animal except man). Less social animals would tend to have fewer pieces of nonverbal communication; animals whereas are more social would logically have more.
Dogs also have domestication to account for, which helps emphasize reactions that humans judge important or useful -- it's why dogs bark and wolves don't. A happily wagging tail was viewed as a valuable or amusing trait, so it was emphasized as dogs domesticated.
Underlined everything I did not already say. So I'll focus on the underlined stuff. Mostly the last paragraph there, as those other things are just filler I forgot/didn't think about.
I forgot about the domestication process. It wasn't because of evolutionary reasons that dogs wag their tail, but because (as you said) Man found it useful. Much like how the corn, wheat, bananas, and several other foods that we eat, do not naturally look the way they do on our table. We breed things to make them more useful to us. But barking... I never noticed that. I could swear that wolves bark, but maybe I'm thinking of another canidae. Besides domesticated dogs, of course. Interesting to think about all of this now that you pointed that out though.
Am I the only one who finds it kind of hilarious that this community is having an incredibly long and in- depth discussion about how ears and tails show emotion and wether it's rude to grab them? I mean, IK this is a mostly furry community so it's in the communities field, but I feel like this is a little too weird…
Drake Arron wrote:Am I the only one who finds it kind of hilarious that this community is having an incredibly long and in- depth discussion about how ears and tails show emotion and wether it's rude to grab them? I mean, IK this is a mostly furry community so it's in the communities field, but I feel like this is a little too weird…
Oh it is VERY weird... and also very normal for this forum! We love our insanity and the wonderful tangents that Tom's story and art send us on. As one of our members likes to say, So much fun!
"Growing old is mandatory, but growing UP is entirely optional." --(I dunno who said it but I'm doing a fine job of proving it's true.)
Drake Arron wrote:Am I the only one who finds it kind of hilarious that this community is having an incredibly long and in- depth discussion about how ears and tails show emotion and wether it's rude to grab them? I mean, IK this is a mostly furry community so it's in the communities field, but I feel like this is a little too weird…
Oh it is VERY weird... and also very normal for this forum! We love our insanity and the wonderful tangents that Tom's story and art send us on. As one of our members likes to say, So much fun!
Lol. I'm not opposed to that . Don't let your normal friends and family see you having this discussion though XD.
Drake Arron wrote:Am I the only one who finds it kind of hilarious that this community is having an incredibly long and in- depth discussion about how ears and tails show emotion and wether it's rude to grab them? I mean, IK this is a mostly furry community so it's in the communities field, but I feel like this is a little too weird…
Oh it is VERY weird... and also very normal for this forum! We love our insanity and the wonderful tangents that Tom's story and art send us on. As one of our members likes to say, So much fun!
Lol. I'm not opposed to that . Don't let your normal friends and family see you having this discussion though XD.
I've already shown TwoKinds to all of my friends, and some of them even started following it too. As for my family, they'd probably join in the discussion.
Fear is not "evil". It is to know your own weakness. If you know your weakness, people can become strong as well as gentle. 2Kinds Portuguese Translation
Dat last panel... Raine's uber-cute face, Sythe's reaction and hidden Zen. I haven't noticed him until reading the comments. He really deserved being called an assassin.
Someone on the dA asked a really good question: Is Raine the only one that has got the pads on her hands?
you guys are really perceptive *bows*
Caille wrote:Dat last panel... Raine's uber-cute face, Sythe's reaction and hidden Zen. I haven't noticed him until reading the comments. He really deserved being called an assassin.
Someone on the dA asked a really good question: Is Raine the only one that has got the pads on her hands?
you guys are really perceptive *bows*
Isaac, the wolf mage that "broke" Natani had pawpads, and the wolf who gave Zen the assassination contract of Sythe also has pawpads.
Drake Arron wrote:Am I the only one who finds it kind of hilarious that this community is having an incredibly long and in- depth discussion about how ears and tails show emotion and wether it's rude to grab them? I mean, IK this is a mostly furry community so it's in the communities field, but I feel like this is a little too weird…
Oh it is VERY weird... and also very normal for this forum! We love our insanity and the wonderful tangents that Tom's story and art send us on. As one of our members likes to say, So much fun!
Lol. I'm not opposed to that . Don't let your normal friends and family see you having this discussion though XD.
I've already shown TwoKinds to all of my friends, and some of them even started following it too. As for my family, they'd probably join in the discussion.
More people inbound? Quick! Get the confetti!
I've enjoyed the discussions I have seen around the forum even though I at times am not talking/typing on them. They can sure occupy the day when they are active (the discussions)
"It is an unfortunate fact that we can secure peace only by preparing for war." (President John F Kennedy)
Every message has a secret, it depends on how valuable that secret is that makes it different from the other secrets.
Drake Arron wrote:Am I the only one who finds it kind of hilarious that this community is having an incredibly long and in- depth discussion about how ears and tails show emotion and wether it's rude to grab them? I mean, IK this is a mostly furry community so it's in the communities field, but I feel like this is a little too weird…
Oh it is VERY weird... and also very normal for this forum! We love our insanity and the wonderful tangents that Tom's story and art send us on. As one of our members likes to say, So much fun!
Lol. I'm not opposed to that . Don't let your normal friends and family see you having this discussion though XD.
I'm one who often questions buying the physical copy of the comic. One because why buy something that is free to see online, but more important for the matter at hand and just in general- you can get caught with a really deviant piece of material.
This topic? Talking about how ears and tails express emotions? I wouldn't say it's weird, nor is it necessarily "common" for furfans to talk about. I've had discussions in real life that revolved around why my family's dog keeps humping the family's cat, and it wasn't weird at the time because it was contextually relevant. We had just pulled the dog off of the poor cat for the umpteenth time that hour, I started with "this wouldn't happen if he were fixed", and there we go off onto a topic about all that stuff. Relevancy and context are crucial. It's only odd if you don't see why we're talking about it.
There are boundaries, of course. If we started talking about how male canines have knots and how transformation creates some interesting concepts (like how it was done in a previous thread here), that would be wtf no matter what.
So... it's strange you think ears and tails are creepier than dog dicks. You ok there?
Because Trace is one lucky guy!
THE SHIP HAS SAILED!