Anthropomorphism: What Do You All Know On It (Spam-be-not)

[C Elegans]

First, I would like to welcome Inter to our forum, I am quite happy that a real Furry appeared here since that may provide me with answers to some of my question. Below, I will pose these questions mostly to Hill since he replied to my reply to his post, but the questions are really to Inter as much as to Hill - whoever who wish and can reply.

Do you ever read any books on Eastern society? Would you describe this (/sub)culture as just another group of people satisfying their infantile needs?

No, I don't read many books about Eastern, ie Far Eastern culture anymore, I used to when I was younger. As a child and a young teenager, I read a lot of the classical English, French and American anthropologists and ethnographs like Levi-Strauss, Motherwell and Mead. I was most interest in African and Polynesian cultures. Then, in the mid-teens my interest changed over to the Far East and Australia, but I merely scratched on the surface. I put my university years into neuroscience as you know. During this period I was most interested in the Orient, Middle East and Inuit culture.
Since my mid-teens, travelling has been my biggest interest. Consequently, I have had the privilege to visit many of the cultures I have read about, providing they still exist of course. Today, I know people who are "shamen", "fetish men", "medicine men" or "priests" - to use some simplified terms - in many different cultures. I have also recently been adopted by a Saharian clan.
Over the last few years, when I have had time to pick up my interest for native human cultures again, I've been most interested in African cultures. Africa is the home of mankind - as a geneticist I am sure you can understand my interest for African culture as an extention of my interest in hominoid evolution.

As for your question "Would you describe this (/sub)culture as just another group of people satisfying their infantile needs?" I have no idea. My response was directed to the group of people Fable described, which I suppose in one group of Furries. It is important that you understand that I have never heard about Furries in all my life before I read this thread. I don't claim to know anything about Furries. I do know quite a bit about African, Inuit and Polynesian tribal animist and shamanistic religious though. And my main point is that based on the information given in this thread, including the links, there is nothing to support the idea that Furry is a religion equivalent of the tribal African religions. Not even similar. If you claim that, please back up this claim with more information. As I am sure you know, any idea, belief, habit or behaviour cannot be defined as religion. If I enjoy parachuting and spend a lot of time doing parachuting, it does not necessarily mean I believe parachutes have a role in creation, that a specific value system is related to parachutes or that a parachuting has a transcendent level. For a belief syste to be defined and classified as a "religion", it must, among other things, include some kind of creation myth, some kind of transcendent level and some kind of value system. Not only a practice, a liking and an interest. I could recommend you hundreds of books and hundreds of scientific papers, but since none here except Fable seems to either knowledgable or interested in tribal religions, I recommend you to just start reading the basics in Wikipedia or something similar.

As mentioned in my post, there is a small group of people who actually follow a religion based on this culture you speak of, and that some are heavily into roleplaying. For the note, if you did read the few parts of the Wiki article as it looks like you did in your first post, you would have noticed that this has been around since the turn of the century

Hill dearie, I am European! The turn of the last century is modern and recently to us - the standard definition used in the arts is 20th century = modern, still within a living persons lifetime = contemporary. When I am referring to tribal religions I am in many cases talking about religions that has been around for thousands of years.

Quite cutting to say this is just made out of children's books and comics, CE, as this form of culture was even around before then, as I mentioned, in the medieval ages.

I got the impression that Furry was a fandom culture based on contemporary fiction. Can you please provide information that gives the history back to the medieval ages? Not that it matters for the issue whether Furry can be a religion or not, but I am interested anyway.

African tribal religion can fit into the term "roleplaying"? Is this a joke? Please explain yourself further. This comment suggests that you may lack knowledge about African tribal culture. Which cultures are you referring to, which religions? Which rites, specifically? There are thousands of distictly different cultures in Africa. I just hope you and/or Hill are not trying to suggest that mask dancing, shamanistic rites or fertility rites where a person use a costume to change his identity for instance into into an animal, a spirit or the opposite gender, has anything to do with entertainment, or "joy of role-playing". If that is indeed what you mean, you are so ignorant so you should not even be discussion African tribal religion but instead read some basic textbooks on the subject.

EDIT: tried to remove as many typos as possible, I know I am horrible, I am sure there are some left.[/size]

[Lestat]

Interesting discussion, but moderating the tone and holding back on the condescension I see sometimes dripping from my screen, risking to damage my keyboard might improve it ... a lot.

[Hill-Shatar]

[QUOTE=fable]Hill-Shatar: You still owe me a response. When you get the time.[/QUOTE]

Sorry, this is my first and only time on today. I'll get to the damn topic when I get the chance.

[C Elegans]

Now I have made a Google search for "Furry" and "religion". I didn't find many pages mentioning this, most of the hits contained the phrase "Furry is not a religion" but instead a lifestyle or fandom. I found three pages who mentioned that Furries could have totem animals "like Native North American cultures" but there was no description that supported these totem animals meant the same as in native North American cultures, or are surrounded by the same spiritual contex. On the contrary, one site said that you can choose a totem animal depending on if you like the animal and/or find it cute and on another site, a person described how he found his totem animals by "just feeling" they were right for him. Nothing about religion. The third site was the same as Hill linked to.

Regarding history, most pages I found gave a history back to web fan cultures in the 1980's, some to the 1960's. I found one page who gave a history back to ancient Egypt:
http://www.perrirhoades.furtopia.org/Furry.html#5

The arguments presented for this was however the similar to what Hill have already posted. I quote from the webpage:

"Furries go back to mythological times. Many gods of early civilizations were anthropomorphic characters. Furries figure prominently in ancient Egyptian art, Native American art, and the art of many other ancient cultures.

Furries also figure prominently in folklore and fairytales, going back hundreds of years. Actually, if you want to get technical about it, there are Furries in The Bible.

Historically, Furries have just always been around.

This is a clear example of overinclusive use of a term, as I described in my post above. The author of this webpage takes a general human behaviour (anthropomorphisism) and single it out as a marker for a contemporary fandom subculture (Furry) and claims ancient Egypt art was Furry. This effectively makes any discussion meaningless, since any term in language can mean anything then. If this is the level of the present discussion, we ought to discuss semantics instead.

Since I didn't find anything substantial when I searched for "Furry" and "religion", I also did a search for only "Furry", but then I got so much cartoon porn pictures of thong-clad cats with human breasts stroking their nipples, so I frankly did not have the patience to wade through all that. Instead, I hope Hill and/or Inter will provide more information that support the claim there is a Furry religion that fulfils the criteria for religion.

[fable]

[QUOTE=Hill-Shatar]Sorry, this is my first and only time on today. I'll get to the damn topic when I get the chance.[/QUOTE]

Actually, your quote of me is not quite accurate. I didn't write:

Hill-Shatar: You still owe me a response. When you get the time.

but...
Hill-Shatar: You still owe me a response. When you get the time.

...changing the mood to a lighter one. Which, judging by your own response, may be something you need to consider.

To speak frankly, had you told us before starting this topic how much you'd emotionally invested in the issue at hand--along the lines of "I"m a big fan of anthropomorphism. What do you think about it?" -I would have not said some of the things I subsequently did, and couched the rest differently. But by stating it in such a neutral, "What do you think of..." fashion, it came across as someone on the outside who was curious, so you got a different perspective in replies. When you seemed to be trying to engage me in further reading of furry fiction, or activities on furry MUDs, I perceived you as misreading my opinions, so I stated them more strongly. In retrospect, you were perhaps unwilling to admit your strong enthusiasm by then, seeing the negativity the subject had raised, and were trying to use this method of securing agreement.

In the field of history, such misundestandings between nations are the course of tragedy. On the artistic stage, the result is farce.

In real life, it is usually an intermingling of the two. And I am not inclined to cause any friends personal grief by interfering with their strongly held enthusiasms.

Seeing how you feel about it now, I am disinclined to discuss any of this further save the claims that anthropomorphism 1) is a religion, and 2) that in its non-religious form it dates back beyond the formation of a modern community with a commonality of interests. I think clarifying these points, especially the first, can be of great interest. I had never heard that anybody believed there was a furry religion, much less claimed to be a worshipper, and I want to see if this proposed religion of furry fans actually meets sufficient criteria to justify such a claim. As of yet, I have seen no such evidence. Nor have I found any in the modern pagan community, who are notoriously heterogeneous in their willingness to embrace non-accepted belief systems.

On the second matter, I have already made my opinions clear. Broadening a definition to find ancient roots in some apparent justification of anything is an all-too-human failing that itself is ancient. In late Renaissance times, numerous forgeries were published claiming to be the "Gnostic teachings" of Plato, Aristotle, etc, and the true Gnostic reprints of works going back to the 3rd and 4th centuries ACE were considered to date back to 2000 and 3000 BCE. The older, the closer to the truth. But if we broaden definitions such as what comprises furry literature to include anything with talking animals, we lose any definition of what sets apart modern furries, and modern furry literature, from anything else. These vacuous definitions are useless, wherever they are applied.

[Chimaera182]

[QUOTE=fable]To speak frankly, had you told us before starting this topic how much you'd emotionally invested in the issue at hand--along the lines of "I"m a big fan of anthropomorphism. What do you think about it?" -I would have not said some of the things I subsequently did, and couched the rest differently. But by stating it in such a neutral, "What do you think of..." fashion, it came across as someone on the outside who was curious, so you got a different perspective in replies. When you seemed to be trying to engage me in further reading of furry fiction, or activities on furry MUDs, I perceived you as misreading my opinions, so I stated them more strongly. In retrospect, you were perhaps unwilling to admit your strong enthusiasm by then, seeing the negativity the subject had raised, and were trying to use this method of securing agreement.[/QUOTE]
Maybe he did it in a neutral voice so as to elicit the very responses he got. Rather than attach himself to the subject at hand, he made himself seem distant so we wouldn't feel compelled to lie as you suggested. you got a different perspective in replies to me suggested we would have said things differently had he more blatantly attached himself emotionally to this thread. I'd go with what I said anyway, but that's me. I still think being a Furry is that persons' life--lifestyle, choice, religion, however you want to put it--and that's up to them. For me, I wouldn't like it merely from a heat point of view: I already can't stand the heat in Florida, why would I parade around in my home--which I have to keep at 70 F just to be comfortable--in an animal costume? I'd have to put the temperature even lower and use up more energy--and pay for it--that way. No thank you. :laugh:

[fable]

Maybe he did it in a neutral voice so as to elicit the very responses he got. Rather than attach himself to the subject at hand, he made himself seem distant so we wouldn't feel compelled to lie as you suggested.

That last sentence seems to be meeting itself as it rounds the corner. It implies he dissimulated, to avoid dissimulation. I don't think conscious dissimulation was involved at all, in any case. We all condition the statements of our needs, goals, etc, in the social sphere based on a variety of external criteria at the moment, such as whether we're speaking to a fellow employee or the boss, or whether we're chatting with a spouse/SO or stranger, or a person in a customer relations situation. This isn't a negative. It is one of the more significant inventions of culture: the art of being civilized.

you got a different perspective in replies to me suggested we would have said things differently had he more blatantly attached himself emotionally to this thread.

Yes, you've got that right. I can only speak for myself, but I would have probably noted that I found non-porn furry literature fell into two groups: poor stuff based on stereotypes, and better stuff in which the anthropomorphism as a result seemed superfluous. And I would have let that statement go, and added nothing more to it. The porn would have been mentioned once, and left at that, and toned down since I would not have been trying to convince him to understand how strongly I felt, but realized instead that he held a different, established point of view. That Hill-Shatar and I hold strongly opposing views on this is perfectly natural, and a matter of pesonal opinions. Neither of us owe any apologies to anyone for our differing views. Facts, on the other hand--whether a given thing truly is a religion, whether that thing has ancient roots--are another matter.

[Hill-Shatar]

@ fable: I used the word damn... perhaps I should have added a to the end? I was actually trying to sound off-the-cuff...

[fable]

[QUOTE=Hill-Shatar]@ fable: I used the word damn... perhaps I should have added a to the end? I was actually trying to sound off-the-cuff... [/QUOTE]

It's so hard to get across intentions without vocal inflections! I find myself cursing the lack of this a lot, lately. An emoticon would have helped. You seemed exasperated. I'm glad you weren't, but my unwillingness to delve into areas of personal likes and dislikes on this issue still hold. On the other hand, those two factual areas both CE and I have been concerned with--they really do interest me.

[fable]

Still no response on this, and since we've had two members who claim that there is a furry religion--one who actually claimed to be a member of it--I think it's only fair to request, again, that this information be made available. Typically we don't let statements like that go unchallenged on SYM. I would also like to see some response to the points CE and I raised about what constitutes "furry literature," and just how much knowledge about genuine African religious and shamanistic practice exists among those who compare these to people who want to roleplay being part-animal.

[Hill-Shatar]

Okee Dokee, although this might take a while, fable, and won't be long in size.

This is a shorter version that I even posted before. I only went back to my last longer post, and will attempt to see what I can make out of what I was able to gleam from it. I am going to follow fable's wish unless a post of CE I read had a posed question that requested answering.

There are three major groups of furry or fandom, ect, the kind that like literature/art/lifestyle, the more porn related/suit wearing ones, and then the more out of the way ones. Originally it was far more the first group with some artists in the second. Recently, these demographics drastically changed, the second group became large and the smaller group grew to become the minority. This lead to the closing of a lot of sites due to little interest any longer, and more individual interests in series such as Redwall and such in bookstores coming out, with more and more people prefering that work. At around that point I just downloaded stories that authors gave away onto my computer at the time. The second group became what Furries are now famous for, wearing suits and 'Yiffing'. Please note I barely cross any line into what a lot of people consider a Furry. I'll end here, since it crosses Falbe's wish for opinion.

As for the last group, I heard rumours that a few had been attracted to a religion (or an offshoot or mainstream of a religion with heavy inclusion of anthropomorphic elements) some time ago. I was neither interested at the time in hearing it or not, and have sent an email to the only one of Inter's accounts I know. Eventually he should respond. As for the rest, I can't perform research, and will try to and edit this post later tonight.

As for the history of Anthropomorphism, do you want the fandom or the actual culture? The fandom has been around since the mid-eighties, but it was the culture that I was speaking of, and since it seems all three of the major posters in this thread continue to post with what seems to be different understandings of the same word (we're speaking the same language, with all the wrong words ), what level or layer of culture are you refering to? Religious of half human entities, more based on popular tales and fantasies, groups of people who were similar to the fandom today...?

[C Elegans]

@Hill: I would like you or Inter to reply to my questions 1 and 2 above. I cannot understand anything you write about anthropomorphism until the overinclusion (question 1) issue is clarified.

[fable]

CE cuts straight to the chase, and I agree. We all know that "furries" aren't about folk tales, or ancient religions. Let's focus on what they are, without innocently or not-so-innocently widening the field of defintion to the point where all discussion becomes useless.

I especially want evidence that there is a modern furry religion, and what it's dogma, worshipping services and practices, etc, actually are. A number of allegations have been made, but no evidence has been provided. And the one person who claimed they were a furry worshipper merely arrived, got angry, hurled insults, and vanished, leaving us with nothing more after they left than before their arrival.

[Hill-Shatar]

Before I go to far with anything, I would prefer some more links from either of you to see what your reading up from. I've only seen two links so far to sites that don't really cover anything being mentioned now from Fable, so I'd like to see things from an alternate point of view, without reading another forty posts with no actual backing. Perhaps that article you wrote, fable, or at least a reference to a book it is in so I can go and pick it up?

In all honesty I've lost interest in this debate since it has begun swinging into areas that I've never wanted to enter or go to. I've learned that arguments on religion go nowhere and don't wish to be dragged into another one comparing views on one religion or another, or wherever this thread might go. Say or think what you wish, typically when someone brings up the topic, I stay away from it as a whole, and that's going to come up here as well.

[C Elegans]

[QUOTE=Hill-Shatar]Before I go to far with anything, I would prefer some more links from either of you to see what your reading up from.[/QUOTE]

Honestly Hill I think you are adapting an irrational standpoint at this point in the discussion. You and Inter have claimed that Furry is a religion. I and Fable have disputed this claim. The definition of religion I use, is the lexiographic standard definition which you can easily check in any undergraduate textbook. You and Inter on the other hand have not provided any support for your claims although they even included specific seemingly incorrect comparisons between Furry and African tribal religion.

Fable backed on his prior statements since he realised that this is a sensitive topic to you. I am less polite than Fable so I don't back at objective facts because I like you. I have posed two questions, both based on your claims that Furry is a religion. The only links I refer to are the ones you and Inter have posted - this makes sense this you are the ones who claimed Furry is a religion. I am not going to post links to the Furry porn sites I found since these would violate the forum rules and they are completly irrelevant for the question whether Furry fulfils the objective critera for a religion or whether you use the term in an overinclusive way. If you are seriously going to dispute what the definition of religion is, I ask you to at least read a textbook on the subject first.

[Hill-Shatar]

I'm sorry you feel that way, CE, and your opinion is noted, although it would have been preferable if you had PM'd me in a similar manner some PM you when they feel your being "cold". I can tell you that I harbour no problems with this thread, but I have grown to notice that the original topic of the thread has altered to a more religious form, and as you saw, I'm not inclined to discuss something I rarely have care for at all, nor something that, as you saw, I'm going to be researching any time in the future, as I've never looked into it in the past.

You and Inter on the other hand have not provided any support for your claims although they even included specific seemingly incorrect comparisons between Furry and African tribal religion.

Neither have you. I tried to use what seemed to be a general preconception of African religion in any example, and was unaware that there was underlying meanings to some of the values to the religions that were not covered in what I've read before, which, to say the least, was not any form of scientific journal.

If you wish to pursue this line of discussion, I suggest a new thread, since you seem eager to discuss it, and having it at the back of this one will do you no good.

Fable backed on his prior statements since he realised that this is a sensitive topic to you.

How kind. I've already gleaned what I needed to from all posts. My query is complete as to what people know, and, as an added bonus, how they feel. You seem to think this is a right or wrong argument, or at least it seems that way. I thought this thread was for learning?

If you are seriously going to dispute what the definition of religion is, I ask you to at least read a textbook on the subject first.

I've noticed that your previous topic has once again switched back to furry porn. I honestly spoke of the fandom, mentioned several groups with links to webpages that are against this new group of people already. As for reading the text book, I've already said that I have no interest in arguing with you, especially since this topic is fluid. I have no interest in religion CE, and learning more about similar patterns between religion is not going to increase my interest in the topic. Thanks.

[fable]

I can tell you that I harbour no problems with this thread, but I have grown to notice that the original topic of the thread has altered to a more religious form, and as you saw, I'm not inclined to discuss something I rarely have care for at all, nor something that, as you saw, I'm going to be researching any time in the future, as I've never looked into it in the past.

I referred to furry-dom as "pure escapism," and your response was: As said, some people even worship in a sense the animal body hybrid ideal. Last time I checked, most people don't consider a religion 'Pure Escapism'. So you threw religion into the mix, and specifically at me. You can hardly expect intelligent people to back off when you make such a statement that mentions a "furry religion." It's your comment, and your need to support it.

I tried to use what seemed to be a general preconception of African religion in any example, and was unaware that there was underlying meanings to some of the values to the religions that were not covered in what I've read before, which, to say the least, was not any form of scientific journal.

General to whom? Practically nobody I know has a thought on the subject of African religions, and in any case we're supposedly discussing facts--so dishing up pop culture hardly counts. And you don't need subscriptions to scientific journals to get some accurate basics on the subject, either.

CE: Fable backed on his prior statements since he realised that this is a sensitive topic to you.

How kind.

I'm glad I read this, because I thought for a while that you really *were* sensitive on this subject, and felt badly as a result for pushing you on it. Now that I know you thought my reactions were amusing and best treated with condescension, I won't have to hold back. I won't make that mistake, again! What a win/win situation.

I've already gleaned what I needed to from all posts. My query is complete as to what people know, and, as an added bonus, how they feel. You seem to think this is a right or wrong argument, or at least it seems that way. I thought this thread was for learning?

Learning requires the passing along of accurate information. When people make statements referring to African religion as involving roleplaying, or liken worshipping in these religions to modern adults in Western civilization who think they have a religion involving furries, then as they say, inquiring minds wish to know. And what we wish to know are facts. To help us learn.

[C Elegans]

I'm sorry you feel that way, CE, and your opinion is noted, although it would have been preferable if you had PM'd me in a similar manner some PM you when they feel your being "cold".

Why should I PM you? This is just an ordinary discussion where someone has made a claim, and someone else disputes that claim. You and Inter claim Furry is a religion. I and Fable dispute this, and I pose questions regarding your support for your claim. I can PM you because you're a nice guy and we can talk about science or our private life, but I am completely at loss as for why you think I should PM you regarding this thread. I do think it is an irrational standpoint to make a claim and then refuse to provide support for the claim. Do you understand me better if I say it's like trying to publish a paper where you only describe the interpretation of results, without background and methods? It's like claiming "I have found the haplotype that cause schizophrenia" and the scientific community say "so where is the evidence" and I say "it's up to you to demonstrate that I am wrong". Sure you and Inter have the right to claim Furry is a religion, but I view it as nonsense until I see evidence.

I can tell you that I harbour no problems with this thread, but I have grown to notice that the original topic of the thread has altered to a more religious form

As I have explained, your claims that Furry is a religion is the only aspect of this discussion that interest me. I have never heard about Furry before you posted this thread, and I couldn't care less if people enjoy dressing up like other species, playing RPG:s as other species, reading fan fiction and conduct various other fandom behaviours. What I do care about is the claims that Furry is a religion and the erranous descriptions of what you call "African Tribal religion". Inter claimed that African religion fits into the term "role playing" and this is a serious error and misunderstanding - it is even degrading to African religion.

What support am I supposed to provide? The standard definition of religion, which can be found in any undergraduate textbook? General textbook knowledge about African religion, which can also be found easily?

What cannot be found easily, is support for the claim that Furry is a religion. As I posted above, I even made an extensive Google search without result. (I did not make a Pubmed or Embase search since I did not expect to find this kind of information in scientific databases.)

What you call "general preconception of African religion" seems in your and Inters post to be synonymous with a completely ignorant and prejudiced view of African religion. This I wanted an explanation for and still want an explanation for. Additionally, I would also like to see support for your claims that Furry dates back to the Middle age.

I thought this thread was for learning?

For learning? Yes, it could have been. You started this thread and asked what people thought about Furry. Inter on the other hand seems only interested in "learning" people to accept his statements and opinions about Furry.

I have no interest in religion CE, and learning more about similar patterns between religion is not going to increase my interest in the topic. Thanks.

If you have no interest in religion and you don't wish to learn more about religion, then you shouldn't make the claim that Furry is a religion and draw parallells between Furry and African religion. If you are ignorant in a topic it's best not to use it as support for ones claim. If I want to claim that Shostakovitch was an important composer, I don't look for support for my claim from Furry Fandom music which I know nothing about, I look for support within the area of classical music, which I do know something about.

EDIT 1: Oh, I should add: As always, this is nothing personal against you or anyone else, I just completely reject the idea that African religion would be similar to roleplaying or Fandom. Furthermore, I am glad to hear that your irrational standpoint is not caused by this being a personally sensitive subject to you - I am so fed up with oversensitive people who post things at public internet forums and then go whining because they only wanted to hear sweet words and weren't at all prepared to defend their views in an objective manner.

EDIT 2: Aha, maybe you meant I should PM you because I expressed the opinion that you take an irrational standpoint in this discussion? If you are offended by this, I can change my wording.

[fable]

I've also been looking around the Web for any serious evidence of a furry religion. Haven't found anything remotely resembling that, but I did find this interesting material posted by a person who clearly is into furries. I want to quote one or two relevant passages:

Of course, it wasn't always this way. Many furry fans remember the earlier conventions where adult furry porn, yiff, was limited to a small section of the confurence. The fandom was about furry-related merchandise, movies, games, and series. Fursuits were worn by fans as costumes not lifestyles. Those were the good old days. Then, slowly but surely, people into the furotica segment of furry fandom became more dominant. Yiff artwork sold for more money than non-yiffy artwork. Personal religions with their furry persona as the centerpiece became all the rage. I found the trend disturbing but thought it was temporary. "People don't take this furry religion thing seriously," I thought. "Furotica was for people with the fuzzy cat ears and tail fetish," It must be temporary.

Every year afterwards it just seemed to snowball.

And this:

The backlash lasted for about a year or two and has sinced faded into obscurity. Many furries felt they are being overly generalized into the fursuit-plushie-bestiality groupings and acted accordingly with little success.

Sure, it's only one point of view, though significantly a point of view from an articulate and acknowledged member of the furry community. So we're not alone in noting that a significant portion of that same community is into the porn aspect of it. And since you asked what we thought of furries, I mentioned it because--like this blogger, who also interestingly took offense at people who were trying to make a religion of furry-dom--it seemed a significant portion of the movement. To deny it, whether reticently like you do or violently like Inter, doesn't deal with it. You got your answer from me, and it was based on accurate observation.

In another discussion I've discovered, one writer in a thread notes:

What I'm about to say next may be something of a slippery slope, because of the varying degrees of importance people place on furrydom. For my own opinion, furrydom is a hobby.. a form of entertainment.. for everyone. Furry lifestyle or religion or whatever is, IMO, simply the product of someone taking a hobby and elevating their own view of its importance. So, in my view, furry lifestyle or furry religion is like saying you have a model railroad lifestyle or action-figure-collecting religion.

This is very well put, in my opinion. It also hints at what may be behind claims that furries have a religion. If these people come out of backgrounds without any serious religious roots, they may never have researched the subject, and lack any understanding of what constitutes a religion. They may believe that for everybody, including African, Hindu worshippers, and Ancient Egyptians, religion was simply a matter of establishing social conformity, or of elevating themselves. In short, their notions of religion may be based on nothing more than a weak comprehension of modernday Protestantism. That would explain the confusion that allows a person to think a religion means you can worship anything you seriously want to be true. But hobbies aren't religions, and the Mahabharata wasn't written by somebody who thought it was cool for people to encounter talking part-animals with superpowers.

[C Elegans]

[QUOTE=fable]It also hints at what may be behind claims that furries have a religion. If these people come out of backgrounds without any serious religious roots, they may never have researched the subject, and lack any understanding of what constitutes a religion. They may believe that for everybody, including African, Hindu worshippers, and Ancient Egyptians, religion was simply a matter of establishing social conformity, or of elevating themselves. In short, their notions of religion may be based on nothing more than a weak comprehension of modernday Protestantism. That would explain the confusion that allows a person to think a religion means you can worship anything you seriously want to be true. But hobbies aren't religions, and the Mahabharata wasn't written by somebody who thought it was cool for people to encounter talking part-animals with superpowers.[/QUOTE]

If this is the background to the claims that a Furry religion exists, it would be my question1: an overinclusive use of the term religion, in this case based on ignorance what a religion is. Ancient and African religion would be targets for this misconception simply because people in the Western world generally has far less knowledge about those religions than the monotheistic religions that are popular in our own culture.

Regarding African religion, I think this is a relatively difficult subject since Western people in general do not understand that the African continent harbours more different ethnic tribes, cultures, languages and religions than any other part of the world. This is not surprising really since evolutionary speaking, we all came out of Africa. As Westerners, we rarely come into contact with authentic African culture and religion and most of us don't visit Africa very often due to the difficulties and expenses going there and the political unstability. In school, we are taught about the "world religions" which usually are the monotheistic religions and hinduism, buddism and konfucianism. African religions are treated simply as "animism" and "tribal" is often equal to a more "primitive" level in an imagined, culture-centric hierarchy where monotheistic religions are the most "developed".

Among people who are interested in religion as part of anthropology/ethnography, West Africa in particular is famous for it's many various rich religions with highly abstract symbolism. I guess though that if you see a guy from Burkina Faso dancing around in an antelope costume on Western TV, it's not always that there is an extensive explanation for his behaviour. I saw a very good documentary at the Swedish Musuem of Dance recently, where various African mask dances were shown together with a narrative that explained the various aspects of the dance and the underlying religious meaning. It's a pity this movie can't be bought, it would serve as a nice source of basic information for people who don't have the time and energy to look for good textbooks about the subject. I've been reading books and articles about African religion since I was 5 years old, and I still know I have barely managed to reach under the surface. *sigh* I wish I had time for another research career