Humans are normal? *GASP*

Technically, we are one of the most widespread oddities on this planet. We have little to no natural defenses (fur, quills, shells), we have little to no natural weapons, and the only real significant thing about ourselves is our intelligence (while on the other hand most other animals have something else they can rely on). Sure, you can say we have guns and stuff like that, but when you're put in the woods, naked and unarmed, with one hungry tiger, who's going to win?

Additionally, human-animal hybrid is a politically incorrect term, because by definition I think we fall under animals.

So, the way I see it, a fox-human or lion-human is not really odd.

Our intelligence is our natural weapon. We lack quills and shells because we don't need them. Your hypothetical naked man vs. hungry tiger scenario is silly, because you've put the human in a situation where he can't fully utilize his best natural defenses.

It's kinda like asking who would win in a fight between a Great White shark and a Grizzly bear. It all depends on where the fight is being fought.


I'm not sure how you could say a humanoid fox-man or lion-man wouldn't be odd. I mean, if one of them suddenly showed up at your front door, you'd be pretty surprised, wouldn't you?

EDIT: And what do you mean by "normal", any way?

I'd be surprised if anyone besides my family and relatives (or friends) showed up at my front door. Now if anything that was a fantasy character showed up, I'd probably have one of 2 thoughts:

1. Oh #@$&! I'm dead.

2. Make friends, make friends... Don't wanna be on this one's bad side...

Well, in this case, I referred to normal by looking from the perspective of the rest of Earth. We may seem normal to ourselves, but in reality, we are still very odd creatures.

Speaking of intelligence, you can't say we are mentally superior because we have the ability to create tools of mass destruction and have the ability of speech. In fact we are hypocrites by seeing the wild as a savage place, for we are barbaric and brutal to one another as well (Most of the weapons we create are used to kill EACH OTHER). I think certain animals can surpass our levels of intellect with the right circumstances, i.e. dolphins.

If you believe in evolution, the human has devolved physically (although our intelligence has dramatically evolved). Especially in the modern generation, instead of adapting to their environments, humans destroy the existing environment to create something suitable for them. This is, compared to the rest of the animal kingdom, very odd.

Our behaviorism sharply contrasts from nearly all other creatures, though. We copulate for pleasure AND reproductive reasons (unlike most other animals that only copulate to reproduce, barring dolphins and bonobos), we are inclined to kill our own kind much quicker than other animals are inclined to kill their own kind, and as far as I know we are the only things on this planet that are capable of wiping ourselves out completely.

Of course I would be shocked to see a fox-man at my door, but that is because by nature we are usually inclined to think we know everything. It is not ODD to see one, it is SURPRISING to see one. I am sure odd and surprising have different meanings. Saying it is odd to see a fox man is like saying its odd to see a asteroid crash into a lake. Because we are not familiar to either, is it fair to say that they are strange?

Besides, if it's odd to see anthropomorphic beings, then it might as well be odd to see somebody of another race because they look, speak, and act differently.

As for intelligence, I think it is a tool more than a weapon. We utilize it to create weapons and defenses. It is not a weapon itself. If our minds were so powerful we can kill by just wishing death upon somebody, then I would consider it as a weapon, but last time I checked, we can't do that.

Okay, the man vs. tiger thing was shaky, but I only asked who was going to win. You could have easily said that the nude and unarmed man would use his intelligence to utilize his surroundings to defeat the tiger.

I am sure I must have contradicted myself 100 times in the above paragraphs, but I won't make an effort to change it, and I will try to stop my share of the arguing here; don't want to end up making myself look like a cynical pessimist more than I already have. Albeit in a scrambled fashion, I hope I have explained my views a little more thoroughly.

I honestly think you hit it on the nail about how our supposed advantage isn't really that much higher of an advantage over other creatures. But I will say that beavers create dams, which is technically similar to us creating buildings and such (or at least compare to us also making them, lol).

As for the tiger vs. man.... that man might also be able to use his own body to fight, if he knew how to use it properly. No, I don't mean be an idiot and try wrestling the tiger. I am meaning that the guy is one of those human weapons, someone who is one of those crazy good martial artists or something. But that's going into something that's not very likely.

Since this thread is pretty much spent and we're drifting off course, let me add that the man would kill the tiger because people have guns. I would say guns are natural from an evolutionary point of view because they were made by nature. If we are the result of ameoba growing legs and then monkeys losing hair and growing their brains, then aren't we the natural result of the forces of nature? How could such creatures not build artifacts, just like beavers build dams? So, people have weapons and tools that are a natural extension of their inherent ability -- brain power (polytics is a fluke using this logic). So, man shoots tiger with a dozen round from a .50 lmg, tiger dies, man cheers.

Back on track, sure, I like good furries, just as I like good people, good dogs, or good books. Stereotypes are well deserved for many people, but not all. I judge a person by what I observe of that person, not by what other people do. According to a psychology professor at my school, stereotypes are an abstraction that allows the human mind to categorize a mind-boggling large number of items into a more managable group of traits.

At the end of the day, you should judge someone by who they are as a person, not by what like like and first appear like.

Back on topic now, yes, i like some furry stuff and some yiff [not too heavy however, nudity, not hardcore porn], but as i explained earlier, i don't find nudity to be an issue. It doesn't bother or offend me in anyway.