Page 1 of 4
A hindrance to furries?
Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:06 pm
by Muninn
An excerpt from Richard Dawkins' The Ancestor's Tale...
In Borneo and Sumatra, the long tailed macaque lives up trees, while the closely related pig-tailed macaque lives on the ground and has a short tail. Monkeys that are active in trees usually have long tails. They run along the branches on all four, using the tail for balance. They leap from branch to branch with the body in a horizontal position and the tail held out as a balancing rudder behind. Why, then, do gibbons, who are as active in trees as any monkey, have no tail? Maybe the answer lies in the very different way in which they move. All apes, as we have seen, are occasionally bipedal, and gibbons, when not brachiating, run along branches on their hind legs, using their long arms to steady themselves. It is easy to imagine a tail being a nuisance for a bipedal walker. My colleague Desmond Morris tells me that spider monkeys sometimes walk bipedally, and the long tail is obviously a major encumbrance. And when a gibbon projects itself to a distant branch it does so from a vertically hanging position, unlike the monkey's horizontal leaping posture. Far from being a steady rudder streaming out behind, a tail would be a positive drag for a vertical brachiator like a gibbon...
Or maybe even... furries?
I know that most furries who have avatars of themselves in anthro form do it because they want one and the anatomical difficulties (apparently) posed by tails are the least of their worries.
I'm not telling them to change but this paragraph made me think of them. What if this actually was true for furries, their tails being a hindrance? It may look cute and cuddly but it may also impend their walking.
Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:11 pm
by Tabris_The_17th
Since it's all fantasy anyway, I don't think this would really hinder me at all. That is fascinating though.
Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:20 pm
by Tom Flapwell
By the same token, a canid muzzle should be a hindrance to speech. That don't stop us.
Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:28 pm
by Burning Sheep Productions
It's bothered me how anthros can sit in backed chairs and lie down as if their tail were not there.
Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 9:01 pm
by CodeCat
I actually think a lot about this kind of 'small stuff'. Things like how they'd sit, walk, live etc.
Maybe I should make a study out of it!
Re: A hindrance to furries?
Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 12:18 am
by Novil Ariandis
What if this actually was true for furries, their tails being a hindrance? It may look cute and cuddly but it may also impend their walking.
This is a ridiculous thought about a non existing problem. What's next? The discussion of possible eye problems of anime characters?
Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 12:23 am
by The Donmeister
I think it's a good point. But looking at the pic at the top of this website, Ozy & Millie's tails stay up, so they don't really get in the way. As for sitting, a chair with a hole in the back would work.
I want to know how Millie can wear shorts with a tail.
Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 1:22 am
by Tum0spoo
I want to know how Millie can wear shorts with a tail.
2 ways.
Either they only come up to the tail
or
there is a hole in them for the tail to fit through, possibly with a string woven through the waistband to tighten the hole after the bulk of the tail is through.
Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 8:00 am
by Burning Sheep Productions
Normally there's a form of hole in the pants.
Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 5:14 pm
by Tom Flapwell
You might expect the fur on the tail to be ruched back after getting through the hole.
Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 5:26 am
by Tai
Tails are extensions of spines ok
Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 10:11 am
by Gizensha
You might expect the fur on the tail to be ruched back after getting through the hole.
It's called a comb
And weather a tail is a hinderance to bipeds would depend solely on what sort of design/shape the tail was. I mean, I never heard the bipedal dinos complain about their tail getting in the way.
Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 11:47 am
by Rooster
I can't comment for any other species, but canine tails are quite light in comparison to cat tails, as they have fewer muscles. So I doubt a dog tail would really be a pain in the arse.
As for the sitting thing, I tend to sit quite forward anyways, with my cocix not on the seat. But if the worst came to the worst, I imagine they'd just sell chairs with open backs.
Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 6:50 pm
by Spray
But if the worst came to the worst, I imagine they'd just sell chairs with open backs.
Don't they already do that?
Anyway, I imagine most anthros would just curl their tails around to the front, instead of sitting on them.
Re: A hindrance to furries?
Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 8:36 pm
by Muninn
What if this actually was true for furries, their tails being a hindrance? It may look cute and cuddly but it may also impend their walking.
This is a ridiculous thought about a non existing problem. What's next? The discussion of possible eye problems of anime characters?
Heh, how convenient that you do not quote the part where I said something to the effect of "this isn't ment to be a serious topic, let's just go along with it".
Besides, discussion about non existing things has been staple of human history. Do we tell made up stories because we think they're real? When we read fiction do we try to prove the events in the book actually happen? Please be more considerate.
And weather a tail is a hinderance to bipeds would depend solely on what sort of design/shape the tail was. I mean, I never heard the bipedal dinos complain about their tail getting in the way.
Well, the legs of dinosaurs were bipedal but not their posture. I would think a Tyrannosaurus with that big a head would need a good balance.