Dimorphism Across Different Boxes and the Standardization of the Fluffy: A Poorly Written Essay

Community Posts
, ,
1

(Note: I wrote this all in one draft. I don’t really care whether or not it makes much sense. Also fuck you I love commas. I’ll use as many commas as I want.)

If you’re a neutralboxer like me and enjoy fluffy media from all reaches of the community, you may have noticed some trends regarding the psychology of fluffies across different boxes. For instance, fluffies in hugbox stories often exhibit emotional depth and intelligence rarely found in abusebox stories. I’d like to talk a little about that.

When you get down to it, everything makes sense plot-wise. Smart and nice fluffies are easier to love while stupid and selfish fluffies are easier to hate. On paper it seems okay but I feel that it’s actually one of the community’s worst tropes. Instead of the hugboxer teaching fluffies to share their toys and get along with their new alicorn sibling, the hugbox fluffy already understands this and makes zero character development. Instead of the abuseboxer hurting a fluffy who barely understands what violence is, the fluffy is evil and cynical and WORKED FOR OSAMA BIN LADEN so they deserve what’s coming to them and the abuse just becomes justice.

So, how do we fix this? Should we pick one trope and stick with it across all boxes? Should we just keep doing what we’re doing? Or should we pick a third option that I couldn’t think of, but wanted a third option because the number three is satisfying? I think we (And by that I mean me) should look at all different types of fluffies, and decide which strengths and weaknesses make the fluffiest fluffy. For that, we need to generalize all fluffies into uhh lets sayyy…Three categories. These being [A]: Angels, [B]: Classics, and [C]: Hellgremlins.

Starting on a good note: Angels, as I’ve decided to call them, are therapists with a lisp. They have a keen understanding of what is right and wrong, innate survival skills, always listen to their owners, and are almost always found in hugbox or really mushy sadbox. They usually help the owner in some way, such as helping them overcome heartbreak. They’re rarely dumber than a teenage human. If they’re abandoned, then expect them to be rescued by some hugboxer. If they’re feral, expect some Warrior’s fanfic. They’re rarely seen in abusebox unless the author is really, really sadistic.

Classics are the neutral point on the fluffy scale. They’re the closest you can get to a believable animal. Most of them are friendly and emotionally mature (take that part with a big grain of salt, because fluffies) but require proper teaching to iron out any faults. They rarely understand how dangerous the world is to their meek forms, but come pre-packaged with enough common sense to keep themselves from running straight off a cliff. Smartie classics are exceedingly rare. Bad mummah classics don’t really exist, unless you count a fluffy running away so they can have babies. That’s more a programming fault than actual stubbornness though. There’s not much else to say about them.

And finally, hellgremlins. They’re often narcissistic, psychopathic, severely mentally stunted, or ridiculously immature. If they’re not the victim of an abusebox story, then they’re most certainly the antagonist in a tropey neutralbox story. Hellgremlins will abandon their foals for no reason. Hellgremlins will walk straight into a fireplace even after it’s burned them several times. Hellgremlins will break into your backyard and sadistically beat up your precious poopy fluffy, only to play innocent and grovel for mercy when you chase them with a garden hose. And worst of all, THEY. SHIT. EVERYWHERE.

Now, I’ll go ahead and say I favor classics above the other two. This doesn’t mean that angels and hellgremlins dont have great aspects. In fact, I’d like to take aspects from the two and merge them with classics in a way. Make a new, fluffiest fluffy. This fluffy needs a name though. Feel free to suggest one. **(And now, for the moment you’ve all been waiting for: The new and improved fluffy. I’m gonna just call them “fluffies” in the next couple paragraphs because i’m sick of coming up with new names. Just pretend no other fluffies exist for a couple minutes.)

First we must understand that fluffies are imperfect beings. Their mental structure is a mix of feral instinct and artificial programming. The two halves compliment each other and should always be accounted for. Fluffies are friendly and social creatures. They get along well with each other, but are prone to misbehaving. Bad behavior can usually be attributed to poor teaching or improper discipline. Fluffies are programmed to h-

(Actually…I just got bored of typing. I’m not even gonna read this over before I send it. I’ll finish this later…maybe.)

9 Likes
2

Getting real tired of how much of the content on here is about a fluffy that worked for Bin Laden.

6 Likes
3

I mean this with all sincerity and I’m not trying to be mean: Who gives a crap

Do whatever you want. If there is something wrong with this community it’s the fact that people feel the need to box everything. To basically make a conformity or a standard. I haven’t been here long but even I can tell that. People shouldn’t take one thing or another as concrete or fact. You should strive toward whatever makes you happiest. Want to borrow elements introduced over the years? That’s cool, most everyone does it. I feel like trying to make a ‘standard’ for what a fluffy is, is just kind counter-intuitive to what makes the thing so fun in the first place.

They can be whatever you want! They are the avatars for your love or destruction.

7 Likes
4

If you got bored typing it imagine how we feel trying to read it, not every thought needs to be communicated.

7 Likes
5

I’m still waiting for Fuckbox to become an officially recognized box community :sparkles:

6 Likes
6

:musical_note: Comma, comma, comma, comma, comma chameleon! :musical_note:

7

Am I the only one who makes fluffies cute AND dumb? I think them being innocent, naive, and stupid makes them funnier and more endearing

5 Likes
8

Lmao, please and thank you

9

Lol no.

Abusebox is extremely disinteresting without strong emotional reactions from the fluffies being abused. Watching a fictional pig horse get ripped in half only does it if you’ve never seen a fluffy get abused before. Otherwise the physical abuse is just a vector to psychological and emotional abuse.

What you are thinking of is “bad writing”, that thing where the fluffies obliviously spew stock phrases and bumble their way into setups that allow the ubiquitous all-powerful human protagonist to kill them in unoriginal ways/save and raise the feces-hued runt in a sudden, out-of-character bout of hugboxing.

5 Likes
10

honestly i have many fluffy charaters that are a mix of things and would be really really cool to play with but, im lazy and too tired so i might just make a quick wright up of them with little art and post em around and explain their antics.
i love diversity in fluff-storys. though i see nothing wrong with sticking to the classics

1 Like
11

You make a very good point. In my defense though, I barely remember writing any of this.

12

fair point

13

My vote for options 3. We change nothing. People who abuse fluffies will pick fluffies that are fun to abuse. And people who love fluffies will gravitate to adopting fluffies with better personalities and more emotional capacity. I think what you are seeing is the natural end result of people using fluffies how they were intended to be used, for fun.

What I mean is, the more emotional/intelligent fluffies will tend to be favored by people who want to take care of them and stupid/arrogant fluffies will be the first on the chopping block for abusers. If this goes on long enough we might even see a general spike in fluffy intelligence as the ones who survive and breed are smarter. Might even make an interesting story prompt.

Anyway, that’s my head cannon explanation for the split.

1 Like