On a scale of 1 to 10, I sympathize with fluffies at a solid “fuck all.”
1 Like
TL;DR: I feel sympathy for Fluffies that didn’t make their life completely shit because they wanted stuff they weren’t ready or mature enough to have, or their owners didn’t want to give them because they didn’t shit on the floor.
Still, it is something so rare to see that it is commendable, a fluffie who could be measured in his desires and discarded instant pleasure for something more enduring and thought ahead, is something to be admired when looking at his peers.
I do sympathize fluffies quite sum, that’s no secret, that’s because i grew up with farmland all around, so the connection with horses is made naturally, i remember cycling around as a kid, and ofcourse i checked horses out standing at the gate, well horses are social towards humans, so ofcourse i petted one on the nose on more occasions, while never being formally introduced. That was the begin of me liking horses, the friendly dememour, the elegance.
So the link to MLP was quickly made, and the link to fluffies faster when discovered, coz MLP ponies never take a shit, i mean when does Fluttershy fertilizes Applejacks appletrees?
So, fluffies are to me, the mainstream cartoon horses coz of that, more versatile and a bit of realism in the cuteness and the amount of shit.
1 Like
It depends. Of course some story styles (bleak, sad) rely on your sympathy but there’s also like, the character involved and the skill of the writer. An underdog character who keeps going in spite of what they’re going through is likely gonna get sympathy from me. But there’s also a limit, lest we hit like Urbanspook territory and it’s just ‘everything sucks and is horrible 24/7’ and then it’s laughable.
For anything I write (and eventually decide to share) it’s a case by case basis.
1 Like
I’ve never actually thought about it? It depends on how they’re written, I suppose. Not just in a “oh it’s an asshole/it’s a good boy” way, but if the fluffy’s being tortured because it did things that made sense to it, then that feels unfair. (For example a fluffy being treated as a yard invader and having its family tortured to death when it actually just didn’t see the house, or the story treating a fluffy like an evil smarty when in fact the human stepped on its son two sentences prior so it has genuine reason to be pissed off.)
A fluffy that has personality instead of being a caricature, one that can say things beyond those tropey “nu huwt am just widdwe babbehs” lines, I’d sympathize with. Otherwise, they don’t feel sapient enough to really warrant it.
2 Likes
If they’re being good, then I sympathize. If they do bad things, my sympathy drops depending on what they’re doing.
Smarties and bitch mares are generally where I have no sympathy.
Foal abuse and neglect by mares makes me lose all sympathy for them, even if they are not being bitch mares otherwise.
100%.
That’s how much I sympathize with fluffies. When I come across content where I can’t pick up on the creator’s empathy toward fluffies I lose interest.
If they’re just little bio machines prompted by their wetware to spew a handful of pre-programmed phrases then it’s simply a Furbee that eats and shits. In that case what’s the point of following the fluffy’s misadventures? Also all the humans having reactions to them seem developmentally stunted. Why are you torturing that G.I. Joe doll if you’re older than 12?
If the fluffies are (somewhat) sentient but there is no empathy it reads like racism or xenophobia to me. In these stories fluffies are the ultimate ”other”. Truly like some of the worst documented examples from history, where people have confidently proclimed that other humans are born to serve, feel no pain, that kneeling is biologically necessry for their health, and worse. You can do whatever you want to a fluffy. It’s okay. Go ahead. They’re not human anyway. Now substitute the word ‘fluffy’ for any seriously bad racial slur, and you can find the same attitude from 50, 100, 300 years ago, spelled out unironically.
To take the side of those in power against the powerless, without reflection, can never be satire. It defaults to bullying, or tyranny. To me, the worst examples of this writing is when fluffies become a threat to human society. They have fangs and attack people. They eat all the crops and cause famine. They spread disease and hurt or kill pets. “They’re eating the cats. They’re eating the dogs! THEY’RE EATING THE PETS!!!” When a creator needs to make fluffies into a dangerous, alien threat that are at the same time infinitely weak and powerless, but also life-threatening and powerful, that’s when I know a fluffy story was not written for me. It was created by someone who’s scared and unwilling to consider the perspective of other people.
With that said we’re all here to enjoy whatever we enjoy. This is nothing but my personal preference.
9 Likes
I feel sympathy for them if the story is well written and elicit such feelings like “Rosemary” but most of the time the most satisfying content for me is the abuse, betrayal, cruelty against the innocent trusting kind loving fluffies.
And I’m a totally normal person irl and never hurt an animal ever even stray ones. In fact I have four dogs I would never even think of laying a finger on.
But if fluffies were real I would definitely abuse them in every conceivable way.
It should be 99% totally sympathetic fluffies against the big cruel world with the one 1% evil fucker you want to see get splatted that works as a villain. The platonic ideal of fluffies should be mostly naive as hell fuzzballs with a love and hugs outlook contrasted against the cruel world. Fluffies didn’t ask to exist within the worlds we create with stories and pictures. But they exist within and how they are treated is what makes those stories and art interesting.
And it’s OK for fluffies to have flaws that they are not perfectly behaved 100% all of the time. Their flaws are what make them interesting and sympathetic because they make mistakes. It’s what separates the really memorable interesting stories from mindless abuse that you forget after you read it.
3 Likes
Personally speaking? Pretty much 0%. why? For me, it’s just walking and talking test subjects, things to test new stuff out of or just toss into a meat gainer. They breed more then rats, a general health hazard, can’t learn a damn thing beyond what it sees beyond its nose.
I can feel sorry for a kitten or puppy out on the street because they have to learn how to find for themselves and become feral in doing so, like how nature teaches them to do it. A fluffy on the other hand, expat everything to be given them on a silver platter and want it given to them on a gold plate. If you toss one into a forest, a fluffy will die rather soon - may that be from animals, bugs or its own shit that it sleeps near it.
The best I can say for them is putting them in a cage and do test on them. The only sympathy they can get is fast death once the testing trails are done.
1 Like
No sympathy from me at all.
Evolution didn’t create them, so they don’t deserve a life of their own, that’s my point of view. Humans created them as objects to satisfy human’s desires, either hugbox or abuse, and fluffies only may be allowed to live for that purpose.
The fact that they are ‘awive’ and have ‘feewins’ doesn’t touch me at all, that doesn’t change the purpose of their existence.
You don’t feel sorry for the punching bag in the gym, right? So you shouldn’t feel sorry for a fluffy as well.
1 Like
Forgot to add in to the earlier post but this has been a perpetual problem with the community since the early days of the fandom that people, especially during the /b/ era wanted to hate fluffies so much but didn’t want to write abuse on fluffies that didn’t deserve it. So they kept on making up reasons to get mad at fluffies. Hell /b/tards came up with “Poopie babbeh” which was “Now we made them racist so you have to hate them”. /b/ of all places trying to make moral parables about racism using fluffies.
It’s just, if you want to hate fluffies, that was easy to do in their original incarnation because they were cute aggression to the max and sickeningly sweet. You don’t need to add in all these moral grandstanding tropes to fluffies to to hate them.
not very much at all but i like to portray them as cute and horribly endearing as possible so the abuse is that much nicer
1 Like
I membah bwuddah… I membah da boawd waws…
Zero percent- they represent capitalism and greed. There’s not a store on the planet that would want one of these things in their house with the amount of poop and maintenance required. Don’t even get me started on the voice.
imagine other peoples children whining, shitting, and begging everyone withon earshot for toys.
Yeah, fuck no. Kill them all.
3 Likes
I’m sympathetic to poopie babbehs and those bullied by smarties. I’m a fan of pigeons and I feel for those poor things. I wouldn’t hate fluffies so much as I would pity the poor things.
1 Like
I sympathize
I sympathize with them quite a lot at a baseline, but that changes depending on the fluffies themselves.
Poopie babbehs get a lot of sympathy.
Bitch mares and Smarties get very little.
Enfie babbehs get a lot of sympathy.
Well-behaved fluffies written with some level of compassion and thought process get a lot of sympathy.
It’s all in the context of the individual characters, I don’t love or condemn fluffies as a whole.
2 Likes
Loving the replies on here but I think Za hit the nail on the head right off the bat, at least in my opinion.
The fact that the fluffies don’t deserve it, even when they’re being horrible little shitrats, is what makes a good fluffy story. Yeah sometimes they can be selfish or judgemental. So can toddlers. That’s where their mental and emotional development caps which is what makes it so horrifying and/or hilarious when you chuck one into a combine harvester.
4 Likes
I like that idea like the good fluffys are rare and the majority of them are a mix of dumb selfish and full of ego so it feels more like slap stick comedy to bash thier heads in or impale them on stuff like medieval time torture special event.