Fluffies gaining animal rights

I need to ask the community if there has been any discussion on the possibility of fluffies gaining animal rights? Or at least, being sapient enough that they are given their rights as living beings?


It depends on your headcanon to be fair.

If your stories take place in a mirror world that has the same scientific conventions as our real one, then you’ll likely ditch the biotoy trope as a whole, because it makes no sense.

That being said, it does present some unique writing challenges to do so.

Mainly, no abuse in plain sight, unless you want your abuser character to be locked up immediately or be accused of having god levels of plot armor. Also a more strict take on shelters/mills and foal-in-a-can machines, as you’d be hard pressed to have those in a regulated, modern setting.

Unless you go with the chinese stereotype of eating domestic pets like dogs or cats, then you can have people eating fluffies.

In short, the biotoy thing frees the author from having to think about third parties and their reactions, as “high pitched voices screaming bloody murder from an alleyway” is normal and nobody cares.

If you meant “banning the biotoy trope community-wide”, I doubt it will happen.

If you envision a world where Fluffies are considered animals, this primarily affects abuse-focused stories. Neutral, Hug and Sadbox would be largely unchanged, Fluffies would still far and wide be considered a pest, look no further than rats as comparison.

That being said, I do remember reading a story or two that used similar writing methods, instead of saying “Fluffies are animals”, they at least made it illegal to torture them. Likewise I’ve seen the exact opposite, where being kind to Fluffies was illegal because they caused so many problems as a pest. You can honestly go wherever you like with your headcanon as long as you write it properly.


That is so entrenched with fluffy consciousness, that it’s almost impossible to consider.
It’s like batman and depressing childhood trauma.


The stories, can you gimme a link to them?

I know it’s kind of shameless to say this, but fluffies in my stories have animal rights.

there is always discussion of fluffies having rights , all that really changes is fluffies go from being a commodity to a willing slave or you start changing other characteristic till anything unique about fluffies is lost and you might as well just be writing about talking dogs


I know it happened in the Boopverse.

1 Like

That’s a rather fatalistic point of view.

The concept of animal rights does not change much for most stories: it only makes things a bit harder for the writer.

You can’t have abusers just paint an alleyway red in broad daylight and abusers that do get caught in the act face anything from a fine to a few years in prison, just like real life, but beyond that, it’s really not a big deal.

For example (Shamelessness ahead):

From my first story

Now replace it with: The next morning, he had shown up, a metal baseball bat in his hands: a tool used by many people to deal with the filthy biotoys whenever they invaded their property.

See how little that changed?

The result is the same, I only had to take a few steps to make the human go Rambo when nobody was around to avoid legal and moral repercussions, as opposed to have most humans look like bloodthirsty maniacs who openly butcher herds in public.

1 Like

no a lot had to change from going from a society that looks as fluffies as nothing to having them have value, but as you say what’s the point of giving them rights if it is just lip service and changes nothing in the story you could have said they have magical powers but if it is not used as a plot point why bother


Ok, but the whole “fluffies have no value” is best portrayed with bleakbox, where fluffy lives have no meaning and matter so little to every human that they might aswell not exist. In that case, since the point of the story is to be willingly dystopian, the biotoy trope has actual literary value.

Which is not what the story in question was about. It followed the misadventures of a foal and his family in a more realistic (hence the lack of dystopian elements) setting.

You still have the fluffy violence, but the human society isn’t depicted as a bunch of screaming lunatics who collectively draw pleasure from painting the town red.

You still have (like real life!) people who do, but have to do so quietly, far from prying eyes.

You don’t have (like real life, I guess) magic animals floating around.

Tl;dr realistic setting instead of dystopian one.

I simply like it more.

If you do prefer the “worthlessness of fluffies as a species” theme, it’s really just peachy!

1 Like

like i said earlier you eventuly start striping away what makes fluffies uniqe to justify your inconsequential plot point , the fluffy is sill killed but it is more discreet what really changed for the fluffy


Basically the same as what everyone else is saying, it just muddies abuse stories and makes the setting too realistic for some people. The idea of fluffies being considered biotoys isn’t nearly as unbelievable as the idea of fluffies actually existing in the first place. I think of it as similar to slavery in ancient societies. Slaves aren’t considered people in these environments and in theory you could do whatever you wanted to them without any legal repercussions, but if pentius flavius gets a reputation for setting his slaves on fire, people are probably going to get a little wary of him. Likewise going into some alley where discarded slaves are hiding out and just going crazy with the gladius would be seen as similarly distasteful, even if it isn’t technically illegal. Though of course, slaves weren’t considered invasive vermin in roman societies…

You can do what you want with your stories at the end of the day, but the biotoy angle is popular for a reason, and it’s probably not going away any time soon.


For the fluffy nothing, for my suspension of disbelief a lot.

Also, it’s highly debatable that what makes fluffies unique is (only) how little they matter to humans.

Many great stories out here wouldn’t exist if the fluffies in them didn’t matter to some humans.

1 Like

talking genetic abomination a ok talking genetic abomination that is a commodity what that is not realistic at all, and did the fluffies need to have rights for them to matter to their owners no so what does giving them rights change .

the plot point of fluffies having right can be interesting but no one is really going to explore it in depth that would make it a worth will point, it’s just a point less check mark on your donut steel head cannon


My good fellow, we just like different things!

You like your fluffies for the nihilistic message of “life is meaningless and the people on top don’t care about you” and I like a more “realistic” (not real, mind you. Fluffies don’t exist, I am well aware, but I still want the universe my stories are set in to mostly adhere to real world laws and science mumbo jumbo, such as the correct definition of “animal”) approach.

I like Star Wars even if there’s no space wizards and laser guns IRL. Or The Elder Scrolls/The Lord of The Rings even if elves and magic aren’t a thing in reality!

We don’t have to agree on every little detail, as long as we respect each other’s opinion!


why would i respect you striping out one of the core themes of fluffies to replace it with a boring meaningless realistic platitude that fluffies have rights but nothing changes thematically in the fluffy stories . it is just some weird derangement that makes you feel superior by saying my interpretation is more realistic , your every post just confirms what i said in the begin fluffies having rights adds noting because if fluffies are treated like animals the size to be fluffies

1 Like

The biotoy thing is a bit weird, because wasn’t it originally a way to avoid license fees or something? It was just a big corporation being like “no no we don’t need breeding papers or anything, these are uh … action figures”.

I guess the headcanon difference is whether people believed them or not. Some places being like “yeah those are toys sure, whatever lets me kill them without repercussion”, while other ones are more “yeah no these are clearly animals, we’re gonna treat them like it”.

Personally, I feel like it makes sense for their status to vary by area. Some cities or countries have gone all-in on the biotoy angle, others have completely seen through it and reclassified fluffies as animals, and some are on the fence about it. This means no stories are designated to “not canon”, and there’s fun to be had from someone moving from one type of city to another.


The “Is a fluffy an animal” debate gets political in my headcanon. When it comes to legislation, the Dems are in favor of recognizing fluffies as animals while the Repubs are the ones against it. The debate about fluffies and their rights have led to political extremists going against each other and taking the abuse vs. hugbox angle to a whole new level. One example is that there’s an Anti Abuse Action group similar to Antifa.

1 Like

Well, because it’s a core theme only if you base your story on it.

And there’s bleakbox for that whole theme, for authors to go nuts on the whole “meaninglessness of fluffy lives” thing.

As for why I do it, I told you already. I. Don’t. Like. It. Simple as that. I am no fan of bleakbox, if I want to depresso espresso myself with nihilism on purpose, I can just go look up the death toll for some war and ponder on the fragility of life itself.

Beyond that, the biotoy trope simply ticks my suspension of disbelief, because it’s a random dystopian element that is, quite simply, unnecessary. “But why are you ok with talking rat-pig-horses and not with that small detail?” you might ask. The answer is… I don’t know. I simply dislike when, in any kind of fiction, the in-universe laws do not apply to something because it’s convenient to the plot or to the writers themselves. It simply happens, I can’t turn it off, sorry.

About the superiority stuff?

Nnnyes? Yyyno?

I mean, if you take two different authors’ works, both of which are set in a world just like ours, with the same laws of physics, mostly similar/same countries and legislations, well…

The one where fluffies are correctly labeled as ‘animals’ is automatically more realistic than the other where these flesh and blood, talking creatures can be jammed on a cactus and left to bleed to death in your backyard while your neighbours share a beer with you while admiring your handiwork.

But ‘more realistic’ doesn’t mean that the story is better.

Do not mistake a simple preference for arrogance.