Generational Divide And Masculinity

Community Posts
, , , , , , ,
1

So on @anon31733200 “uppies!” image I pondered the generational divide on Fluffies, particularly in regards to men.

It was suggested by @Oculusfluffy (originally credited to @Mr_Owl by mistake) that I move that to a full topic to allow the image comments to be Hugbox and I agree.

Reposted:

I wonder if there is a Gen X, Y, Z divide on Fluffies? Especially for men?

Gen X men (heh) seem to be suffering a crisis with the masculinity of later generations, being motivated no longer as an inspirational role but a mildly antagonistic one defined by a sense of having been failed by their successors. Gen Y masculinity seems to be defined largely by not pissing off the other two generations and straddling the line between full-on gender neutrality while hanging on for dear life to traditional symbols of masculinity and outdoorsmanship. Gen Z is, as the children say, a spectrum.

I can see a lot of Abuse from Gen X towards Fluffies. Particularly sexual, castrating “feminine males” and sorting females into Madonna/Whore and treating them with fire or giving them the Se7en treatment. I’d almost imagine they’d mainly not be interested in harming Foals, being the grandparent generation now. The Hugboxers treating Fluffies very much as toys (I imagine in most works Fluffies have been around 40+ years) but like any adult reenacting their childhood far more delicately than their younger selves. Probably the highest demand for classic color combinations akin to the first MLP cartoon.

Gen Y as Abusers too, but more generally abusive, intent on taking out the frustrations of growing in the transition from the innocent time where Columbine and 9/11 were horrors (and probably Cleveland in Fluffverse) to when that shit wouldn’t even make the news beyond idiot politician babbling about it for a week (two if a slow news cycle). The Hugboxers would probably use their Fluffies as a kind of cope, giving the Fluffies a life representing what they want; an elaborate homemade Fluffy palace if housing was a concern growing up, making them act like a compassionate masculine male (maybe styling a Fluffy “beard” out of fluff on the chin and lip allowed to grow while the rest is kept close to the body, flannel Fluffy shirts, maybe teaching them outdoors survival and an appreciation for craft beer). They’d probably desire Poopie colors more than any other.

Gen Z Abuse I can see being just typical teenage boy rage. But probably less than the other generations, and an increase in Fluffy animal rights advocation, use of Fluffies for manure and responsible clearing of brush on farms, and use of Fluffies to show acceptance of LGBTQI+ folks asa living metaphor of the rainbow and acceptance. Colors not mattering, since they probably have them styled anyway.

12 Likes
2

It was @Oculusfluffy -_-

2 Likes
3

Fix’d.
My apologies.

2 Likes
4

While I agree there is a generational divide I think there is a bit of a mix up on some things, imo.

A good chunk of GenX traits you listed are more Boomer qualities.

A good chunk of GenY traits are more GenX and Millennial qualities.

Pretty spot on with GenZ though.

:yum::wink:

2 Likes
5

Abuse is is beta bitch shit and has nothing to do whit masculinity

3 Likes
6

I was kind of equating Abuse with several things. Hunting (which can be positively masculine even if its not my hat, but can also take the form of basic bitch Wayne Lapierre and his completely pathetic elephant “hunt”). People abusing their children and pets out of insecurity. People with positive destructive hobbies like building model kits to blow up with fireworks. Finally, people taking out frustrations by fighting, consuming violent media, or playing violent tabletop/video games.

Shit like that.

Not overall positive or negative, since Fluffies can themselves be harmless or harmful depending on the universe (or the way I imagine it geographic location and how dedicated people are to Fluffy-proofing their property and environment). But with the potential to be positive or negative, and representative of something in their lives.

7

I would like the gens SIMPLE

There is booru gen,

And there is after booru.

Simple

2 Likes
8

Words have meanings if you are going to give them random meaning you have to define that new meaning or you are just typing letters

2 Likes
9

In the world of allegory and expression, everything is everything!

10

Potato combust to gibe they’ll vest out acorn, everything is everything indeed

2 Likes
11

OOOOOO I LOVE THIS SO MUCH

1 Like
12

'Twas brillig
and the slithy toves
did gyre and gimble in the wabe.
All mimsy were the borogoves
and the mome raths outgrabe.

1 Like
13

I will need to reread and process this later on. Thank you :slight_smile:

<— late GenX, arguable Xennial if you recognize that grouping, more of a hugboxer but find abuse oddly fascinating in a detached way, do have my limits, probably NOT aware of all my particularities.

1 Like
14

I am a late Gen X, early Millennial cis woman. I like boys’ toys growing up but I also liked things that were cute and did play with Barbies as a child. As a child I was exposed to A LOT of cutesy pink crap and I think my rage against fluffies is part of my rejection of that sticky-sweet shit. Terrible, worthless kids’ media for girls was such garbage back then compared to the cool stuff boys got like TMNT. And I loved TMNT.

The 90s was also the heyday of dark “edgy” 90s humor and dark violent media. I still have a little bit of that in me. Like it wasn’t cool to like video games that didn’t have blood in them.

Despite being a female, I draw some pretty messed-up stuff. A lot of those things came from anger, and since I’m feeling happier lately, I haven’t drawn as much. But I like both abuse and hugbox.

1 Like
15

Speaking as somebody who doesn’t see abuse as innate and prefers to work on canon(s) that doesn’t have widespread abuse or treats it as a “normal”, I do think differe generations would have different reasons for owning a fluffy. But thing is, it ultimately boils down to “why” fluffies would be made in the first place, and why they are the way there are.

In a satirical canon where fluffies are “incomplete” MLP, or are a parody of girls cartoons toys made flesh, than sure, I could see how mistreatment of them would be a punchline to said stereotypes. But I’ve developed a fondness for stories that actually tried to explore fluffies in a more serious way. After all, cartoons and comcis centered about intelligent neotenic animals or a babyspeak theme are not new, as seen with Baby Looney Toon and Muppet Babies.

Following on that trend, a canon I prefer to work with is that interest in fluffies grew out of an interest in a show or property. The base can be MLP, or it can be a pastiche of MLP (lately I’ve been writing a show called My Little Fluffy). Conversely, rival companies could come up with thei own franchsies they want to market with their own fluffy pony biotoys.

From there, it would be good to look into why the millennial and Gen Z generations liked MLP so much. It was a phenomena that baffled people when it first happened, but, on 4chan, it was a meme. An ironic meme that became a bit more serious. But, thats not to say MLP:FiM didn’t have merit, for a show to become a meme, it needs to have some quality that it is either good, or outrageously and hilariously bad. Anti-bronies would easily the latter, but the fact remains that /co/'s interest in MLP:FiM was because Lauren Faust was working on it, and the aesthetics of the show harkened to the days of classic 90s cartoons.

I am hesitant to explore Gen X, which is defined as a 60s to 80s period, because I cannot imagine those people being interested in MLP or an MLPlike show, and from their, the subsequent products (nlcuding fluffies). Fluffy canon, imho, should be understood as the result of a phenomena that affected an unusual male demographic consisting of millenians and gen X.

I did a writeup about how it was a group of bronies that created fluffies. It also makes sense to understand the unusual nature of the MLP:FiM fandom. They may seem cringy, but I’d argue that bronies are diverse. Hell, we still have MLP fans within fluffies (Foxhoarder comes to mind), as well as myself.

@RQ I’ve actually been wondering whats your thoughts on Gen4 MLP, aka MLP:FiM. Part of my reason for liking MLP:FiM is because it is not “sticky-sweet shit”. Part of the reason why /co/ was interested in MLP:FiM was because it harkened back to 90s cartoons of a similar aesthetic like Powerpuff Girls and Dexter’s Lab. (after all, Lauren Faust is the wife of Craig McCracken, and they both worked on the Powerpuff Girls)

I sometimes wonder if the latter, non-MLP:FiM fluffy artists/writers, especially the anti-brony ones, typified fluffies as “sticky-sweet shit” based on an assumption of MLP on its Gen 1 to Gen 3 incarnations, as opposed to the more interesting Gen 4. I know @Pushka felt that they were attacking fluffies base don what they disliked in Gen 4, but too much about assumptions about “wuv and huggies” of fluffies in latter fluffy canon reminds me of setereotypes and presumptions of being an “MLP fan”, without knowing why MLP:FiM had the fandom it did.

3 Likes
16

Gen Z here. It’s hard to speak for everyone because of how these generational divides aren’t as solid as some believe, but I think you’re mostly right.

Generally speaking, I think there is something to be said about the access I had growing up to extremely violent stuff. With all of the gore on the internet and the accessibility of video games, if fluffies were real I think you wouldn’t see as much abuse among my demographic. That being said, I definitely find the abuse content to be more entertaining.

17

Its a lot more complex then that.

There was a pre-booru gen, as there was fluffy content made before Fluffybooru existed.

Fluffybooru also existed for NINE years before it died. And within those nine years the fluffy hivecanon got very confused. Heck, even you yourself admit there are many fluffya rtists you don’t know about, and I’d point out that the designs and ideas of fluffies change over time.

Even the reddit content, or after booru is fairly new, as the reddit only gained its traction in the last year.

tl;dr The timeline of the booru should NOT be so grossly simplified, especially when the history of the booru itself is complex.

2 Likes
18

Pre booru is to scattered in focus barely more than a off shoot of mlp the booru years is when fluffys solidified into its own distinct thing ,booru and post booru works just fine when talking about fluffys

1 Like
19

For some reason I thought that MLP was from 1976, so it would have more relevance to Gen X in a Fluffyverse where Fluffies basically came out with the show (or copyright-free equivalent). Still, younger Gen X was certainly part of it being created in 1981.

Something else as a factor occurs to me. Lisa Frank and the sparklepony aesthetic was usually detested by Gen X boys, but sparkleponies were not universally reviled. Plenty of boys liked the original She-ra and were just disappointed by how her toyline didn’t fit well with existing He-man scale and sculpt compatibility but her sparklepony pegasus named Swift Wind was still a popular toy for both genders. Plus, Transformers has explored both horse characters and a rainbow/neon aesthetic long before the first MLP/Transformers crossover.

I think my hypothesis was wrong and @Aurix is right. Gen X would be more divided, Boomers would loathe Fluffies most.

20

Pre-Booru is actually better documented thanks to the 4chan archiving.

1 Like