of courses all that is just your head cannon
2 Likes
True, I was talking from the hypothetical standpoint that if they were real, and having some thoughts on why some would abuse the fluffies and most people wouldn’t bat an eye on it except due to public health concerns.
My guesstimate is that industrial sadbox and occasional abuse would be the norm, just due to the influence such a creature would have. Since industrial sadbox is already pretty much the norm in the real world with regards to modern husbandry and food production.
It seems to really rile up people that these things would be mistreated if they did walk around, why?
4 Likes
The problem with discussing “what would we do if fluffies were real” is the fact that different artists and writers have different ideas on fluffies. Something as simple as “what do fluffies look like” has no definite answer - so many people have different ideas on how fluffies. should look. Hell, I based my main written series on how different each fluffy artstyle could look.
From there, it becomes the question of asking to what extent are fluffies a problem, or if they are even a “problem” within the universe the artist or writer is depicting. I know Waggytail never obsessed about fluffy as vermin, and even openly explored them as an ownable pet.
I really feel like it just becomes an excuse to explore some deep-seated preference for abuse and torture. Granted, not all abuse-centric artists or neutralboxers go that far - Shadysmarty once did a comic about fluffies being a pest but, after a while, they were mostly eradicated, and the last remaining feral family in a city dies to accidental abuse. It was a gory story, but the beauty of it was that, even though it showed a period where abuse was openly allowed, the primary action was focused on uncaring, oblivious accidental abuse.
I think its because of their nature as a neotenic animal with sapient/sentient qualities. As Vaught mentioned to me earlier in this topic, there’s a lot of disturbing implications regarding fluffies, especially if one humanizes them (which I do). I think the implications of fluffies are interesting from a science-fiction and specualtive angle, but I find that these ideas are heavily marred when some edgy and grimdark people are in it only to jack off to the blood and gore
4 Likes
I can see where you’re coming from and the hugbox content is very much appreciated. For example: even though my headcanon is extremely bleak I do like looking at hugbox from time to time, to see that sometimes there is a happy ending.
In fact, hugbox is a natural compliment to abusebox as it allows for a wider array of emotions to be felt by the reader towards these creatures.
3 Likes
I think because people equate how you would treat a fictional creature with how you would treat actual animals, like dogs or cats. People are really passionate about animals, often more-so than humans because animals are pure and innocent and very frequently are victims of genuine sickos.
I was concerned about this too when I initially discovered the community, but it became clear to me that, at a minimum, 95% of the community would never dream of hurting a real animal. That made me warm-up to the idea of “justified abuse”, because fluffies really can be little assholes to a degree that no animal on Earth can.
That’s my opinion.
4 Likes
If it was a rare variant like an alicorn or one of Turboenculator’s cannibal fluffs: like a highly loved pet.
If it was anything else: I would get a hammer and redacted and if it’s a herd (I like gardening, it upsets me when I hear about how greedy and invasive ferals are), I would leave any foals with stallions that have been fed redacted. That’d be a fun afternoon.
1 Like
Yes: the lab is faster.
They’re both genetic manipulation that can result in an entirely new organism. The only difference is relying on random mutation vs modifying the genes directly.
2 Likes
no a new organism has never been made by breading even our genetic manipulation can not make a new organism
1 Like
In regards to mass production: that doesn’t justify torturing something with some level of self-awareness. Human life is cheap, and there are many points in history were one group of people committed heinous acts against another under similar justification. Or animals with ________ baiting and animal blood sports.
Also: real pests with little to no redeeming qualities are exterminated with impunity every day. Look at rats: they’re a fairly popular pet, and they’re also a disease carrying pest with no redeeming qualities. “Pest control” for rats is socially acceptable and necessary, but torturing them is a sign that someone is sick in the head.
6 Likes
I wondered about that
2 Likes
I always thought that fluffies were kind of like rats, negligible in undeveloped rural areas, annoying in farm lands and a full blown pest in urban environments, lack of predators plus simple problem solving skills and the ability to speak? Yeah you are going to need to do something.
4 Likes
I recognize your points and thank you for your views.
1 Like
Did you just agree with yourself my dude?
3 Likes
To be honest, I forgot.
3 Likes
so, to give a fair answer I would be closer be inclined to consider them a pet while having the ability of crude speech which is not an achievable level of communication from a standard animal fluffies tend to suffer from several psychological behaviors that make them difficult to respect as a family member or a noble pet that will protect you or back you up on a given situation, a large dog can protect you from a threat and a family member is able to give support to a degree of mental maturity, I would think of it as a toy one capable of feeling pain, not one I would feel a large degree of sympathy for
2 Likes
I’d treat them like a mixture of the two. Take them outside when they need the bathroom, go for walks, give them a collar, teach them tricks, etc. But I’d give them toys and try to teach them things like how to count, how to drop the lisp and probably a little self defense too.
For punishments, I’m way too soft hearted to get physical. I’d think a time out in the corner or loss of privileges would work.
4 Likes
drop the lisp
might not be worth it
self defense
against other fluffies right?
4 Likes
Or a rat
3 Likes
Excellent reference to Mutagen’s “Mummah” comic.
Actually I’ve been thinking about that. I know @anon31733200 has a canon where fluffies can be learn to be without the lisp. Its a headcanon thing, but I do think its interesting. That said.
This is a topic I’ve been thinking a lot about, and I’m ambivalent about. I say that because its the same as asking “should fluffies be fixed?” So much hivecanon and ideas centre around fluffies having innate problems that can’t be solved, but then, and as seen on the reddit, someone asked, what if fluffies could have their innate problems solved
Some people in this community may call it “mary sue oc donut steel” but, with so much content focused and obsessing ont he flaws of fluffies, it doesn’t really allow grow growth and potential for them outside such a headcanon. Its something I mentioned here: when you have a base thats so determined on making fluffies as unlikeable and unintelligent as possible, it limits the kinds of stories that can be told.
And its not like an interesting story with an intelligent fluffy can’t be told. Mutagen’s Postfluff is proof of that.
But on the other hand, some of the classic hugboxers like Waggytail and Marcusmaximus liked fluffies for their flaws. Granted, they didn’t followed the so-called hellgremlin lore, but they did like fluffy naivete and the fluffspeak. Hell, I feel like Waggytail saw a lot of commonality between fluffies and domestic pets.
This is something I want to put into a longer opinion piece, but suffice to say is that I feel that hugboxers like Waggytail and Marcusmaximus had a point to liking fluffies “as they are”, flaws and all. Because we do lvoe cats and dogs, as well as people, despite their flaws. But at the same time, and if its better for the fandom, maybe fluffies should be able to learn to overcome some of their hindrances, if it at least diminishes some of the negative stigma and discrimination against them.
5 Likes
Abuse answer
1 Like