Pokémon and the Furry Fandom

In yesterday's post, I discussed more of my connections with a special someone who can be considered a friend from my early years with the Internet through discussion forums. As I noted, through my interactions with him and what I've discerned through his profile, he is a "furry", a person who likes animal characters that act in many ways like people, and part of its greater "furry fandom". It seems like these things may have little to do with Pokémon, but they in fact do have some interlink, which makes for a worthwhile discussion as well.

Most of this discussion is aided by information graciously given by WikiFur and its article on Pokémon. If, by the definition as above, a furry is interested in animal characters that resemble people in behavior, then Pokémon has the latter in spades. Many Pokémon show semblances to the ways of people, including in appearance, intelligence, independence, and perception. Some can walk bipedally like people, many can speak simply (at least to people), a few can and do form humanlike "colonies", and exceptional ones can really show how they feel. This, coupled with the fact that it's practically everywhere (especially today thanks to Pokémon Go), makes it popular even within the furry fandom.

In the furry fandom, each furry has a "fursona" as the representative character identity of that person. Extending this to Pokémon, each furry may have a "Pokésona" as the alternative representative Pokémon species, or in some cases it may in fact be one's "fursona", which I'm sure it might be for diehard fans like me. Some people may be expected to have Pikachu or Piplup (family species), for example, as their "fursona", while others may have less common ones like Braixen and Delphox, two species that came to my mind as I was ruminating for this discussion. A very popular choice for a "fursona" is apparently Lucario thanks to the movie that featured it, and I can see why; from its depictions, it's a total furry fodder, not the least because it is bipedal and canine. Of course, the choice is up to the furry to make with all the Pokémon species there are.

All this fur talk does beget a specific question: do Pokémon have fur? It's a hard question to answer. The depiction of Pokémon in the Detective Pikachu movie appears to suggest that this may be the case, as I've noted way back when the first preview came out. Aside from species that are clearly based on things that don't have fur to begin with, many Pokémon that have animal origins can conceivably be considered to have fur; Aipom is particularly evident as the plot device early on in the movie. Other canines like Mightyena and most recently Lycanroc can pretty much be considered affirmative for this. All things considered, this does make Pokémon further lend itself to the furry fandom.

As for me, I'm not a furry, but I can relate to the fandom. I have a friend who is one, and we get along just fine - in fact, better than fine, and I'm not worried. (That sounds like a particular Pokémon song.) I like Pokémon, but I'm not a furry, even though Pokémon can be made to relate to its fandom. That said, given the possible relations that could be made to the world of the furry fandom, maybe for Pokémon fans like me, there is a little bit of "furry" in all of us after all.

One year ago: A Tripartite Conversation
Two years ago: I Can Hear Your Voice