A slight concern

This is a quick question regarding the book I've been working on. There's a particular aspect - quite a prominent one - that's sparking a little uncertainty for me.

The central species which inhabit the story's world and serve as main characters are called the Vulshiera. Appearance-wise, they're quite similar to anthropomorphic foxes.
Now, assuming there isn't a speck of suggestiveness or sexuality to be found, do you think they'd be looked at in the same light as furry fandom? (Let's face it, suggestiveness is mainly responsible for the fandom's shaky repute.)
I've nothing against furries (In fact, I once knew a few. Nice people.), but I do know how controversial a subject it is over the net. And considering the net's the major gathering point for audiences and opinions, I think it's wise to wonder what the general reaction might be.

So what do you think? Am I just paranoid here, or is an anthro-animal-esque look enough to divide an audience and grant it sceptical thoughts?

I don't think it'd be an issue, personally. No more than things like the Fantastic Mr Fox, Disney's Robin Hood, etc, at any rate. (I suddenly went blank for films)

However, I would be prepared for it to gain some furry press.

I doubt such an issue would emerge.

I don't think it would be a problem...

I don't think it'll be an issue either, but still, my paranoia tends to play with me.
I'm kinda sad I feel inclined to ask, to be honest. I've nothing at all against furries. =/

I know two furries. One is creepy, the other is awesome.

3mptylord wrote:I know two furries. One is creepy, the other is awesome.

Blaze and Morbius respectively?

In that order?

Blaze and Morb are furries?

I'm creepy, am I?

Yep, I imagine foxes mroe prone to creeping than wolves so...

Right you are.
But about the topic, what do you think?

Depends. If people want to find furries everywhere, they'll find them in your book. Rational people probably won't.

Well they're not meant to be furries as such. Only creatures of a fantasy story. I'm just wondering if they'd be interpreted as such.

If it's specifically fantasy, then I doubt that there will be much of a problem, as long as they don't seem like furries.

Most people won't think twice that it's furry. But haters gonna hate; and the contrary also. You know you've achieved some degree of popularity when there's rule 34 though.

I imagine that above paragraph won't make total sense to some people.

CAn someone answer meç?

No, Duskcurse, I personally am not a furry.

But on a seperate note: Curse you, Rule 34!!

It has been a long time since I saw you Blaze , also have you decided to make a continuation of zavionce? , and also post some concept art and I'll tell you if the furries can do something wierd

As a side note: Blaze I love your profile picture

Rule 34?

If it exists, there is porn of it.

Nice to see you too, Dusk. I haven't been working on Zavionce recently. Naturally, the book's demanding my attention and input at the moment.
I may very well add more to Zavi in the future though, in fact I probably should, there were thing's I'd mentioned that I didn't deliver. They'd be fun to work on.

And thank you.

Oh, and as for concept art, yeah, I've been thinking of doing some. It'd help clarify things. I'm kinda short on time at the moment, though, and I think I need a good deal of practice when drawing people/anthro-characters, so I may wait for a bit.

Bookfest?

If you know the movie Avatar, you'll agree with me when the Na'vi come to mind. If you don't refer to them as antromorphologic, it shouldn't be a problem. Also, Trixtor has a point, rational people won't have a problem. I mean, it isn't porn...right?