It's not a question. Furry just means funny animal, so Usagi Yojimbo is a furry comic. Just pretend furgays aren't true furries or something if it bothers you.
>Furry just means funny animal
No it doesn't. Furry means people who want to dress up as animals and frick in dirty convention halls. They want to draw themselves as wolves and cringe shit.
Funny animals are shit like Donald Duck or Bugs Bunny.
Stop trying to conflate the two genres. Funny Animals are innocent shit you can show kids, Slapstick cartoons or comic books. Furry shit is all laced with sexual shit and predatory antics and seedy undertones. They're not the same at all. Usagi Yojimbo is a historical comic that just happens to star animal people. It's more like Bojack than Jack the webcomic.
Yes and no.
It's a "funny animal" (furry) comic, probably the best of his kind, which started in the 80's and continues to this day. It's very different from a modern furry comic.
Basically, it's a cartoon. With seppuku. Sakai is a (mostly) serious cartoonist.
Yes, and I find the denial about as amusing as when someone insists their "graphic novel" shouldn't be considered a "comic" or when an author says they write "speculative fiction" because they don't want to be lumped in with "science fiction."
People are only reluctant with the label because the furry community has destroyed their public perception by being so openly sex obsessed. The only argument that you can make for usagi not being a furry comic is that it isn't sex obsessed and theres little to no nudity, despite every major character being an anthropomorphic animal. But because it's not made to be jerked off to, people don't consider it "furry", because sex is an inherent part of that label to us.
he's clearly ripped and many women are charmed by his physical appearance alone
It's classic furry. Inspired largely by classic cartooning. As opposed to modern furry stuff which is largely derived from Japanese illustrations and digital art
It's not a question. Furry just means funny animal, so Usagi Yojimbo is a furry comic. Just pretend furgays aren't true furries or something if it bothers you.
>Furry just means funny animal
No it doesn't. Furry means people who want to dress up as animals and frick in dirty convention halls. They want to draw themselves as wolves and cringe shit.
Funny animals are shit like Donald Duck or Bugs Bunny.
Stop trying to conflate the two genres. Funny Animals are innocent shit you can show kids, Slapstick cartoons or comic books. Furry shit is all laced with sexual shit and predatory antics and seedy undertones. They're not the same at all. Usagi Yojimbo is a historical comic that just happens to star animal people. It's more like Bojack than Jack the webcomic.
>furry
real people and people outisde Cinemaphile doesn't know that word exist.
It started out in a furry zine. What the frick do you think?
Yes.
Yes and no.
It's a "funny animal" (furry) comic, probably the best of his kind, which started in the 80's and continues to this day. It's very different from a modern furry comic.
Basically, it's a cartoon. With seppuku. Sakai is a (mostly) serious cartoonist.
Yes, and I find the denial about as amusing as when someone insists their "graphic novel" shouldn't be considered a "comic" or when an author says they write "speculative fiction" because they don't want to be lumped in with "science fiction."
I mean, in the broadest terms, you are right.
is usagi sexy?
some weirdos in the story time threads seem to think so
>some weirdos in the story time threads seem to think so
I don't believe you.
Gen is 🙂
yes, unambiguously so. the turtles are too.
People are only reluctant with the label because the furry community has destroyed their public perception by being so openly sex obsessed. The only argument that you can make for usagi not being a furry comic is that it isn't sex obsessed and theres little to no nudity, despite every major character being an anthropomorphic animal. But because it's not made to be jerked off to, people don't consider it "furry", because sex is an inherent part of that label to us.
he's clearly ripped and many women are charmed by his physical appearance alone
It's classic furry. Inspired largely by classic cartooning. As opposed to modern furry stuff which is largely derived from Japanese illustrations and digital art
Who cares it's good
No.
The Jennika comic is a furry comic, though.
Wait a second... Usagi is about to be killed on that cover art..
A lot of things happen to Usagi on the covers which never happen in the comic.
Perhaps this is the true reason why Jei hates him.
He's about to cut the arrow in half
>Anthropomorphic animal character
>Is this a furry?
Cinemaphile truly is fricking moronic sometimes.
>all these people ITT in absolute denial
it's Cinemaphile for fricks sake, are we really trying to pretend that furry stuff is below us?