/anthro/ - Anthro

>>136319 (OP) 
toe beans are erotic ???

>>136320
I suppose it would depend on context. Sometimes they’re drawn to be cute sometimes it’s footfag material.

67a3634adcb6b39e9b432ecfce5a06587ff83289cc8b6358641680ad628bf168.jpg U A
[Hide] (108KB, 1200x1523) Reverse

>>136319 (OP) 
>>Toebeans 
Owari da.

I have to ask, is this a joke?

>>136319 (OP) 
>Because a lot of you have been unhappy about this
??? who was unhappy??

>>136329
ME!

images - 2026-10-25T165604.623.jpeg U A
[Hide] (28.4KB, 588x438) Reverse

>>136329

>>136329
All the people who left.

>>136331
>>136332
try banning the underage wojak posters

>>136350
They generally get put on trains and sent to the ghetto >>>/b/

>>136350
you can always go back

This is probably for the best and I agree that the level of hornyposting has gotten out of hand lately sorry :x, but I would be careful of who it is youre making changes for. The only person i saw air their grievances publicly was the guy whos thread got moved to /b/. I understand that according to his word he was an oldfag but you never really know who is coming from another community to start drama or try to gayops things and just say that they used to post here until it 'got worse'.

>>136357
i moved the thread there myself because i thought it was "poisoning the well", but i noticed it wasn't just him sperging about it. other people, who i checked to be legitimate posters were complaining about it too.

>Softcore porn gets spoiler tagge'd in a SAFE FOR WORK imageboard
<NOOOOOO YOU CANT DO THAT ITS LITERALLY 1984!!!!! I NEED EVERYONE TO SEE MY GOON FOLDER!!!111

>>136362
geega

>>136362
too gay to play
too gay to play
wtf is a vagina?
too gay to play!

Gay Occupied Government

Kitsune Enhanced Kingdom

>>136396
Stop.

>>136319 (OP) 
good choice honestly , it feels like this site has went overboard with the goonish stuff recently

1792985068387s.gif U A
[Hide] (7.4MB, 392x392) Reverse

>Because a lot of you have been unhappy about this, we’re cracking down on risqué imagery. those images will be forcefully spoilered.
<REDDIT SPACE
>what qualifies a such:
>>Exaggerated proportions
>>Clear boob or butt focus
>>Toebeans 
>>Anything else clearly going for suggestive
</TRASH/ SPACE
>Text-based ERP posts will be deleted. whether or not to delete other content is up to the janny's discretion.

>>136319 (OP) 
This change sounds great. The uptick in horny images over the recent months has been disheartening and made me feel as though the original 'foo/'boo demographic had abandoned some restraint or been usurped by newfags.

>>136329
I was, the goonery was too numerous and too vocal

>>136358
How do you check if people are legitimate posters?

>>136461
> too numerous and too vocal
Oh that's horrible. We don't want that. Ideally we'd want no more than 1PPD between the three boards, that would be much easier to moderate and look so clean.

>>136463
Blud is butthurt 💀

>>136467
on foenem

>no more toebeans 
Literally 1984

ab67616100005174c823d2064109bbee668284b0.jpg U A
[Hide] (25KB, 320x320) Reverse

>>136486
It is for the best.
Each time those were posted unspoilered, a gooner came (in more ways that one). This is very bad for the environment.
May I interest you in something hecking wholesome and b*anless, like Barney, instead?

HUg4fvwWEAA6NYW.jpeg U A
[Hide] (273.8KB, 1463x2048) Reverse

>>136319 (OP) 
This is awesome thank you

I have no opinion on this change.

I can understand spoilering nudes / lingerie / bikini pics where nipple slips appear imminent. 

But I don't get spoilering stuff just because it shows a well-endowed woman, that just sounds like puritan autism. We had this discussion before and the proponents were unable to formulate clear boundaries on what is too spicy or what kind of poster's "intent" (if definable at all) is permissable.

It's not like we force women with G cups IRL to cover their cleavage (except maybe in religious fundie shitholes) either

>>136507
Most women aren't G cupped doh. Not that I disagree with your overall post, I agree that it's a hard to find the line. But when scrolling the boo and ALL the furry women are suffering from gigantomastia it's... A bit much. Even in a SFW setting, if you're browsing Instagram and ALL your reels are women with huge knockers... You're going to get some looks.

Spoilering isn't even that bad so I don't see where the hoopla is coming from, from other users.

>>136511
It's drawings and therefore fantasy, you don't see furry women in real life either but that doesn't surprise you when browsing. Unsurprisingly when you have a large repository of images dedicated to female bodies, furred or not, people will focus on the aspects they like

>>136511
I think they should have AI measure cups in each image.
The AI would then have a % of probability of putting a spoiler on such image which would be inversely proportional to the probability of such a size naturally occurring.
That way most of the outliers would be spoilered so that the distribution mimic the types of breasts you see irl (>implying).

>>136507
this is gooner coal and should be spoilered. The metrics are pretty clear, those proportions arent natural, a natural proportion would be something you can find irl in a natural woman in the street and not in a porno movie, and even if those are natural proportion the way they are depicted (looking like a bunch of balloons close to popping in that dress) is clearly meant to be sexual in a way and direct the attention to it. SFW means that its safe for other people to see. If a furriend saw this in your phone you could not explain you didnt have this for gooning purposes and he would think of you as a gooner. Same thing should apply to this whole site if a furriend of mine saw me scrolling through the booey i dont want him to think of me as a furry gooner, i want him to think of me as a furry (which already would make him suspicious of me being a gooner but it would outright confirm it to him)

Do you understand

veri.png U A
[Hide] (457.7KB, 1200x991) Reverse

>would outright confirm it to him
wouldnt*

>>136514
>i dont want him to think of me as a furry gooner, i want him to think of me as a furry
Do you really think normal people actually see a difference between these two categories? Does having images of something more "feral" looking like that averi you just posted with digitigrade legs make you look like less of a weirdo to them? I don't think you should be judging what is good or not by whether regular people would think you are weird for it, because they'll think so just because you come to this website at all

>>136514
> a natural proportion would be something you can find irl in a natural woman in the street
What is the natural proportion of women with tails and fur? These are next on the chopping block, aren't they?

>>136514
I wouldn't go thaaat far, it's a reference to a meme. I see where you're coming from but I wouldn't even say it needs to be spoilered. 

>>136512
Because I'm browsing a SFW furry website. But I think there should be at least some "discouragement" from posting some of the more fantastical depictions of furry women (and men, there is that one gooner in the amoma thread).

And I don't want to come off puritan, a gooner post every now and then isn't the death knell of the site. Nekotsuki IS a gooner character but is also booculture. There's a balance somewhere and I don't think being more liberal with spoilers is a problem in any way.

ClipboardImage.png U A
[Hide] (37KB, 811x245) Reverse

>>136517
>human form

>>136519
That does not answer the question. Try again.

>>136520
literally does, human form meaning form of humans, or a mix between animal and human form. Exaggerated boobs are NOT human nor animal

>>136521
If we can't have exaggerated human features then we also can't have exaggerated animal features. Averi's tail must be reduced in size or risk being spoilered as big fluffy tails are fetish material and are unrealistic to foxes.

>>136523
are those exaggerations done to make the character more cute and interesting or to make them more goonable? Because thats what we were discussing

41586_2000_Article_BFnews0012288_Figa_HTML.jpg U A
[Hide] (10.7KB, 200x303) Reverse

>>136524
>make the character more cute and interesting or to make them more goonable?
Who gets to decide the intent? You?
Where does it state that in the OP?

>>136524
Is there a difference? What's cute to some is goonable to another, both make the characters more appealing to different people

>admin threatens to spoiler boobs
<boo has never been busier

>>136525
if you dont know ill tell you what i usually consider wrong. Its definetly wrong with boobs, butt, bulge. It can be wrong with thighs, belly, paws and maybe mouth. If you no longer know the bounds between cute and sexual just avoid to post anthros that exaggerate those body parts.

>>136528
That does not answer the question. Try again.

Welcome to anthro.boo where we love complaining.

>>136530
Username checks out.

>>136319 (OP) 
I think people are overreacting and just need to learn not to post borderline porn

3886835d3faeac031f33cf64f497ff7aee600f13f3aacec710353914c12a35c9.jpg U A
[Hide] (328.6KB, 2195x2056) Reverse

>>136536
>this is borderline porn
https://4chan.org/janitorapp

>>136461
>How do you check if people are legitimate posters?
behaviour

>>136537
Viking?

bfd2835ea0e39845201a97a5487723418c814abe80e6cd8f6c2ec8b5a42c92fc.png U A
[Hide] (137.6KB, 500x500) Reverse

>>136551

>>136516
They do if they are my furriends and i explain it to them, i dont think anyone can find averi (at least 90% of pics of her) goonable. The only reason people associate furries with gooners and fags is because the community is filled with them, sorry for wanting a few furry places that dont catter to sexfreaks

>>136554
> i dont think anyone can find averi (at least 90% of pics of her) goonable. 
Too bad that under the new ruleset most of her pics are considered gooner degeneracy.
How has it come to it that this place is now aiming to be more more modest than the Pope?

>>136559
you nyaggas are throwing a tantrum over nothing oh my God

>>136559
The admins suck at writing up rules clearly for some reason, but it's pretty evident the "toebeans" thing is blown out of proportion and images won't get spoilered simply for featuring them. Frog was referring to foot fetishism.

>>136514
Those proportions are natural. There are real life women with massive tits. That's not their fault. And there is nothing particularly wrong with that image. They are not being "wielded" in any provocative form.
The problem with "(N)SFW" is that they are a worthless, ambiguous set of terms. Frankly, I would not want to be caught browsing this site in a hypothetical workplace even if it became strictly puritanical simply because I'd rather not be caught looking at Furry media regardless of how pornographic or not it is. So anything Furry will always be "NSFW" for me no matter what. And there are many different kinds of workplaces. The point being: the terms are ambiguous and useless.

>>136562
That would be the reasonable assumption, right? But it is just as reasonable to expect clear rules to be well-thought out, there have to be more thorough internal guidelines for this stuff or at least some sort of consensus among the team, that they only had to put to words. As it is, it couldn't have been phrased more confusing. That part could have been lumped with another point and left intentionally vague - as again, there's vague and there's confusing. 
And it's not even just that, there's also the question of whether this applies only here or the same rules apply to  >>>/b/ and >>>/kemono/ . Think. Plan ahead.

Furthermore, if they didn't want to have this blown out of proportion, this shouldn't even have been its own thread but a footnote in the metathread and a few more randomly formatted lines on the rules page. Literally, just drop a mention as a footnote there, wait a day or two then start spoilering. But no, we'll make this the hottest thread on the board.

From a personal perspective, having been put up against the wall along with the types of people who post stuff like >>136208 will only make me bond with them over the same cause of freedom of speech, because the OP makes it seem like we are the same.

>>136559
it is very clear what the admin meat and its not the long tail or the minuscule beans that appear in the image, you nyaggers are just being dense on purpose

>>136567

>Admin meat

4118bc47c8a66a34cc5a5ff5d14ae916d47b3d01dcfa80dd62046cbe532cb3f3.jpg U A
[Hide] (525.9KB, 1280x1202) Reverse

HAIL FROG

>>136567
> the image
What image are we talking about again?

>it is very clear
No, it was clear to whoever wrote it but they failed to phrase it in such a way that it would make sense to those who don't understand their line of reasoning from having observed the trends. If this was a rule that actually had much impact on the posting habits and there was a malicious actor in place, he would be able to exploit it.

>>136567
Oh hey, just noticed that you also happens to be to avoid my other questions; please do catch up on them as well when you have the time.

>>136576
I have to get busy now, but I will read all your stuff later. Arguing is so fun ^.^
But yes, phrasing could definitely use work and I've been saying this for a while.

>>136319 (OP) 
>no rule against bulge focus
fags just cant stop winning

>>136578
what other questions

GgQRwTNWEAA-8k7.png U A
[Hide] (55.9KB, 193x177) Reverse

>>136344

>>136537
a little bit of bean isn't the same as foot fetish art

>>136608
That was not specified.
We are not telepaths here.

>>136619
bruh it's literally right there 😭

slow.jpg U A
[Hide] (364.9KB, 780x749) Reverse

>>136622
>bruh it's literally right there 😭
>the spoilering frog   ## Admin 1 day ago
>Last edited 4 hours ago by Hidden User

19a3f28668c9b8290de901d009a93262.jpg U A
[Hide] (42.8KB, 735x593) Reverse

You puritan closeted faggots, if you are going to complain about how God created foids go to the soycuck splinter of the 'boo
>Normi-ACK
I was here since the sharty board got raped, anthro.foo was build by gooners, don't erase history you bolshevik nyaggers from 4cuck/xitter

>>136643
Keep spittin sis

>>136644
We are the anthro.boo so it's supposed to be a scary and evil version of the boo so thats why overly suggestive stuff is banned now

>>136319 (OP) 
SITE IS FINALLY USABLE

>>136654
looked around and the site sucks anyways, SAD!

>>136657
No colorjeets here at least

no-fun-allowed-no-fun.png U A
[Hide] (60.2KB, 300x300) Reverse

>>136654
Damn, and here I thought doing nothing but banning more and more things would have improved quality.
Petition to ban images where anthros touch each other. Perhaps it is those that make people leave? If we ban those, they will return.

then they came for the gooners
and i did not speak out
because i was not a gooner

then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me

you are all a bunch of sperging whiny whores
no ones stopping you from posting your garbage people just dont want to see it and hide it with a spoiler tag
when the administration team finally does something positive for once you all decide to pooch and moan instead. and then you complain this site is dead, etc etc.
fuck off and die

517179d3d82509143eca885e7ec920e7181ca0379480f7b33e3345f6a2603cd6.png U A
[Hide] (1.7MB, 1440x1440) Reverse

>>136453 
>>136539
>>136666
Checked.

>>136666
England owns you fluff your islands lolz

>>136667
This character is underage by the way

>>136670
Just how many people here are unique?  5?

3380e819ffcc36142c09f3c03387577b648e2f5a39e6ae8245f9d4d6f4d82f78.jpg U A
[Hide] (49.1KB, 976x850) Reverse

>>136539
>>136666
what

>>136670
Is it being sexualized despite being underaged?

1786067f3db17bb98873258495e76c405f3ad459c019e7fa33b562cb90fb3e43.png U A
[Hide] (946.5KB, 1920x1920) Reverse

>>136329
Me. All the borderline softcore porn was getting noxious, and being a SFW board is the main thing that separates us from most other fur spaces. 
>>136537
>>136559
>>136663
>>136643
>>/trash/

>>136663
hi crimlarp