More sluggies from my slugle species! Lots of blue this time. It's not me, it's real life sea slugs being blue to blame :V
#phm#ryland grace#rocky the eridian#project hail mary spoilers





seen from United States
seen from Russia
seen from Maldives
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from Canada
seen from China
seen from Indonesia
seen from China
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from T1
seen from United States
seen from Netherlands
seen from Brazil
seen from United States
seen from China

seen from United States
More sluggies from my slugle species! Lots of blue this time. It's not me, it's real life sea slugs being blue to blame :V
Yes Im afraid ive fallen in love with lost media show
abt the anthropomorphizing conversation. i have been told not to ascribe ANY feelings towards animals for fear of anthropomorphizing because the only words we DO have are for our own experiences. which doesnt seem the way to go either. also thank you for sharing lots of bird behaviors. i actually dont know lots about birds so following your blog has really enlightened me to that. peahen social structure is fascinating!
*deep breath*
The thing is, anthropomorphization isn't a bad/evil thing in a vacuum. There is nothing inherently wrong with saying, or thinking, things like "My dog is happy" or "my bird is sad." While "happy" and "sad" are descriptors for human interpretations of these emotions, they can be a useful shorthand for communication provided both parties understand it is being used as shorthand.
If someone goes to a vet and says "my dog is depressed" then what they usually mean is usually some combo of "my dog is not participating normally in enrichment activities, my dog is not eating/drinking normally, my dog's energy level is lowered, my dog is acting the way a depressed human acts." Saying "depressed" is a human descriptor that may or may not be applicable to a dog, but it doesn't actually matter in this instance. Saying it gives the vet a place to start asking questions because the owner knows what depressed means, and the vet knows what depressed means.
The problem is that anthropomorphization doesn't exist in a vacuum, and many times people take these kinds of descriptors at face value.
When someone says "my dog is depressed" in casual conversation, they may mean (or someone else who doesn't understand it as a shorthand may take that to mean) that their dog is suffering from the human psychological effect known as depression. Maybe there's some overlap, but more likely the dog is acting a certain way because they are ill or injured. They may have lost their appetite or energy because they don't feel good because of a virus or a gut problem or an organ failure. That's when it becomes a problem.
The other problem is when people are just plain old wrong lol "your bird is purring! she likes me!" no she would like to put her beak through your eyeball, please do not put your face within facilitation range of that goal. "The dog is smiling!" no that dog is baring its teeth to inform you it will be biting soon if you don't heck off. "The cat is exposing its belly to me and wants belly rubs!" wrong, it's a trap.
But like. If your cat head butts you and cuddles down in your lap to sleep, "my cat loves me" is a harmless way to describe this or think about it. It's even true, if not quite in the same way you love them. if your dog is gallivanting around your yard in the sunshine chasing balls with his tail wagging, then "my dog is happy" is probably true for whatever value of "happy" a dog can feel. These kinds of anthropomorphizations do not have any serious consequences for the animal to say or think. Especially if you're not mis-identifying anything egregiously (like, thinking your dog is happy because his teeth are bared). It's just shorthand.
So, imo you can have a little anthropomorphization in conversation, as a treat, especially if you understand that is what you're doing. It's not evil, it can be useful shorthand, and it's important to human bonding to think another living creature is like us. But when it comes to actually handling/interacting with/caring for the animals, the anthropomorphization has to go on time out for a little while, so the animal can thrive. And you HAVE to be able to tell the difference in situation, and be able to tell WHEN you are anthropomorphizing so you can know what to stop doing it when needed.
What's the best/most correct way to anthropomorphize a snake?
No arms, no legs
Yes arms, but a snake tail instead of legs (like a naga/mermaid)
Arms and legs, with a large tail
Arms and legs, with a small tail
Arms and legs, no tail
Other
Depends/there is no ideal way
We ask your questions anonymously so you don’t have to! Submissions are open on the 1st and 15th of the month.
almost all of my anthros are 3D-printed cgi-demons and I wouldn't have it any other way
I grew up on the Redwall books when I was younger. This is an old illustration I did in inspiration / homage to them
I like drawing leggies. Also, I gave Alastor the more deer-like characteristics he deserves.
(I got the idea for Vox’s legs from this post by @t-hal-mothman)