WikiFur - User contributions [en]

User talk:103.62.49.229

2021-03-26T20:25:24Z

SpazKitty: Created page with '{{Dontvandalize}}'

User talk:176.248.144.25

2021-03-23T20:19:14Z

SpazKitty: Created page with '{{Dontvandalize}}'

Zoophilia

2021-03-23T20:16:30Z

SpazKitty: Reverted edits by 2601:196:8500:F920:109C:2122:5020:1E77 (talk) to last revision by Equivamp

{{wikify}}
{{unreferenced}}
{{context}}
[[File:ZETA.png|thumbnail|200px|Zoophilia logo]]
'''Zoophilia''' is the technical term for the [[sexual]] attraction of [[humans]] to [[animal]]s.<ref>[https://dictionary.apa.org/zoophilia ]. Retrieved January 20, 2021.</ref>

== Etymology ==

it is a favorite term used in [[W:Mainstream|popular]] and [[furry culture]] as an alternative to the term [[bestiality]],{{cn}} because it stresses orientation over acts, and is usually regarded as less prejudicial. (For more information on the context and use of the technical term, see: [[Paraphilia]].)

==Self-identified zoophiles versus bestiality==
[[File:Zetapin.jpg|right|thumb|250px|A Zeta pin, used in public by some zoophiles]]
Most people who identify themselves as '''zoophiles''' distinguish between zoophilia and bestiality. Though some zoophiles choose to engage in sexual contact with their animal companions, not all do. Zoophiles state that they are lovers of animals, and that sexual contact, when it is done, is an extension of a deeper emotional and perhaps spiritual relationship with the animal, similar in character to the sexual expression between human companions.<ref>https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14574096/</ref>

They sometimes refer to those who have sexual contact with animals without emotional bonds as '''beastialists''' (and/or '''beasties'''). Zoophiles may draw attention to the distinction between bestiality (an act), and zoophilia (sexual attraction), and to the view that those who have sexual contact with animals without an emotional connection are not zoophiles.

Some self-identified zoophiles also use the term to refer to anyone with the kind of emotional bonds they stress as distinguishing them from bestialists, including those who have no sexual contact with or interest in animals.

===Zoophilia as a sexual orientation===

While zoophilia is classified as a paraphilia by the [[APA]], many zoophiles conceptualize it instead as their [[w:Sexual_orientation|sexual orientation]], referring to their attraction as '''zoosexuality'''. While most studies analyze zoophilia as a paraphilia or within a criminal context, some scholars have argued in favor of the idea that zoophilia can be conceptualized as a sexual orientation.

In his study of 8 zoophiles, [[Donofrio]]<ref>Also cited by Miletski, 2005.</ref> (unpublished doctoral dissertation, 1996) suggested that zoophilia may not be a clinically significant problem, and reported that the concept of zoophilia being a sexual orientation was supported by his doctoral study. He suggested using a scale resembling the [[w:Kinsey_scale|Kinsey scale]] to measure sexual interest in humans vs. animals.

More recently, sexologist [[Hani Miletski]] surveyed 93 zoophiles, and concluded that zoophilia fits [[Robert Francoeur]]'s conceptualization of sexual orientation (affectional orientation, sexual fantasy orientation, and erotic orientation).<ref>[http://www.isaz.net/isaz/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Bestiality-and-Zoophilia.pdf#page=90</ref><ref>https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2017-03441-006 ]. Retrieved ?.</ref>

== Zoophilia and furry ==

It is a common misconception that [[furries]] are sexual lovers of animals and, by extension, "zoophiles". It is true that a significant proportion of [[Sexual|erotic]] [[furry artwork]] and stories involve beings with animal characteristics having [[sex]] with each other or with humans, but it should be noted that the participants are usually [[anthropomorphic]] beings.

While some furries are zoophiles, the two terms are not synonymous. Most furries do not have any sexual interest in animals in real life, though some may roleplay otherwise in a fantasy scenario.

As most furries express some degree of sexual attraction towards anthropomorphic beings, several surveys have also asked furries about zoophilia. To date, however, no surveys have asked about bestiality.

Below is a review of the estimates on the prevalence of zoophilia among furries:
{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Title !! Results !! Sample size
|-
| ''The Sociology of Furry Fandom'' (Rust, J. D., 2001)<ref>https://web.archive.org/web/20050302094251/http://www.visi.com/%7Ephantos/furrysoc.html</ref> || 2% of respondents stated they were zoophiles. || 350
|-
| ''The Furry Sociological Survey'' (Evans, K., 2008)<ref>https://www.gwern.net/docs/psychology/2008-evans.pdf</ref> || 17.2% of respondents stated they were zoophiles. || 278
|-
| ''2008 Furry Survey'' (Osaki, A., 2008)<ref>http://www.klisoura.com/ot_furrysurvey2008.php</ref> || 18.4% of respondents stated they were zoophiles. || 7,024
|-
| ''2009 Furry Survey'' (Osaki, A., 2009)<ref>http://klisoura.com/ot_furrysurvey2009.php</ref> || 13.9% of respondents stated they were zoophiles. || 9,024
|-
| ''2010 Furry Survey'' (Osaki, A., 2010)<ref>http://klisoura.com/ot_furrysurvey2010.php</ref> || 13.6% of respondents stated they were zoophiles. || 4,895
|-
| ''2011 Furry Survey'' (Osaki, A., 2011)<ref>http://www.klisoura.com/ot_furrysurvey2011.php</ref> || 13.3% of respondents stated they were zoophiles. || 4,365
|-
| ''2012 Furry Survey'' (Osaki, A., 2012)<ref>http://www.klisoura.com/ot_furrysurvey.php</ref> || 14.9% of respondents stated they were zoophiles. || 3,267
|-
| ''Furscience 2019 Studies'' (Roberts, S., et al., 2019)<ref>https://furscience.com/research-findings/appendix-1-previous-research/furscience-2019/</ref> || 6.9% of participants listed zoophilia on an open question about kinks/fetishes. || 827
|-
| ''The “Furry” Phenomenon: Characterizing Sexual Orientation, Sexual Motivation, and Erotic Target Identity Inversions in Male Furries'' (Hsu, K., Bailey, J. M., 2019)<ref>https://www.gwern.net/docs/psychology/2019-hsu.pdf</ref> || 46.7% of participants reported nonzero attraction towards animals. || 334
|-
| ''What Are Furries?'' (fek, 2020)<ref>https://web.archive.org/web/20210116160156/https://whatarefurries.com/</ref> || 14.3% of respondents stated they felt any sexual attraction towards animals. || 4,790
|}

The simple average across all surveys is 16.1%. Weighing the estimates according to sample size gives a result of 14.9%. Some important limitations of these surveys should be noted, however.

A shortcoming that affects every survey on the [[furry fandom]] is the fact that it's impossible to gather a random and representative sample of [[online community|online communities]]. As all of these surveys rely on [[w:Self-selection_bias|self-selected]] samples, they may have oversampled furries who have a greater interest in the fandom, a more positive opinion of it, or who simply spend more time online.

[[Rust, J. D.]]t's estimate of only 2% would be even lower than what's been estimated for the general population, however this is likely due to [[W:Social-desirability_bias|social desirability bias]] affecting the results, as 325 of the participants were interviewed in-person, and respondents had to provide identification plus an email address in order to participate in the online survey.

In [[Dr. Sharon Roberts]]' survey respondents were asked to list their kinks and fetishes in an open-ended question. As some zoophilies think of their attraction as a sexual orientation rather than a paraphilia or [[kink]], not all zoophiles may have listed their attraction on this question. Furthermore, only respondents who listed at least one kink were included in the total, hence furries who are [[asexual]] or don't have any kinks are not represented in these results.

[[Hsu, K.]] and [[Bailey, J. M]]'s study focused only on participants who identified as [[male]], hence their results are not generalizable to all furries. They also state that 64.7% of participants were recruited via a [[forum]] for furries. While they don't specify what forum, other surveys of the fandom suggest that very few furries participate in forums.<ref>https://sites.google.com/site/anthropomorphicresearch/past-results/international-online-furry-survey-2011</ref> It should also be noted that while 46.7% of respondents reported some level of sexual attraction to animals this does not necessarily mean that they can all be classified as zoophiles, as many researchers set a threshold of medium or low attraction to make such a classification.

==ZooWiki==
[[File:ZooWiki.png|thumbnail|ZooWiki logo]]
'''ZooWiki''' was a [[W:wiki|wiki]] for the German zoophile community. It was created on May 23, 2005, by [[Wolfie (Germany)|Wolfie]]. It had 89 articles as of October 2006, on topics such as literature, authors, philosophy, events, vendors, anatomy and general trivia.

ZooWiki's policies specified that it should not contain explicit or illegal content. ZooWiki was located at [https://web.archive.org/web/20120204124210/http://zoowiki.zetapin.de/index.php?title=Hauptseite http://zoowiki.zetapin.de/] (defunct, July 2012. Retrieved via the [[W:Wayback Machine|Internet Wayback Machine]]).

== References ==
<references/>

==See also==

* [[W:Zoophilia|Zoophilia]] on [[Wikipedia]]
* [[Bestiality]]
* [[Zetacon]]

== External links ==

* [http://www.zeta-verein.de/en/ ''ZETA-VEREIN''] official website (German)
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20160423052440/http://zoophilia.net/ Zoophilia.net] official website (retrieved via the Internet Wayback Machine)
* ''[http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sex.bestiality/browse_frm/thread/b26e8acbd087f127 Zoophilia and Your Health]'' on [[alt.sex.bestiality]] (login required)

=== Media ===

* [http://adjectivespecies.com/2012/02/06/zoophilia-in-the-furry-community/ ''Zoophilia in the furry community''] article on [[adjective species]]

[[Category:Paraphilias]]
[[Category:Mature terms]]
[[ru:Зоофилия]]

Talk:Zoophilia

2021-03-23T20:15:58Z

SpazKitty: Reverted edits by 2601:196:8500:F920:109C:2122:5020:1E77 (talk) to last revision by Equivamp

== But what of the fandom? ==

Is there not also a significant portion of furries that ''are'' into bestiality? Throw a rock at a furry convention, and I think probably a third of the time, you'd hit a (most likely closet) zoophile.

I'm not saying this to defame. I'm simply saying this from my experience with others within the fandom that seem to share this fetish-- if you can call it that, as some have taken it to heights of "I CAN ONLY LOVE ANIMALS BECAUSE HUMANS DON'T UNDERSTAND ME!!!". [[User:Verix|Verix]] 04:07, 15 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:So now we know who the Mystery Rock-Thrower of AnthroCon '02 was! ;-)

:I don't fully understand those people that you describe, either. But then I've not had the experience of meeting many such people myself. Maybe I should go to more conventions!

:I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "closet" - do you mean you're aware that they have sex with animals but don't tell people about it, or do you just suspect it, or do you just think they ''want'' to have sex with animals, or would if they got the chance? --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 06:15, 15 Aug 2005 (UTC)

::Hate to break it to you, but your parents had sex with animals. Homo sapiens are a species of the animal kingdom, last time I checked. --[[User:Chibiabos|Chibiabos]] 11:59, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

::Haha, someone threw a rock at AC '02? My first AC was '05, so that wasn't me. ;>

::And like with most anything embarassing or reprimanded by the majority comes the idea of "being in the closet" about something. Hence, since so many furries believe that zoophilia has nothing to do with funny animals-- myself included-- and will fight against any accusations and claims, one would assume that to come out like this , they would be reprimanded. Of course, this is assuming that our embarassed fellow is still "in the closet" about this, and not raving from the tops of his lungs about how HE LOVES MARES HOORAY HOORAY.

::So when I say they're in the closet, I don't mean that I believe that I the all-knowing, all-seeing, goose-stepping master of that who can understand a zoophile from miles, miles, miles away-- no. I'm just basing this off of how many people have personally come out to me and said "hey you know I'm into this k." But then again, maybe I attract those kind of people, so my opinion is biased? I dunno. The immense amount of people in #zoo on FurNet ''somewhat'' backs up my opinions, but not by much. From the popularity of that channel, and both reflecting a little bit more, I'll back down and say that probably less than a third of people are into it. Hell, it's probably about as popular as fursuit sex-- which is more popular than most people think. [[User:Verix|Verix]] 06:36, 15 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:::Fursuit sex is probably limited by lack of materials. That plush fur doesn't come cheap, you know! --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 06:42, 15 Aug 2005 (UTC)

::::That hasn't stopped many from buying cheap materials. ;) [[User:Verix|Verix]] 06:47, 15 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== WikiFur the right place for the zoo morality discussions? ==

I was going to add some simple conterpoints to the pro-zoo arguments here, but then I realized that additional sides of the morality argument would immediately be added, eventually turning this article into a duplicate of the one on Wikipedia. I'm not certain if that's a good thing or a bad thing, but if it's a good, then the article at the very least needs additional structure. If it's bad (which is how I feel due to redundancy and less information overall), then I think removing the moral arguments altogether would be wise and keeping the focus of the article restricted to the involvement with the furry fandom. In otherwords, if folks want to find out a wealth of information on the pros and cons of zoophilia, they can go to the Wikipedia link in the Exteral Links section. If they want to see how it relates to the fandom, they can read this article. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, because for a change, I'm not trolling the zoos. ;-) Also, lollin' at how some of my troll threads (I recognize those quotes) somehow made it to the definition. [[User:Leam|Leam]] 20:59, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

What I don't get is why zoophiles who have sex with animals make a distinction between themselves and beastlialists. Beastiality is beastiality - which is to say, sex with animals. No matter if someone claims to have some bullshit "spiritual fulfillment" you're still fucking an animal. It's like NAMBLA claiming they aren't child molestors, but child "lovers." {{unsigned|68.5.45.126}}
::There's a link in the original Wikipedia Zoophilia article Related Links about some intellectual/researcher who coined the term to distinguish and elevate that supposedly more moral form of animal abuse you speak of above normal animal abuse. [[User:Leam|Leam]] 17:33, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
:Thank you for sharing your thoughts on this matter. However, as the person above you noted, it is probably a bad idea to start the morality argument here. As much as you might think you have original thoughts on the matter, I'm quite sure this argument has been hashed out before, repeatedly. This being the internet, it is probably archived in multiple locations for everyone to see and draw their own conclusions.
::Well, it's not on the article. [[User:Leam|Leam]] 17:33, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
:::I would suggest linking to a (good, rational; not a contentless flamewar) debate archive somewhere...if such a thing exists. Point being there's no reason to rehash it here. [[User:Simba B|Simba B]] 17:46, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
::::Fair enough. [[User:Leam|Leam]] 18:21, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
:The NAMBLA bit is a [[wikipedia:Straw man|straw man]] (as NAMBLA tends to be in most debate). I hope you realize that. [[User:Simba B|Simba B]] 01:06, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
::I'm curious why you think that particular comparison is a strawman. [[User:Leam|Leam]] 17:33, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
:::Mainly because children != animals...not to get too deep into the debate, but a) NAMBLA has about the same use in a debate as "God kills a kitten when you do X", e.g. it's more emotion than rational thought and arguement, and b) the research you mentioned above...don't know the details but it's possible that the argument that it is _not_ abuse could be made.
::::Assuming the pejorative overrides the value of the comparison. Given that the topic is sexual contact with animals, I don't think that Godwin-esque logic quite applies. Anyway, to keep it short, I have yet to hear a rational argument that animals can give informed consent any more than children. If the comparison is invalid, [[User_Talk:Leam|I would most certainly want to know]] (link to my talk page). [[User:Leam|Leam]] 18:21, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
:::I should point out that I myself have no interest in this personally but I dislike seeing people demonized because of their interests or personality. Standing up for those who might be afraid/ashamed to do so, if you will. [[User:Simba B|Simba B]] 17:46, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

There's a difference between being born with a certain sexual disorder and actually acting up on it. Whether "spiritual attachment" is involved or not, you're still fucking an animal. {{unsigned|62.112.158.213}}

== Essay link ==
I hope this is all right - I know there are many essays out there dealing with pro/anti stances on zoophilia, but I've never heard/seen of the argument put forth in the essay I added as a link (is zoophilia any worse than eating animals?). What are others' opinions on linking zoophilia essays (of both POVs): is there such a thing as too many links? [[User:SpazKitty|Spaz Kitty]] 19:00, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
:See above; the pro needs a con. I support the link if I can put the link to [http://www.nmanimalcontrol.com/aco_fo/sex_abuse/ New Mexico Humane Society's stance on Zoophilia] there as well. ;-) [[User:Leam|Leam]] 19:59, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
::Screw them, you can't judge based on popular wisdom, you have to '''know''' what you're talking about. Not all zoophiles are abusers. One must know the meaning of "consent" and "abuse". Try http://www.firstlight.net/~chythar/manawolf/articles/zooessay.htm and read it fully, you should get a better idea of judging :). I'm not ashamed of who I am, neither would I hurt an animal or do against their will, I hope you can come to understand this. [[User:213.222.158.152|213.222.158.152]] 14:51, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
:::Well, said popular wisdom is formed by a near-unanimous consensus by vets, zoologists, biologists, researchers, ethicists, politicians, philosophers, and intellectuals who form said opinion based on their professional education, experience, logic, and empirical observation. If you're trying to redefine consent and abuse while ignoring all that, don't be surprised when the Humane Society fursecutes you when your justification is an argument of assertion backed up by flimsy philosophy. If you'd like to talk more about this, feel free to leave a message in my user talk. [[User:Leam|Leam]] 18:14, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
::::Doubt it's worth it, you seem like you can't be convinced. Anyways, a group of snazzy smartypants won't tell me what's right and what's wrong when my common sense seems to be the one that's right. If I don't hurt, restrain or otherwise act against an animal, they can't damn say I'm an abuser. Or, if I would, say, let them mount me, then the above is even more true. I extended my range of relationships beyond my species, that's all. Don't try to tell me I abuse anyone when people out there beat their wives, children, or who knows what else they do, and I'm taking good care of animals. I don't even eat meat, if you also plan to strike diet-wise. :) I care for my peer's wellbeing and feelings more than people do in today's usual relationships, and "important people" label it as abusing. Hmpf- [[User:213.222.158.152|213.222.158.152]] 20:02, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
:::::You're entitled to your opinion, but just don't break any local laws and don't expect anti-intellectualism to be very persuasive. :3 [[User:Leam|Leam]] 20:06, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

== But what is it? ==
I can't help but notice that the definition of zoophilia never clearly states what it is, or how the term is used within furry. This makes the moral arguments rather moot. The ALF FAQ (remember this was written, in part, by furs who call themselves zoo) gives this definition:
<blockquote>
Within furrydom zoophilia simply means a love of animals, and
a zoophile is someone who loves animals. It's probably best to apply
the same principle we used for toonophiles: a zoophile feels for
non-humans in the same way that humans generally feel for each other.
Zoophilia can mean sexual attraction, but one shouldn't assume that is
the case if someone tells you 'I'm a zoo'. Many furries are zoos in
the non-sexual sense of the word. Some furries are also sexual
zoophiles.
</blockquote>
I suggest that the opening paragraph be changed to reflect this and that within furry the statement "zoophilia is a paraphilia" is false (within clinical diagnosis it is true).
[[User:Dingotush|Dingotush]] 09:41, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

:Here's where it gets tricky. I agree with most everything you say, but in the context of the furry fandom, "zoophilia" is synonymous with "sexual zoophilia," thanks to the actions of notorious past bestialists in zoophiles' clothing. As a result, "zoophilia" has since become synonymous with "bestiality." Looking at it from a fair perspective, a WikiFur article should reflect this. While I don't necessarily agree that we're there yet, a whitewash of zoophilia would be worse. [[User:Leam|Leam]] 18:47, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
:In my dealings with these people who claim to be "non-sexual zoophiles" I always ask them why they don't just refer to themselves as "animal lovers" or "dog lovers." I have yet to hear a convincing response as to why they choose to endorse this "zoo" community that supports the morality of human-animal sexual contact (I've seen their "training manuals"), instead of so easily dodging the associated stigma. [[User:Leam|Leam]] 18:47, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

== Vague? ==

I know this is sorely in need of a rewrite, but pointing out which statements are vague would be of enormous help for occasional editors like me. [[User:Leam|Leam]] 23:10, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
:The lack of defintion is what makes the article (at this point) vague. The term 'paraphilia' should simply not be used-- the intended audience of wikifur is not the psychiatric community and either zoophilia in our sense can be made plain without an education in that field, or the term ('zoophilia') and article don't belong here. On the other hand, even outside that profession, the term does very much refer to specifically sexual interest in animals (terms ending in -philia/-phile in english refer to biological impulses regarding a thing, or 'abnormal' attraction to a thing) and does not mean just any kind of positive regard for animals whatsoever, a concept that is readily expressed in english already. Nor is it being used to mean that in the fandom, where love of animals is nigh ubiquitous. The two elephants in the room are as follows: 1) Zoophilia is a subset of bestiality-- one with an emotional connotation. 2) Zoophiles have invented the term because they don't like the social censure (and criminality) that attaches to the word 'bestiality.'
:To me, the only question is, are we going to put the defintion: '''Zoophilia is interest in bestiality, with a connotation of emotional depth,''' in there, or is wikifur in the business of keeping things (like the bestiality of zoophiles) hidden? --[[User:Furthling|Furthling]] 03:23, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
::Wikipedia's audience is not psychologists, and [[Wikipedia:Zoophilia|they use the word paraphilia too]], because ''that's the best word to describe the concept''. You don't dumb down your content just because you're afraid they won't understand what it means. Assume your readers are, at the least, willing to read a link providing information for a word they don't understand
::As for "keeping things hidden" - some people (some of whom are members of the furry fandom) claim that they are zoophiles but are not interested in bestiality. Now, there's an argument that they are using the word incorrectly - at least according to the paraphilia definition - but it's not our job to stop them from doing so. As a third party, we report on the actual situation, so we ''should'' say that some use it in this manner - as someone who has a deep and abiding but not necessarily sexual interest in animals. To take an example - I'm a furry fan but I ''don't'' have a deep and abiding interest in animals in general - at least, not to that extent. I have an interest in animals that are also (somewhat intelligent) people. Zoophiles, in the use of the word described in this paragraph, are the kind of people who devote lots of time to their "animal friends", and leave all their money to them in their wills. --[[User:GreenReaper|GreenReaper]]<sup>([[User talk:GreenReaper|talk]])</sup> 04:04, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

==Re: Last Edit==

In contemplating the recent vandalism of the page and other, sometimes slightly more maturely expressed views preferring some distance be maintained between Furry culture and and interest in bestiality, I tried to create a more neutral paragraph regarding what self-identified zoophiles think about zoophilia and bestiality, which I think was easily misread to say that the views attributed zoophiles were broadly accepted in the fandom, which is at least unclear. --[[User:Furthling|Furthling]] 13:56, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

==WRONG!!!==
I don't know how many of you are using other sites or what you've just heard to describe Zoos, but I NEED to fix this. Zoophilia =/= Bestiality. I'm a Zoophile, I do not have sex with animals. Not all zoos are sexually attracted to animals. Some only feel emotional love for them (the way humans feel emotional love for other humans) and would never even dream of having sexual contact with them. Period. I'm fixing the page.[[User:98.18.25.169|98.18.25.169]] 02:19, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
:Zoophilia, from which Zoophile derives, is definitely about sexual interest in animals. Nobody's mistaken to say that it's about sexual attraction. If you misunderstood whether the term zoophile applies to you as somebody with no sexual attraction to animals, your dismay is understandable. But zoophilia definitely references sexual interest. --[[User:Furthling|Furthling]] 21:25, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
::On reviewing the edits made I'm going to seek guidance from an admin on reverting the edit made, because it definitely harms the integrity of the article. --[[User:Furthling|Furthling]] 21:27, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
::Is that really the case? Where's your reference? [[Wikipedia:Zoophilia|Wikipiedia's version of this article]] suggests the term has a wider usage. The American Heritage Dictionary also gives sexual attraction as [http://www.answers.com/topic/zoophilia the second definition], not the first. Compare [[plushophilia]]. I appreciate that you may believe otherwise; but if so, this is an ''opinion'', and needs to be stated as such - not as accepted fact. --[[User:GreenReaper|GreenReaper]]<sup>([[User talk:GreenReaper|talk]])</sup> 22:14, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
:::Factually, zoophilia is, by definition, always, about sexual attraction of humans to animals. Yes, I'm sure. See any copy of the DSM; that (psychology) is where the term in its present usage comes from-- it's a technical term that explicitly involves sexual attraction. See also Wikipedia's article on the same term. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoophilia Zoophilia]
:::Moreover, the edit that was done fails exactly the test you propose, as you should be able to see by reading it-- it was done, as the anonymous editor has clearly stated was his/her intent, to *obfuscate* a meaning, NOT to present another point of view about zoophilia. You're defending people destroying information in the Wiki, GR.
:::(Incidentally, until wikifur has a stated, applicable standard of verifiability, asking questions about 'reference' is irrelevant as far as I know, though a quick check of Wikipedia makes the issue plain. Where's the editor's 'reference'? I mean, really, what *is* the Wiki supposed to be? Because I'm tired of trying to help develop Wikifur in good faith when what it seems to relish most is reinventing terms that have precious little to do with the fandom before or after reinvention, to try and hide any meaning that anybody may find embarassing or unpleasant to hear said aloud.)--[[User:Furthling|Furthling]] 01:18, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
::::We're both pointing at Wikipedia's article, but I'm obviously seeing something different in it than you are. Reading right from the top: "This article is about zoophilia, the emotional and (optionally) sexual attraction of humans to animals." This appears rather different to "Zoophilia is [a] technical term for sexual attraction of humans to (nonhuman) animals."
::::I saw the anonymous edit as a person who saw an article presenting one point of view and changing it to show two. Was this new point of view too forcefully expressed? Perhaps. But calling it "obfuscation" means that there is a clear truth to the matter and they are hiding it, which I think is inaccurate. There are truths to be stated, certainly, but we need to draw the line more finely around them.
::::The reality of the situation is that some people use the word differently. If a body of people are doing this, then we need the equivalent of "some people use this word to mean X" in the article - even if that is not the ''clinical'' definition in one particular source (and if we give that, we need to say which one - there are many such sources and they may have differing views). We don't judge whether they're right or wrong, because we don't ''have'' to; it's not our job to decide "ultimate truth". We just have to represent their view accurately along with all other views - not necessarily in equal proportion, but without disagreeing with any particular viewpoint - and let the reader make up their own mind.
::::References are not required for most articles or most assertions on WikiFur. However, when there is disagreement, it becomes the word of one person against the word of another. Edit wars are unsatisfactory, so what we do is ask that if one person wants a piece of the article to stick the way that it is, they have to provide a reference - they have to back up their claims with evidence from other sources. Typically the result is that the claims made in the article become more specific, because everyone can agree on their truth.
::::If you want to be definite, make specific claims attributed to others, such as "X is defined in Y as Z", rather than blanket claims such as "X is Z". That means it is not us who is making the assertion - and that makes the article better, because it does not rely on unattributed assertions which no reader can evaluate. --[[User:GreenReaper|GreenReaper]]<sup>([[User talk:GreenReaper|talk]])</sup> 09:25, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

:::::GR, the first paragraph of the article on wikipedia makes inescapably clear that zoophilia is a definitionally sexual matter. The line you refer to references the disambig page; that line is not part of the text of Wikipedia's actual Zoophilia article. The article over and over discusses zoophilia as specifically sexual in nature, and the only thing that contradicts this view in that article is a section about word usage whose only supporting reference is dictionary.com! (More about cherry-picking meaning out of dictionaries below.) Throughout the entire rest of the article, it clearly assumes that zoophilia is definitionally sexual. Read the article, or don't, but don't pretend the wikipedia Zoophilia article reads as though "nonsexual zoophilia" was a meaningful subject, because it plainly does not.

:::::You are wrong about whether it's inaccurate to call what the anonymous edit obfuscation-- in fact, that's too weak a term. They plainly set out to obliterate a view on what zoophilia is-- that it is definitionally sexual. And indeed, they obliterated it! Intentionally! It's nothing to do with how forcefully expressed the view was-- it's to do with the fact that they intentionally overwrote information with different information. They did NOT change the article to show two views, they just overwrote one. If you read the edit, you know that. Please advise whether you support that kind of information-obliterating edit. I don't want to contribute to a wiki where information obliteration is generally held to be a good idea, and my doubts about your support for such behavior are strong and legitimate.

:::::Regarding your remark: "The reality of the situation is that some people use the word differently,": of course that's true, but absent any standard of verifiability, it's at *least* irrelevant, and at worst a major disaster for the integrity of the Wiki. Seriously: I and some other people I know use the word "zoophile" to describe persons who rape and abuse animals. That's exactly what I think the word actually amouts to. If you include every view on a given word, in a given article, you will have a meaningless hodgepodge of contradictory definitions.

:::::So when you say: "We don't judge whether they're right or wrong, because we don't have to; it's not our job to decide 'ultimate truth'." You're setting up and cutting down a straw man. I've not suggested there's some kind of revelatory ultimate truth, and my views don't depend on that idea. Nevertheless, there ARE views that are correct on the preponderance of the evidence, and that *does* have a lot to do with whether they're proper or improper for inclusion on the wiki.

:::::Insisting on disputed views only being included with a reference *is* judging, for this purpose, whether they're right or wrong-- by policy that you've just stated, you DO judge whether views are right or wrong for the purpose of inclusion here.

:::::I've not seen this policy applied on Wikifur, but I'm not the most industrious article reviewer, so maybe I've missed it. Regardless, either you have a standard for what constitutes a good reference, or you don't. If you don't, I'm sure I can find references to support the following views: all furries are homosexual, all furries are child abusers, furries never bathe, and so on. Ought I include these views in the article on Furry? You know that I shouldn't-- that's because you know that, even though those are fairly common views, they're unsupported by credible references because they're wrong. It's the wrongness and unsupportedness of them that merit their exclusion.

:::::Also, I meant to take you to task for cherrypicking your dictionary definition of zooophilia. At dictionary.reference.com, there are five listed definitions for zoophilia. Two refer '''exclusively to sexual attraction to animals'''. A third refers to the technical use in psychology without mentioning that it's understood to be sexual in that context (this definition also gives an unrelated technical meaning from botany.) The fourth does include "affection or affinity for animals" along with the sexual meaning (and a technical usage from biology.) The fifth is from a medical dictionary-- written for an audience with a specialized education; it refers to the psychology and biology terms, relevant here being the psychological one. That's four out of five entries for which sexual attraction to animals is the ONLY relevant definition. I mean unless you think the article should cover pollination and parasitism. --[[User:Furthling|Furthling]] 15:21, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

::::::I look at [http://en.wikifur.com/w/index.php?title=Zoophilia&diff=187486&oldid=185827 the edit] and I see "that may or may not include sexual contact." Doesn't seem like they're saying it doesn't, just that it doesn't have to - as opposed to the prior lede, which specified it solely as "an interest in [[bestiality]]".
::::::Regarding the "meaningless hodgepodge of contradictory definitions", some of which may not be viewed as "good" as others, I specifically disagree with your assertion that "[I] know that [you] shouldn't" add such references. It is ''not'' a problem if some definitions contradict one another, or that some references are viewed by some people as being higher-quality than others. That simply means that some sources have a different definition of the word, and that people have differing opinions of sources. As a practical matter, the potential definitions are likely to collapse down to two or three, supported by a variety of sources - some more than others. That does not mean we should present only the first one.
::::::In the given example of alternate views of furry fandom, you most likely ''should'' provide those views - in the form of a reference attributed to a specific group or organization. We do not provide just the furry view of things here, as established quite clearly on [[stereotype]] (another article which could do with references, if only to provide examples). There ''are'' some rare cases where we have specifically excluded references, but this is when the source itself states that it is not a true opinion, but merely one put out for the sake of amusement without regard to truth (see [[Encyclopedia Dramatica]]).
::::::The problem comes when you assert that a particular view or shared set of views are the ''correct'' view, based on preponderance of the evidence, and that therefore it can be stated without reference to who holds it. In cases where there is no contention between opinion-holders, there is no real problem with this. This is true for the majority of pages on WikiFur, and it is why many pages lack any reference.
::::::In cases of contention, it is appropriate to specify your references - and by this, I mean that ''all'' disputed views should be given with references, or specifically tagged with {{tl|fact}} as lacking them. The reader will then be able to judge the quality of the views for themselves by judging the quality (and, perhaps, quantity) of the attributed sources. If no source is provided for a definition, or that provided is not credible in their eyes, or there is only one credible source that gives it as opposed to five that prefer another, then they will probably rely more on the other definitions offered. But that is their decision to make.
::::::No attempt was made to "cherry-pick" definitions. I simply went to Google, typed in "zoophilia" and clicked the "[definitions]" link to the right. There, I found [http://www.answers.com/zoophilia&r=67 three definitions]. All three included non-sexual aspects as part of their definition - the first two ''also'' included sexual ones. In the actual dictionary entry given, this non-sexual aspect was the first sub-definition as opposed to the second. There may well be other methods of looking up definitions that give other results. I encourage you to add those definitions to the article as well, with appropriate citations attributing their source, in order to provide a broader view of scholarly opinion.
::::::In defense of non-sexual definitions, such definitions do appear to derive closely from its Greek root, "philia". This [[Wikipedia:Philia|means friendship]], in its various forms - not sensual attraction, which has its own word ([[Wikipedia:Eros (love)|eros]]). Indeed, Wikipedia specifies that according to Aristotle it could apply to pets, and I presume that not all Greeks were having sex with their pets.
::::::I don't want to get hung up too much on what the Greek definition is, though it is probably worth mentioning for the sake of those who claim it as an example of why sexual definitions are "wrong". What really matters is how that word is used now - and, as there appears to be differences of opinion on that, the authorities you appeal to need to be cited in the article, especially if you seek to give one definition preeminence over others. Only then can we truly claim that the article relies on the opinions of others, rather than our own. --[[User:GreenReaper|GreenReaper]]<sup>([[User talk:GreenReaper|talk]])</sup> 13:09, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

== Is this vandalism? ==

"They sometimes refer to those who have sexual contact with animals without emotional bonds as "beasties," or, more often, "rapists.""

Not really up on this subject, but that last word just sounded wrong. [[User:Perri Rhoades|Perri Rhoades]] 19:45, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Tyroo

2021-03-23T12:39:43Z

SpazKitty: Protected "Tyroo": Article exclusion ([Edit=Colleagues only] (indefinite) [Move=Colleagues only] (indefinite))

Tyroo

2021-03-23T12:39:27Z

SpazKitty: confirmed via FA

Muzzle (anatomy)

2021-03-23T12:38:35Z

SpazKitty: Reverted edits by 2001:8003:E10C:9A00:3571:42B8:3715:11F6 (talk) to last revision by Equivamp

{{copyedit}}
[[File:Cocker spaniel.jpg|right|thumb|225px|A Cocker Spaniel's extended snout]]
[[File:Panthera leo Kruger Skull.jpg|right|thumb|225px|Panther's skull showing enlarged nose aperture and extended jaw and row of [[carnivore]] teeth]]

A '''muzzle''', also known as a '''snout''', is a protruding part of an [[animal]]'s face that includes the nasal cavity, nose, jaw, and mouth, in the same relative region where the [[human]]'s counterparts are located.

== Purpose and function ==

The primary reason a muzzle is extended for this is the extension of the nasal cavity, which provides for an extremely acute sense of [[W:Olfaction|smell]]. A tangential benefit is the extension of the jaw, allowing for more teeth (and more specialized teeth) in a single species.

Most [[mammal]]s have [[wikipedia:Vibrissae|vibrissae]], or sinus hairs (named for the blood filled sinus surrounding the follicle, which provides their sensitivity), colloquially known as ''whiskers,'' on various locations on the face and body; the end of the muzzle is the primary location for them, where they are called mystacial vibrissae. Their primary function is mediating tactile sense, used to navigate and to identify objects,<ref name="PsychToday">[https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/canine-corner/201109/why-do-dogs-have-whiskers "Why Do Dogs Have Whiskers?"] - article in ''Psychology Today''. Retrieved February 5, 2017.</ref> but they can also have social uses, as in [[rat]]s.<ref name="RatBehavior">[http://www.ratbehavior.org/RatWhiskers.htm "The world through a rat's whiskers"] - RatBehavior.org. Retrieved February 5, 2017.</ref> Loss of the whiskers can disorient an animal,<ref name="PsychToday" /><ref name="RatBehavior" /> and plucking them can cause discomfort.<ref>[http://www.vetstreet.com/dr-marty-becker/how-dog-and-cat-whiskers-work "How Dog and Cat Whiskers Work"] - VetStreet. Retrieved February 5, 2017.</ref>

[[Canine]]s have the longest proportional muzzle, followed by [[feline]]s and [[mustelid]]s.{{fact}} [[Equine]]s' "muzzles" are technically very short, although the entirety of their extended skulls are considered to be part of the muzzle.

== Muzzles and furry ==

A common problem in [[furgonomics]] is how to deal with the issues of having a muzzle; for example, how a [[character]]'s [[anthropomorphic]] muzzle may alter [[W:Facial expression|facial expressions]] or [[W:Speech|speech]] in relation to similar Human traits (i.e. Humanoid mouth motor functions such as whisling, lips' muscle expressions, such as puckering, frowning, etc), or how the muzzle's larger cranial (extended) [[W:Bone|bone]] mass may work in relation to normal Human gear or vestments (helmets, masks, etc,...).

== See also ==

* [[W:Muzzle|Muzzle]] on [[Wikipedia]]

== References ==
<references/>
{{term-stub}}

{{Anatomy}}
[[Category:Anatomy terms]]

[[it:muso]]
[[ru:Морда]]
[[zh:嚵]]

Hidden Nirvana MUCK

2021-03-23T03:24:35Z

SpazKitty:

<pre class="MU-logo noexcerpt">
:
: : ''' : :
// // //.\\ \\ \\
. ||``:||``://.....\\:``||:``|| .
. \. ||```||```||.....||```||```|| ./ .
\. \\. \\```\\```\\.....//```//```// .// ./
\\..\\..\\```\\`` \\...// ``//```//..//..//
\\..\\..\\`` \\`` '| |' ``// ``//..//..//
=..==.==..===..== | | ==..===..==.==..=
-- -- -- --- | | --- -- -- --
)| |(
| |o | | | |:. .o
|---|.,---|,---|,---.,---. | | |\ |.,---.. ,,---.,---.,---.
| ||| || ||---'| | | | | \ ||| \ / ,---|| |,---|
` '``---'`---'`---'` ' | | ` `'`` `' `---.` '`---.
| |
<<<__| |__>>>
| |
<<<_____| |_____>>>
| |
| |
| |
| |
_,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'| |'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,_
| |
_,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,__,.-'~'-.,_

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -</pre>

'''Hidden Nirvana MUCK''' was an [[wikipedia:India|India]]-themed wildlife ([[non-morphic]]) [[role-playing]] [[MUCK]]. Species include [[tiger]]s, clouded [[leopard]]s, and [[dhole]]s. "Allowed species include: All species that are native to India and are not extinct. This includes species that were historically found in India as long as they still exist somewhere. [...] Humans are treated as having existed in the distant past (100+ years ago), but they still have myth/legend status among the animals of the muck."<ref>[http://hiddennirvana.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=announce&action=display&thread=14 Rules, for your inspection] August 21, 2010 forum post. Retrieved March 20, 2013.</ref> A few players have revived their characters from the long-defunct [[India MUCK]].

* '''Addresses''':
** '''MUCK server''': [telnet://marupa.net:2010 marupa.net, port 2010]
** '''Website''': http://hiddennirvana.proboards.com/
* '''Ran from/to''': September 2010 - 2011?

== Staff ==

* [[Avalikia]] - Head Wizard
* [[Sudhir]] - Wizard
* [[Rakta]] - Programmer

==References==
<references/>

==External links==
* [http://www.tigerden.com/infopage/muck/hidden-nirvana.html Hidden Nirvana MUCK] on [[Rhal's Furry MU*s Page]]

[[Category:Animal multiplayer worlds]]
[[Category:2010 births]]

Meadows MUCK

2021-03-23T00:07:09Z

SpazKitty: Reverted edits by SpazKitty (talk) to last revision by 71.59.40.59

<pre class="MU-logo noexcerpt">
__ __ _ __ __ _ _ ___ _ __
| \/ |___ __ _ __| |_____ __ _____ | \/ | | | |/ __| |/ /
| |\/| / -_) _` / _` / _ \ V V (_-< | |\/| | |_| | (__| ' <
|_| |_\___\__,_\__,_\___/\_/\_//__/ |_| |_|\___/ \___|_|\_\

....... .....
((())))))) ((())))
(())(()))))())(())))oooooo ......
ooooooo()))))())()) ooooooooo ((())))))))
ooooooooo)))())())0000.0000000(()(())))))))())
oOOOOOOOOO)())))) 0000.0000000(((()((((((()))))
ooooooo| | ooooooo0000\\ 000(())))((()))))
\\// | | o||o | | \\// | |
|| | | || |=| || | |
@ || | | @| | | || |=| @
__\\|//__|/__\\||__| |_\\|//_| ||/__@|__\\|//| |___\\/___\\|//____
|| \\|// \\|// | |
------------------------------------------------------------------
</pre>

'''Meadows MUCK''' was a North American wildlife [[role-playing]] [[MUCK]]. Popular species included [[wolf|wolves]], [[cougar]]s, [[coyote (species)|coyote]]s, [[foxes]], [[dogs]], [[horses]], and [[deer]]. While there was a small degree of [[human]] presence, the focus was on the interactions among the animals. A few of the past groups on the MUCK had drawn inspiration from [[non-anthropomorphic]] literature such as ''[[Watership Down]]'' and the ''[[Warriors]]'' series. The MUCK was originally set in Europe, but changed in March 2007 to a North American setting.

* '''Addresses''':
** '''MUCK server''': amber.org.uk, port 7000 or 7007
** '''Website''': http://meadowsmuck.googlepages.com
** '''Forum''': http://meadowmuck.proboards.com
* '''Motto''': ''Where imagination roams free.''
* '''Ran from/to''': May 2006 - 2020

== Staff ==
=== [[Wizard]]s ===

*Azoto
*[[Spaz Kitty|Curiosity]] - Head Wizard
*Greer
*Pavane
*Therdde

=== Former [[staff]] ===

*Aesop (July 2009 - July 2010)
*[[Asrohc]] (Programmer)
*[[Juggernaut|Brunhilde]] (May 2006 - December 2006)
*Etenia (July 2011 - January 2012)
*Ivy (May 2006 - August 2006)
*[[Unzumi|Nicodemus]] (May 2006 - June 2009)
*Nascha (October 2010 - June 2011)
*[[Ninebirds]] (May 2006 - July 2006)
*[[Sidian|Penumbra]] (May 2006 - July 2006)
*Siri (December 2007 - June 2009)
*Sohtoh (July 2009 - July 2011)
*[[Suhuba|Storm]] (August 2006 - December 2006)
*Tamaharus (June 2006 - December 2006)
*[[Bahiyah|Temperance]] (May 2006 - January 2009)
*[[Shinda|Whyk]] (June 2006 - November 2009)

== Policies ==

A player is allowed to have no more than two wolf characters or two cougar characters. This includes [[canine]] [[hybrid]]s, which are restricted through special applications. However, a third wolf may be allowed to players who submit a quality application and have an active non-canine [[alt]].

A moderate amount of realism with characters is enforced, though some creative leeway is allowed. For example, unnatural colorings (e.g. blue) are not permitted, but unique patterns and variations in shades are allowed. Albino characters are also restricted by way of application.

[[TinySex]] was originally allowed in private rooms, but has since been banned as a result of several problems and complaints.
{{q|The MUCK has a general rating of PG-13. As such, explicit sexual content is not allowed under any circumstances. While we understand that animals do breed, past issues have forced a complete ban of scenes of this nature. Please use a fade to black, or take the RP elsewhere.<ref><tt>news rules</tt> on Meadows MUCK. Retrieved July 16, 2016.</ref>}}

== Setting ==

Originally, when it opened in May 2006, Meadows MUCK was set in an unspecified area of Europe. In March 2007, the head wizard stated that by setting the MUCK in Europe rather than in North America, "we sacrificed the presence of cougars. This may not seem like a lot, but I think a 'clan' of cougars could add a lot to the dynamics of the IC realm.".<ref>[http://meadowmuck.proboards91.com/index.cgi?board=sugg&action=display&thread=1173570258 Changes?]. Thread started by Curiosity on March 10 2007. (defunct)</ref> She proposed allowing cougar characters without changing the setting; allowing species from both North America and Europe; or changing the setting from Europe to North America. After a final poll between the two most popular options of a merge or a complete shift, the setting was changed to western North America.

== Social groups ==
=== Amaranth Cougar Tribe ===
*Chieftain: Wiraqu
*Matron: Arroyo
*Shamaness: Maul
:Generation 1: Chieftain Ahiga and Matron Paoro. Shamaness Donoma.
:Generation 2: Chieftain Chesmu and Matron Ayashe. Shamaness Paoro.
:Generation 3: Chieftain Kein and Matron Nayeli. Shamaness Sweet-Rain.

=== Cerulean Wolf Pack ===
*Alpha male: Coinin
:Generation 1: Alpha Tariro. Beta Shag.

=== Past groups ===
* '''Hawthorn Rabbit Warren'''
* '''Dorado Horse Herd'''
* '''Lazuli Wolf Pack''' (merged into Cerulean)
:Generation 1: Alphas Felstride and Storm. Betas Thorne and Miakoda.
:Generation 2: Alphas Haze and Larkspur. Betas Cyrus and Eclipse.
* '''Russet Dog Pack'''
* '''Sienna Dog Pack'''
* '''Sagebrush Horse Herd'''
* '''Umber Deer Herd'''
=== Ute Wolf Pack ===
*Alpha male: Ikuna
*Beta: Althaea
:Generation 1: Alphas Helaku and Skelaghe. Beta Teketa.
:Generation 2: Alphas Hahtalekin and Wyanet. Beta Quidel.
:Generation 3: Alphas Skahla and Shawnee.
? - 2015 "Ute's @group listing has been removed, though IC members remain"<ref>[http://meadowmuck.proboards.com/thread/2237/seasons-end A Season's End] February 27, 2015 post by Pavane on Meadows MUCK forum. Retrieved July 16, 2016.</ref>
=== Viridian Wolf Pack ===
:Generation 1: Alphas Silvan and Silver. Betas [[Friti]] and Cottonpaws.
:Generation 2: Alpha Cottonpaws. Beta Shag.
(merged into Cerulean)

== References ==
<references/>

[[Category:Animal multiplayer worlds]]
[[Category:2006 births]]

Meadows MUCK

2021-03-23T00:06:40Z

SpazKitty: /* Former staff */

<pre class="MU-logo noexcerpt">
__ __ _ __ __ _ _ ___ _ __
| \/ |___ __ _ __| |_____ __ _____ | \/ | | | |/ __| |/ /
| |\/| / -_) _` / _` / _ \ V V (_-< | |\/| | |_| | (__| ' <
|_| |_\___\__,_\__,_\___/\_/\_//__/ |_| |_|\___/ \___|_|\_\

....... .....
((())))))) ((())))
(())(()))))())(())))oooooo ......
ooooooo()))))())()) ooooooooo ((())))))))
ooooooooo)))())())0000.0000000(()(())))))))())
oOOOOOOOOO)())))) 0000.0000000(((()((((((()))))
ooooooo| | ooooooo0000\\ 000(())))((()))))
\\// | | o||o | | \\// | |
|| | | || |=| || | |
@ || | | @| | | || |=| @
__\\|//__|/__\\||__| |_\\|//_| ||/__@|__\\|//| |___\\/___\\|//____
|| \\|// \\|// | |
------------------------------------------------------------------
</pre>

'''Meadows MUCK''' was a North American wildlife [[role-playing]] [[MUCK]]. Popular species included [[wolf|wolves]], [[cougar]]s, [[coyote (species)|coyote]]s, [[foxes]], [[dogs]], [[horses]], and [[deer]]. While there was a small degree of [[human]] presence, the focus was on the interactions among the animals. A few of the past groups on the MUCK had drawn inspiration from [[non-anthropomorphic]] literature such as ''[[Watership Down]]'' and the ''[[Warriors]]'' series. The MUCK was originally set in Europe, but changed in March 2007 to a North American setting.

* '''Addresses''':
** '''MUCK server''': amber.org.uk, port 7000 or 7007
** '''Website''': http://meadowsmuck.googlepages.com
** '''Forum''': http://meadowmuck.proboards.com
* '''Motto''': ''Where imagination roams free.''
* '''Ran from/to''': May 2006 - 2020

== Staff ==
=== [[Wizard]]s ===

*Azoto
*[[Spaz Kitty|Curiosity]] - Head Wizard
*Greer
*Pavane
*Therdde

=== Former [[staff]] ===

*Aesop (July 2009 - July 2010)
*[[Asrohc]] (Programmer)
*Brunhilde (May 2006 - December 2006)
*Etenia (July 2011 - January 2012)
*Ivy (May 2006 - August 2006)
*[[Unzumi|Nicodemus]] (May 2006 - June 2009)
*Nascha (October 2010 - June 2011)
*[[Ninebirds]] (May 2006 - July 2006)
*[[Sidian|Penumbra]] (May 2006 - July 2006)
*Siri (December 2007 - June 2009)
*Sohtoh (July 2009 - July 2011)
*[[Suhuba|Storm]] (August 2006 - December 2006)
*Tamaharus (June 2006 - December 2006)
*[[Bahiyah|Temperance]] (May 2006 - January 2009)
*[[Shinda|Whyk]] (June 2006 - November 2009)

== Policies ==

A player is allowed to have no more than two wolf characters or two cougar characters. This includes [[canine]] [[hybrid]]s, which are restricted through special applications. However, a third wolf may be allowed to players who submit a quality application and have an active non-canine [[alt]].

A moderate amount of realism with characters is enforced, though some creative leeway is allowed. For example, unnatural colorings (e.g. blue) are not permitted, but unique patterns and variations in shades are allowed. Albino characters are also restricted by way of application.

[[TinySex]] was originally allowed in private rooms, but has since been banned as a result of several problems and complaints.
{{q|The MUCK has a general rating of PG-13. As such, explicit sexual content is not allowed under any circumstances. While we understand that animals do breed, past issues have forced a complete ban of scenes of this nature. Please use a fade to black, or take the RP elsewhere.<ref><tt>news rules</tt> on Meadows MUCK. Retrieved July 16, 2016.</ref>}}

== Setting ==

Originally, when it opened in May 2006, Meadows MUCK was set in an unspecified area of Europe. In March 2007, the head wizard stated that by setting the MUCK in Europe rather than in North America, "we sacrificed the presence of cougars. This may not seem like a lot, but I think a 'clan' of cougars could add a lot to the dynamics of the IC realm.".<ref>[http://meadowmuck.proboards91.com/index.cgi?board=sugg&action=display&thread=1173570258 Changes?]. Thread started by Curiosity on March 10 2007. (defunct)</ref> She proposed allowing cougar characters without changing the setting; allowing species from both North America and Europe; or changing the setting from Europe to North America. After a final poll between the two most popular options of a merge or a complete shift, the setting was changed to western North America.

== Social groups ==
=== Amaranth Cougar Tribe ===
*Chieftain: Wiraqu
*Matron: Arroyo
*Shamaness: Maul
:Generation 1: Chieftain Ahiga and Matron Paoro. Shamaness Donoma.
:Generation 2: Chieftain Chesmu and Matron Ayashe. Shamaness Paoro.
:Generation 3: Chieftain Kein and Matron Nayeli. Shamaness Sweet-Rain.

=== Cerulean Wolf Pack ===
*Alpha male: Coinin
:Generation 1: Alpha Tariro. Beta Shag.

=== Past groups ===
* '''Hawthorn Rabbit Warren'''
* '''Dorado Horse Herd'''
* '''Lazuli Wolf Pack''' (merged into Cerulean)
:Generation 1: Alphas Felstride and Storm. Betas Thorne and Miakoda.
:Generation 2: Alphas Haze and Larkspur. Betas Cyrus and Eclipse.
* '''Russet Dog Pack'''
* '''Sienna Dog Pack'''
* '''Sagebrush Horse Herd'''
* '''Umber Deer Herd'''
=== Ute Wolf Pack ===
*Alpha male: Ikuna
*Beta: Althaea
:Generation 1: Alphas Helaku and Skelaghe. Beta Teketa.
:Generation 2: Alphas Hahtalekin and Wyanet. Beta Quidel.
:Generation 3: Alphas Skahla and Shawnee.
? - 2015 "Ute's @group listing has been removed, though IC members remain"<ref>[http://meadowmuck.proboards.com/thread/2237/seasons-end A Season's End] February 27, 2015 post by Pavane on Meadows MUCK forum. Retrieved July 16, 2016.</ref>
=== Viridian Wolf Pack ===
:Generation 1: Alphas Silvan and Silver. Betas [[Friti]] and Cottonpaws.
:Generation 2: Alpha Cottonpaws. Beta Shag.
(merged into Cerulean)

== References ==
<references/>

[[Category:Animal multiplayer worlds]]
[[Category:2006 births]]

User talk:68.36.114.95

2021-03-22T23:40:54Z

SpazKitty: Created page with '== Personal Exclusion == Hi {{PAGENAME}}, you have recently blanked or removed lots of information from the article Tyroo, which was reverted by another editor. If you ar...'

== Personal Exclusion ==

Hi {{PAGENAME}}, you have recently blanked or removed lots of information from the article [[Tyroo]], which was reverted by another editor. If you are Tyroo and wish to be excluded from [[WikiFur]], you can [[WikiFur:Personal exclusion|request personal exclusion]]. Note that to remove incorrect or private info, you don't need to request personal exclusion; see [[WikiFur:Personal exclusion#Alternatives to full exclusion|alternatives]]. [[User:SpazKitty|Spaz Kitty]] ([[User talk:SpazKitty|talk]]) 19:40, 22 March 2021 (EDT)

Talk:Tyroo

2021-03-22T23:39:35Z

SpazKitty: Created page with 'Rolling back removal request pending confirmation via FA, or by User:Tyroo. ~~~~'

Rolling back removal request pending confirmation via FA, or by [[User:Tyroo]]. [[User:SpazKitty|Spaz Kitty]] ([[User talk:SpazKitty|talk]]) 19:39, 22 March 2021 (EDT)

Tyroo

2021-03-22T23:38:40Z

SpazKitty: Reverted edits by 68.36.114.95 (talk) to last revision by FrostTheFox

[[Image:Ty_avatar_jpg2.jpg|right|thumb|Tyroo, by himself]]
'''Tyroo''' is a [[furry artist]] from [[Wikipedia:Wyandotte, Michigan|Wyandotte, Michigan]]. Although he was once a [[grey wolf]] fur he switched to a [[kangaroo]] after an incident where his parents found out he was [[gay]].

Tyroo's character is cute and innocent at the age of 16, but with an anger disorder which he tries to hide. He is a big fan of the art of [[Roo Boy]].

==External links==
{{Contributor}}
*[http://www.furaffinity.net/user/tyroo/ Tyroo] at [[Fur Affinity]]

[[Category:People]]
[[Category:Artists]]
[[Category:Kangaroo characters]][[Category:Michigan]]

Forum:Forum:Please delete my page and acct

2019-06-28T23:22:39Z

SpazKitty:

<div class="forumheader">'''Forums:''' [[Forum:Index|Index]] > [[Forum:Help desk|Help desk]] > {{PAGENAME}}</div><br />

[[Category:Help desk]]



Hey there, I no longer wish my acct nor [[Madius|my page]] to exist on longer, please delete them. Thank you. -m {{unsigned|Madius}}
:Fire me a DM via [[Twitter]] for confirmation, plz. Thanks - [[User:Spirou|Spirou]] ([[User talk:Spirou|talk]]) 01:57, 26 June 2019 (EDT)

Hey not seeing your Twitter account listed ? I found @SpiroiWikifur, sent a public tweet to it. [[User:Madius|Madius]] ([[User talk:Madius|talk]]) 08:44, 28 June 2019 (EDT)

Removed/protected by request. [[User:SpazKitty|Spaz Kitty]] ([[User talk:SpazKitty|talk]]) 19:22, 28 June 2019 (EDT)

Madius

2019-06-28T23:21:55Z

SpazKitty: Protected "Madius" ([Edit=Colleagues only] (indefinite) [Move=Colleagues only] (indefinite))

Madius

2019-06-28T23:21:44Z

SpazKitty: removing page by request

User:Spaz Kitty

2019-06-18T20:16:16Z

SpazKitty:

{{LinkingSupporter}}
{{supporter}}
[[Image:Spaz_dk_icon.jpg|left]]

<div style="float:right; width:250px;">
{|border="1px" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" style="text-align: center; width: 250px; margin: auto;"
|-
|{{User Administrator}}
|-
|{{User FWA}}
|-
|{{User Fur Affinity Name|SpazKitty}}
|-
|{{User IMVU Name|Guest_TheSpazKitty}}
|-
|{{User Second Life Name|Chovexani}}
|-
|{{ContributorU|Spaz Kitty}}
|}
</div>

*'''RL Name''': Brooke
*'''Gender''': Female
*'''Species''': Calico Cat
*'''Orientation''': Bisexual
*'''Mate''': [[Tad Cooga]]

{{Furcode|FFD4acdmr A C Dm++ H+ M++++ P++ R+ T- W- Z- Sf+ RLVM a30 cn++ d- e++ f++ h++ iwf++ j+ p+ sf+}}

== Current MUCK Characters ==
[[Meadows MUCK]]
* Curiosity - female cat ([[wizard]])

'''For a list of past MUCK characters, click [[User:SpazKitty/Past Characters|here]].'''

<center>''[Feel free to copy all or part of this layout as your own userpage template. A few furs have already, and I don't mind!]''</center>

Braduz Yakuza

2019-06-18T20:11:12Z

SpazKitty: Protected "Braduz Yakuza": Article exclusion ([Edit=Colleagues only] (indefinite) [Move=Colleagues only] (indefinite))

User:SpazKitty/Past Characters

2012-06-02T18:49:58Z

SpazKitty:

<center><u>'''Past MUCK Characters'''</u></center>

[[Meadows MUCK]]
* Aurora - female cougar
* Ayita - female mustang
* Haze - male wolf
* Lilith - female wolf
* Nightshade - female rabbit
* Paoro - female cougar shamaness
* Ruya - female cougar
* Sequoia - female whitetail deer
* Skylar - neuter dog
* Styx - male wolf

[[Hidden Nirvana MUCK]]
* Saraswati - female linsang

[[The Pridelands Chronicles]]
* Sinyaa - female hyena ([[wizard]])
* Zira - female lioness queen

[[Cry of the Kalahari]]
* Mme - female hyena spirit (wizard)
* Msaliti - female lioness

[[Sunrise MUCK]]
* Zira - lioness queen

[[Kings and Vagabonds MUCK]]
* Zira - juvenile lioness

[[Endless Round MUCK]]
* Zira - lioness queen (wizard)
* Sumu - female hyena

[[The Lion King MUCK]]
* Mapyoro - lioness hunt mistress of the Fire Pride
* Sumu - female hyena killed by the Tsavo pride
* Inda - hyena matriarch of the Sumu clan (lived in Elephant Graveyard), named in honor of her deceased half-sister
* Chukizi - female hyena who ruled the Mender clan alongside Bashak, half-sister of K'jasria (matriarch of the Damuamwa clan of Elephant Graveyard)

[[Crossroads MUCK]]
* Nemesis - female alpha wolf of the Kobuk pack (wizard/Alaska)
* Etcetera - female calico cat (Alaska)
* Zira - lioness (Africa)
* Cicero - female ocelot (Amazon)
* Selina - female human (New York)
* Chovexani - female Balinese cat (New York)
* Ayita - female Siberian Husky (Alaska)
* Dixie - female Lhasa Apso (Alaska)
* Victoria - female human (Alaska)
* Yiska - female human (Alaska)
* various other characters

[[Verdant Reign MUCK]]
* Paoro - female puma (wizard)
* Ratri - female black jaguar

[[Redwall MUCK]]
* Paoro - female cat, lawyer of Ruingate
* Etcetera - female cat

[[African Legends]]
* Mchinjo - lioness hunt mistress
* Vitani - lioness

[[The Prides MUCK]]
* Kijakazi - female cheetah

[[Tapestries MUCK]]
* Etcetera - female calico cat

[[Mnara]]/Uchawi
* Mbi - female hyena
* Shetani - lioness

Talk:Alin Raven

2012-05-25T13:19:11Z

SpazKitty: ETA...

== 174.91.43.127 ==

This kind of harrasment is not welcome in Wikifur, some valid points or not. Of the valid points, these have been covered by the article itself. Other venues or sites may not mind your entry, but, please, no here. Thanks - [[User:Spirou|Spirou]] 16:22, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

== Exclusion request ==

The subject of this article has requested [[WikiFur:Personal exclusion]]. Are there any objections to this? I notice some controversy here, but it seems to have been something of a storm in a teacup. --[[User:GreenReaper|GreenReaper]]<sup>([[User talk:GreenReaper|talk]])</sup> 05:23, 25 May 2012 (EDT)

:I want it removed because its costing me work! <small>—The preceding unsigned comment was added by [[User:AlinGrizzly|AlinGrizzly]] ([[User talk:AlinGrizzly|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/AlinGrizzly|contribs]]) .</small>

::Well, that's cool and all, but [[Starfinder]] would probably get a few more commissions if we didn't have an article covering her activities, too. What we care about is whether a) the information on this article is accurate, and b) whether it justifies keeping the article up despite your objections. Please understand that clicking edit and hitting the delete button is entirely counter-productive. If you want this article gone, focus your arguments on the above points. --[[User:GreenReaper|GreenReaper]]<sup>([[User talk:GreenReaper|talk]])</sup> 05:45, 25 May 2012 (EDT)

:::I received a mail about this as well, and if it's actually causing RL career issues ("My boss found it and I might lost my job"), then I support the case for removal. No one should have to lose their job because of an article on a furry wiki. If there are issues with removing the article because of past controversy within the furry community, then at the very least all unnecessary/unrelated RL details (such as name, birthday, RL career/education details, etc) should be removed, and only furry-specific info should be left behind. [[User:SpazKitty|Spaz Kitty]] 09:13, 25 May 2012 (EDT)
::::(ETA: Of course, Alin should also consider not having a picture of his fursona with his furry name on it prominently displayed as his public Facebook profile picture (which everyone knows bosses are going to check) if he really wants to keep his alternate identity a secret...) [[User:SpazKitty|Spaz Kitty]]

Talk:Alin Raven

2012-05-25T13:14:42Z

SpazKitty:

Talk:Alin Raven

2012-05-25T13:13:46Z

SpazKitty: support removal (at least partially)

== 174.91.43.127 ==

This kind of harrasment is not welcome in Wikifur, some valid points or not. Of the valid points, these have been covered by the article itself. Other venues or sites may not mind your entry, but, please, no here. Thanks - [[User:Spirou|Spirou]] 16:22, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

== Exclusion request ==

The subject of this article has requested [[WikiFur:Personal exclusion]]. Are there any objections to this? I notice some controversy here, but it seems to have been something of a storm in a teacup. --[[User:GreenReaper|GreenReaper]]<sup>([[User talk:GreenReaper|talk]])</sup> 05:23, 25 May 2012 (EDT)

:I want it removed because its costing me work! <small>—The preceding unsigned comment was added by [[User:AlinGrizzly|AlinGrizzly]] ([[User talk:AlinGrizzly|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/AlinGrizzly|contribs]]) .</small>

::Well, that's cool and all, but [[Starfinder]] would probably get a few more commissions if we didn't have an article covering her activities, too. What we care about is whether a) the information on this article is accurate, and b) whether it justifies keeping the article up despite your objections. Please understand that clicking edit and hitting the delete button is entirely counter-productive. If you want this article gone, focus your arguments on the above points. --[[User:GreenReaper|GreenReaper]]<sup>([[User talk:GreenReaper|talk]])</sup> 05:45, 25 May 2012 (EDT)

:::I received a mail about this as well, and if it's actually causing RL career issues ("My boss found it and I might lost my job"), then I support the case for removal. No one should have to lose their job because of an article on a furry wiki. If there are issues with removing the article because of past controversy, then at the very least all unnecessary RL details (such as name, birthday, RL career/education details, etc) should be removed, and only furry-specific info should be left behind. [[User:SpazKitty|Spaz Kitty]] 09:13, 25 May 2012 (EDT)

User:Spaz Kitty

2011-12-09T18:30:38Z

SpazKitty:

{{LinkingSupporter}}
{{supporter}}
[[Image:Spaz_dk_icon.jpg|left]]

<div style="float:right; width:250px;">
{|border="1px" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" style="text-align: center; width: 250px; margin: auto;"
|-
|{{User Administrator}}
|-
|{{User RC Patrol}}
|-
|{{User FWA}}
|-
|{{User Fur Affinity Name|SpazKitty}}
|-
|{{User IMVU Name|Guest_TheSpazKitty}}
|-
|{{User Second Life Name|Chovexani}}
|-
|{{User LiveJournal name|TheSpazKitty}}
|-
|{{ContributorU|Spaz Kitty}}
|}
</div>

*'''RL Name''': Brooke
*'''Gender''': Female
*'''Species''': Calico Cat
*'''Orientation''': Bisexual
*'''Mate''': [[Tad Cooga]]

{{Furcode|FFD4acdmr A C Dm++ H+ M++++ P++ R+ T- W- Z- Sf+ RLVM a25 cn++ d- e++ f++ h++ iwf++ j+ p+ sf+}}

== Current MUCK Characters ==
[[Meadows MUCK]]
* Curiosity - female cat ([[wizard]])
* Arroyo - female cougar
* Malia - female wolf
* Mimiteh - female horse
* Sage - female lynx
* Soyala - female wolf pup

[[The Lion King MUCK]]
* Bimbiriza - female hyena
* Sujudia - female lioness

[[Haezyn|Haezyn MUCK]]
* Vex - female wildcat

[[Redwall MUCK]]
* Vex - female cat

'''For a list of past MUCK characters, click [[User:SpazKitty/Past Characters|here]].'''

<center>''[Feel free to copy all or part of this layout as your own userpage template. A few furs have already, and I don't mind!]''</center>

User:SpazKitty/Past Characters

2011-12-09T18:30:36Z

SpazKitty:

<center><u>'''Past MUCK Characters'''</u></center>

[[Meadows MUCK]]
* Aurora - female cougar
* Ayita - female mustang
* Haze - male wolf
* Lilith - female wolf
* Nightshade - female rabbit
* Paoro - female cougar shamaness
* Ruya - female cougar
* Sequoia - female whitetail deer
* Skylar - neuter dog
* Styx - male wolf

[[Hidden Nirvana MUCK]]
* Saraswati - female linsang

[[The Pridelands Chronicles]]
* Sinyaa - female hyena ([[wizard]])
* Zira - female lioness queen

[[Cry of the Kalahari]]
* Mme - female hyena spirit (wizard)
* Msaliti - female lioness

[[Sunrise MUCK]]
* Zira - lioness queen

[[Kings and Vagabonds MUCK]]
* Zira - juvenile lioness

[[Endless Round MUCK]]
* Zira - lioness queen (wizard)
* Sumu - female hyena

[[The Lion King MUCK]]
* Mapyoro - lioness hunt mistress of the Fire Pride
* Sumu - female hyena killed by the Tsavo pride
* Inda - hyena matriarch of the Sumu clan (lived in Elephant Graveyard), named in honor of her deceased half-sister
* Chukizi - female hyena who ruled the Mender clan alongside Bashak, half-sister of K'jasria (matriarch of the Damuamwa clan of Elephant Graveyard)

[[Crossroads MUCK]]
* Nemesis - female alpha wolf of the Kobuk pack (wizard/Alaska)
* Etcetera - female calico cat (Alaska)
* Zira - lioness (Africa)
* Cicero - female ocelot (Amazon)
* Selina - female human (New York)
* Chovexani - female Balinese cat (New York)
* Dixie - female Lhasa Apso (Alaska)
* Victoria - female human (Alaska)
* Yiska - female human (Alaska)
* various other characters

[[Verdant Reign MUCK]]
* Paoro - female puma (wizard)
* Ratri - female black jaguar

[[Redwall MUCK]]
* Paoro - female cat, lawyer of Ruingate
* Etcetera - female cat

[[African Legends]]
* Mchinjo - lioness hunt mistress
* Vitani - lioness

[[The Prides MUCK]]
* Kijakazi - female cheetah

[[Tapestries MUCK]]
* Etcetera - female calico cat

[[Mnara]]/Uchawi
* Mbi - female hyena
* Shetani - lioness

Meadows MUCK

2011-12-08T00:06:50Z

SpazKitty:

<pre class="MU-logo">
__ __ _ __ __ _ _ ___ _ __
| \/ |___ __ _ __| |_____ __ _____ | \/ | | | |/ __| |/ /
| |\/| / -_) _` / _` / _ \ V V (_-< | |\/| | |_| | (__| ' <
|_| |_\___\__,_\__,_\___/\_/\_//__/ |_| |_|\___/ \___|_|\_\

....... .....
((())))))) ((())))
(())(()))))())(())))oooooo ......
ooooooo()))))())()) ooooooooo ((())))))))
ooooooooo)))())())0000.0000000(()(())))))))())
oOOOOOOOOO)())))) 0000.0000000(((()((((((()))))
ooooooo| | ooooooo0000\\ 000(())))((()))))
\\// | | o||o | | \\// | |
|| | | || |=| || | |
@ || | | @| | | || |=| @
__\\|//__|/__\\||__| |_\\|//_| ||/__@|__\\|//| |___\\/___\\|//____
|| \\|// \\|// | |
------------------------------------------------------------------
</pre>

'''Meadows MUCK''' is a North American wildlife [[role-playing]] [[MUCK]]. Popular species include [[wolf|wolves]], [[cougar]]s, [[coyote]]s, [[foxes]], [[dogs]], [[horses]], and [[deer]]. While there is a small degree of [[human]] presence, the focus is on the interactions among the animals. A few of the past groups on the MUCK have drawn inspiration from [[non-anthropomorphic]] literature such as ''[[Watership Down]]'' and the ''[[Warriors]]'' series. The MUCK was originally set in Europe, but changed in March 2007 to a North American setting.

* '''Addresses''':
** '''MUCK server''': [telnet://amber.org.uk:7000 amber.org.uk, port 7000 or 7007]
** '''Website''': http://meadowsmuck.googlepages.com/
** '''Forum''': http://meadowmuck.proboards.com/
* '''Motto''': ''Where imagination roams free.''
* '''Ran from/to''': May 2006 - present

== Staff ==
=== [[Wizard]]s ===

*Azoto
*[[Spaz Kitty|Curiosity]] - Head Wizard
*Etenia
*Pavane
*Therdde

=== Former [[staff]] ===

*Aesop (July 2009 - July 2010)
*[[Asrohc]] (Programmer)
*[[Juggernaut|Brunhilde]] (May 2006 - December 2006)
*Ivy (May 2006 - August 2006)
*[[Unzumi|Nicodemus]] (May 2006 - June 2009)
*Nascha (October 2010 - June 2011)
*[[Ninebirds]] (May 2006 - July 2006)
*[[Sidian|Penumbra]] (May 2006 - July 2006)
*Siri (December 2007 - June 2009)
*Sohtoh (July 2009 - July 2011)
*[[Suhuba|Storm]] (August 2006 - December 2006)
*Tamaharus (June 2006 - December 2006)
*[[Bahiyah|Temperance]] (May 2006 - January 2009)
*[[Shinda|Whyk]] (June 2006 - November 2009)

== Policies ==

A player is allowed to have no more than two wolf characters or two cougar characters. This includes [[canine]] [[hybrid]]s, which are restricted through special applications. However, a third wolf may be allowed to players who submit a quality application and have an active non-canine [[alt]].

A moderate amount of realism with characters is enforced, though some creative leeway is allowed. For example, unnatural colorings (e.g. blue) are not permitted, but unique patterns and variations in shades are allowed. Albino characters are also restricted by way of application.

[[TinySex]] was originally allowed in private rooms, but has since been banned as a result of several problems and complaints.

== Setting ==

Originally, when it opened in May 2006, Meadows MUCK was set in an unspecified area of Europe. In March 2007, the head wizard stated that by setting the MUCK in Europe rather than in North America, "we sacrificed the presence of cougars. This may not seem like a lot, but I think a 'clan' of cougars could add a lot to the dynamics of the IC realm.".<ref>[http://meadowmuck.proboards91.com/index.cgi?board=sugg&action=display&thread=1173570258 Changes?]. Thread started by Curiosity on March 10 2007. (defunct)</ref> She proposed allowing cougar characters without changing the setting; allowing species from both North America and Europe; or changing the setting from Europe to North America. After a final poll between the two most popular options of a merge or a complete shift, the setting was changed to western North America.

== Social groups ==
=== Amaranth Cougar Tribe ===
*Chieftain: Wiraqu
*Matron: Arroyo
*Shamaness: Maul
:Generation 1: Chieftain Ahiga and Matron Paoro. Shamaness Donoma.
:Generation 2: Chieftain Chesmu and Matron Ayashe. Shamaness Paoro.
:Generation 3: Chieftain Kein and Matron Nayeli. Shamaness Sweet-Rain.

=== Cerulean Wolf Pack ===
*Alpha male: Tariro
*Beta male: Shag

=== Dorado Horse Herd ===
* Lead mare: Cliantha

=== Ute Wolf Pack ===
*Alpha male: Skahla
*Alpha female: Shawnee
:Generation 1: Alphas Helaku and Skelaghe. Beta Teketa.
:Generation 2: Alphas Hahtalekin and Wyanet. Beta Quidel.

== Past groups ==
* '''Hawthorn Rabbit Warren'''
* '''Lazuli Wolf Pack''' (merged into Cerulean)
:Generation 1: Alphas Felstride and Storm. Betas Thorne and Miakoda.
:Generation 2: Alphas Haze and Larkspur. Betas Cyrus and Eclipse.
* '''Russet Dog Pack'''
* '''Sienna Dog Pack'''
* '''Sagebrush Horse Herd'''
* '''Umber Deer Herd'''
* '''Viridian Wolf Pack''' (merged into Cerulean)
:Generation 1: Alphas Silvan and Silver. Betas [[Friti]] and Cottonpaws.
:Generation 2: Alpha Cottonpaws. Beta Shag.

== References ==
<references/>

[[Category:Animal multiplayer worlds]]
[[Category:2006 births]]

User:Spaz Kitty

2011-11-21T13:12:29Z

SpazKitty:

{{LinkingSupporter}}
{{supporter}}
[[Image:Spaz_dk_icon.jpg|left]]

<div style="float:right; width:250px;">
{|border="1px" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" style="text-align: center; width: 250px; margin: auto;"
|-
|{{User Administrator}}
|-
|{{User RC Patrol}}
|-
|{{User FWA}}
|-
|{{User Fur Affinity Name|SpazKitty}}
|-
|{{User IMVU Name|Guest_TheSpazKitty}}
|-
|{{User Second Life Name|Chovexani}}
|-
|{{User LiveJournal name|TheSpazKitty}}
|-
|{{ContributorU|Spaz Kitty}}
|}
</div>

*'''RL Name''': Brooke
*'''Gender''': Female
*'''Species''': Calico Cat
*'''Orientation''': Bisexual
*'''Mate''': [[Tad Cooga]]

{{Furcode|FFD4acdmr A C Dm++ H+ M++++ P++ R+ T- W- Z- Sf+ RLVM a25 cn++ d- e++ f++ h++ iwf++ j+ p+ sf+}}

== Current MUCK Characters ==
[[Meadows MUCK]]
* Curiosity - female cat ([[wizard]])
* Arroyo - female cougar
* Haze - male wolf
* Mimiteh - female horse
* Sage - female lynx
* Soyala - female wolf pup

[[The Lion King MUCK]]
* Bimbiriza - female hyena
* Sujudia - female lioness

[[Haezyn|Haezyn MUCK]]
* Vex - female wildcat

[[Redwall MUCK]]
* Vex - female cat

'''For a list of past MUCK characters, click [[User:SpazKitty/Past Characters|here]].'''

<center>''[Feel free to copy all or part of this layout as your own userpage template. A few furs have already, and I don't mind!]''</center>