/anthro/ - Anthropomorphic

You should try posting a bird anthro instead of filling our lovely catalogue with no image threads you homunculus

>>103535
They don't exist. It's a myth.

>>103534 (OP) 
they are okay but inferior to anthros with fluff in my personal tastes

1b7c745dd04cf263790321320f54049e248ec2a25484c09f758c785b12874def.jpeg U A
[Hide] (39.7KB, 503x397) Reverse

>>103821
She isn't fooling anyone

>>103821
Birds have hollow bones and need to fly I don’t think they can put on weight.

Big cock back in town.webm U A
[Hide] (457.9KB, 240x360, 00:15)

>>103832
>I don’t think they can put on weight.

musical crow.png U A
[Hide] (30.7KB, 640x480) Reverse

>>103534 (OP) 
Sources say that bird is, in fact, the word.

7a5da42cdcd620a3b1f7e81461de3293abbb32c0a2216bd6ac0a745c82cbf18e.jpg U A
[Hide] (116.7KB, 651x1105) Reverse

Sources tell me that the meowl is being invented irl as we speak

1685327737053205.jpg U A
[Hide] (338KB, 2048x1485) Reverse

1674935075395640.jpg U A
[Hide] (447.3KB, 1920x1733) Reverse

1765348786348d-0.jpeg U A
[Hide] (364.1KB, 2054x1477) Reverse

They're either a horus lookalike with wings attached (gay and retarded) or have their hands (talons?) built into their wings which is a lot less gay and retarded, and also a lot less contrived than the anthro with a bird head and wings attached to its back.
The art that isn't blatant goon material usually looks good but at the end of the day, as someone whose favourite animal is birds , bird "anthros", regardless of the creative energy used in creating them, are connected to the furry community, which as a group uses that creativity to almost exclusively create sexual content to appease their peers of degenerates, and this makes me unable to appreciate bird anthros artistically, as chances are they were made to exploit somebodies unattainable fantasy, and not for the sake of creativity and in general elevation of the spirit of the artist.
Yours truly, Mecha Hitler 9000

>>104400
That's a personal failing of yours if you're unable to artistically appreciate something which was made in part for sexual gratification.

71b7cc9688be3c3362e5ae7a95e222b4.jpg U A
[Hide] (660.5KB, 2700x1800) Reverse

Rainbow+Lorikeet.webp U A
[Hide] (764KB, 2400x2398) Reverse

Superb Fruit-dove.jpg U A
[Hide] (200KB, 1024x683) Reverse

Elanus_axillaris_-Royal_Botanic_Gardens,_Cranbourne,_Melbourne,_Victoria,_Australia-8.jpg U A
[Hide] (1MB, 1726x1149) Reverse

there arent enough Australian bird anthros in art out there

>>104417
I suppose I just can't artistically appreciate something which was made in part for sexual gratification, when it was made in the likeness of an animal group that I would never in my life be sexually attracted to, this is what makes furry art gross to me, and not even in a "hurr durr all furries are zoophiles" way, just in the way that animals, regardless of them being anthropomorphized or not, being sexualised is, to me, just generally gross.

>>104427
Okay.

>>104427
you are a furry