| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Arcanus
Rank: Super Veteran
Joined: 28 Aug 2011
Posts: 1386
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kommy
Royal Member of BonBon
Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 1000
|
 Posted: Sat Sep 10, 2011 5:59 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
I used to ponder this a lot myself, back when the population under study was substantially smaller. Yes, I enjoy statistics and population genetics as a minor hobby, so sue me. 
Hmm... Lets take another survey...
Family___Male__ Female__ Percent Male
Lapine___ 1 _____________100
Feline ___11 ____2_______ 85
Vulpine __3 _____3_______ 50
Avian ____1______________100
Canine __11_____________100
Mustelid _ 3______4_______ 43
Ungulate_ 2______1_______ 67
Ursine____1______________100
Marsupial _1______________100
Reptile___1______1_______ 50
Chiroptera 2______________100
Other____Martin!__________100
Total___ 38 _____11______ 78
I've included the gal in progress, as well. Why not? *waves at Kiala*
Also used relatively broad categories... Honestly, just how different does a wolf look from most breeds of dog? And I used more scientific nomenclature because I just like sounding smart and it really sorts things out pretty well. I'm not sure how the counting was done earlier, as my numbers are way different from Symphony's... I have a whole five new Royals than she listed (one probably being Kiala). But only 11 canines and 13 felines to her 16 and 14, respectively.
Anyway, on to analysis! First, as previously noted, is the huge favor given to canines (dogs, wolves) and felines (lions, tigers, house cats, etc.). The gender imbalance is rather staggeringly male (78% male!), but I suppose that is to be expected in a venue such as this. But breaking it down by gender gives one some further interesting data points. Like the fact that mustelids, reptiles, and vulpines are shockingly about evenly split between genders. There are even more female mustelids than male, albeit that probably isn't that much of a surprise. And that while canines are a huge demographic, there is not a single solitary female canine! In addition, rodents are shockingly under-represented from furry norms. Not a single true rodent anywhere!
Unusual fur colors are rare, as noted. There are two blue vixens thanks to the Krystal Effect, which, amusingly, makes blue as common a color as any other for foxes. Other than that, the red-striped Samuel rounds it out unless you count Jillian's heterochromia. Unnatural fur color makes up 6% of the total population, not counting Jillian's slight phenotypic quirk.
So, therefore, if uniqueness is the goal for a new Royal (you special snowflake, you), the rules are simple:
1. Be female!
2. Don't be a vixen (ESPECIALLY BLUE) or a mustelid!
3. Nor feline, reptile, or horsey if you're determined about this.
4. If you want to stand out from the boys, be a bitch! (I mean female canine, not being unpleasant) You'd have 11 males all to yourself.
5. If you want to be in a category all your own, be a rodent.
6. Honestly, coloration is just gravy at this point.
If you're a guy and you want to be surrounded by women with reproduction as a concern, be a mustelid. Foxes aren't bad, too. I'd also recommend reptile, but then Henk might start to get ideas about you. Wait, he might do that anyway.
If you're insistent upon being male, be a rodent for maximum uniqueness. Or choose another category with zero entrants, such as amphibian, primate, procyonid, hyrax, insectivoran...
Edit: Ick, does this forum hate charts... Hope it's readable now, at least.
_________________
"Doktor! Are you sure this will work?!" "HAHA! I HAVE NO IDEA!"
Last edited by kommy on Sun Sep 11, 2011 6:09 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
furrynerd
Rank: Super Veteran
Joined: 07 Nov 2009
Posts: 2846
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arcanus
Rank: Super Veteran
Joined: 28 Aug 2011
Posts: 1386
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 10, 2011 8:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Very interesting! Quite the info you have there kommy, how long did it take for you to come up with the data for this?
_________________
People shouldn't judge by looks or appearances, they should judge by whats in a persons heart. If they let looks affect them then they are no better then the supposed monsters they see. -Fates Chosen
My Fursona:
http://forums.pleasurebonbon.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=11813
My FA:
http://www.furaffinity.net/user/arcsol/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tsavo
Royal Member of BonBon
Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Posts: 283
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rikardo
Royal Member of BonBon
Joined: 11 Feb 2011
Posts: 1436
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 10, 2011 9:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kommy wrote: | I used to ponder this a lot myself, back when the population under study was substantially smaller. Yes, I enjoy statistics and population genetics as a minor hobby, so sue me.
Hmm... Lets take another survey...
Family___Male__ Female__ Percent Male
Lapine___ 1 _____________100
Feline ___11 ____2_______ 85
Vulpine __3 _____3_______ 50
Avian ____1______________100
Canine __11_____________100
Mustelid _ 3______4_______ 43
Ungulate_ 2______1_______ 67
Ursine____1______________100
Marsupial _1______________100
Reptile___1______1_______ 50
Chiroptera 2______________100
Other____Martin!__________100
Total___ 38 _____11______ 78
I've included the gal in progress, as well. Why not? *waves at Kiala*
Also used relatively broad categories... Honestly, just how different does a wolf look from most breeds of dog? And I used more scientific nomenclature because I just like sounding smart and it really sorts things out pretty well. I'm not sure how the counting was done earlier, as my numbers are way different from Symphony's... I have a whole five new Royals than she listed (one probably being Kiala). But only 11 canines and 14 felines to her 16 and 14, respectively.
Anyway, on to analysis! First, as previously noted, is the huge favor given to canines (dogs, wolves) and felines (lions, tigers, house cats, etc.). The gender imbalance is rather staggeringly male (78% male!), but I suppose that is to be expected in a venue such as this. But breaking it down by gender gives one some further interesting data points. Like the fact that mustelids, reptiles, and vulpines are shockingly about evenly split between genders. There are even more female mustelids than male, albeit that probably isn't that much of a surprise. And that while canines are a huge demographic, there is not a single solitary female canine! In addition, rodents are shockingly under-represented from furry norms. Not a single true rodent anywhere!
Unusual fur colors are rare, as noted. There are two blue vixens thanks to the Krystal Effect, which, amusingly, makes blue as common a color as any other for foxes. Other than that, the red-striped Samuel rounds it out unless you count Jillian's heterochromia. Unnatural fur color makes up 6% of the total population, not counting Jillian's slight phenotypic quirk.
So, therefore, if uniqueness is the goal for a new Royal (you special snowflake, you), the rules are simple:
1. Be female!
2. Don't be a vixen (ESPECIALLY BLUE) or a mustelid!
3. Nor feline, reptile, or horsey if you're determined about this.
4. If you want to stand out from the boys, be a bitch! (I mean female canine, not being unpleasant) You'd have 11 males all to yourself.
5. If you want to be in a category all your own, be a rodent.
6. Honestly, coloration is just gravy at this point.
If you're a guy and you want to be surrounded by women with reproduction as a concern, be a mustelid. Foxes aren't bad, too. I'd also recommend reptile, but then Henk might start to get ideas about you. Wait, he might do that anyway.
If you're insistent upon being male, be a rodent for maximum uniqueness. Or choose another category with zero entrants, such as amphibian, primate, procyonid, hyrax, insectivoran...
Edit: Ick, does this forum hate charts... Hope it's readable now, at least. |
You've forgotten Strigiformes (Drafgod696) and Falconiformes (Me) from the list!
_________________
Furaffinity: http://www.furaffinity.net/user/rikarda/
http://theelzeronchronicles.webcomic.ws/comics/1/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arcanus
Rank: Super Veteran
Joined: 28 Aug 2011
Posts: 1386
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 10, 2011 10:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Shes counting only royal members, if she counted everyone there would be way more data, you arent a royal member yet so thats why your not mentioned
_________________
People shouldn't judge by looks or appearances, they should judge by whats in a persons heart. If they let looks affect them then they are no better then the supposed monsters they see. -Fates Chosen
My Fursona:
http://forums.pleasurebonbon.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=11813
My FA:
http://www.furaffinity.net/user/arcsol/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mayfield
Rank: Super Veteran
Joined: 21 May 2010
Posts: 11790
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 11, 2011 2:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
And I believe Drofgod would fall in the avian category.
_________________
"I have currently run out of fucks to give." - Me
My FA
---Fursonna---
Rhoda Mayfield |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Symphony
Royal Member of BonBon
Joined: 13 Apr 2008
Posts: 2620
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 11, 2011 3:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| kommy wrote: |
Also used relatively broad categories... Honestly, just how different does a wolf look from most breeds of dog? And I used more scientific nomenclature because I just like sounding smart and it really sorts things out pretty well. I'm not sure how the counting was done earlier, as my numbers are way different from Symphony's... I have a whole five new Royals than she listed (one probably being Kiala). But only 11 canines and 14 felines to her 16 and 14, respectively.
|
Feline is the family of animas that includes lions, tigers, cats, panthers and such, just as canines are foxes, dogs, wolves and coyotes. So if you're going to put all the tigers and lions in the same group as the regular cats, you should do the same with foxes and the wolves, and put them all in the same group. That's how I got to 16 canines.
Also being ungulate refers to the animal having hooven or cloven feet, not that they're of the same family of species. Cows and giraffes, for example, are also ungulate animals. Horses are equines, while deers are of the family Cervidae.
Skunks aren't mustelids either, though they are often referred to as such, which is why I made the comment about whether or not to include them.
I'm just using wikipedia for this. Looking up the different animals and finding their information. It's not like I know much about this subject.
_________________
Constance Mayflower's bio
Constance Mayflower's diary
The Mayflower Diaries |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kommy
Royal Member of BonBon
Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 1000
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 11, 2011 5:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Taxonomy is pretty subjective, I grant you. I didn't strictly sort things out by taxonomic family or order, either... I was pretty dang certain skunks were mustelids... They're just so similar to badgers, weasels, etc. However, I felt justified in separating out foxes from wolves and dogs due to them having some rather special traits that separates them. Semi-retractable claws, some low-light vision, etc. Not to mention the popularity of foxes amongst furries as distinct from wolves, dogs, and other canines. Also, I'm a fox and I like being special.
The cats... I grouped together because I was never sure how to separate them out properly. Sure, there are the great cats like lions and tigers, then the small cats like house cats and lynxes, but then I'm not entirely sure where to put things like bobcats, panthers, cougars, and jaguars. So, I just stuffed 'em all together. Listing everything out by individual species isn't as useful, anyway.
Also choose to use the ungulate category because... well, they're just not that popular, other than horses. Not many people care to be farm animals, like pigs, goats, cows, or the big wild ones like bison, deer, antelope, zebra, etc.
And I should have included this in the original survey, but here's a brief description of the categories used:
Lapine: Bunnies, hares, and other long eared varmints.
Feline: Cats of all shapes and sizes, from lions, tigers, and ligers to house cats.
Vulpine: Foxes! As distinct from canines by some very feline-esque traits. And big, fluffy tails. Also, aheh, my favorite. So we're special.
Avian: Any and all birds.
Canine: Dogs, wolves, coyotes, dingos, jackals, and other dog and wolf-like creatures.
Mustelid: A kind of odd category, including badgers, weasels, pine martins, stoats, otters, and in my list here, skunks.
Ungulate: If it's got a hoof, it's here. Ponies, horses, goats, deer, antelope, pigs, cows...
Ursine: Bears! From grizzlies to teddy bears, and also including a few oddballs like pandas. Not sure if those are true ursines, though.
Marsupial: Animals that bear live young in pouches. Kangaroos, koalas, opossums, etc. Aussies are most famous for these, but there are a surprising number in the Americas, too.
Reptile: Scales, cold-blooded, and not very popular. Includes snakes, lizards, and turtles.
Chiroptera: Bats. From fruit bats to vampire bats to 'flying foxes'.
Other: Martin! Really, platypi are in a category all their own. They're so weird!
For a description of some categories mentioned, but not used in that little census...
Amphibians: Born in water with gills, then grow lungs. Frogs, toads, newts, salamanders, etc.
Procyonids: Raccoons! And related critters.
Rodents: Creatures distinguished by constantly growing teeth and the need to gnaw. Mice, rats, capybaras, squirrels, voles, etc.
Primate: Monkeys, apes, chimps, and I here there are things called hunams? Hyooomans? I dunno, but I heard of them somewhere...
Hyrax: An interesting little category of some vaguely rodent-like small, furry mammals. They look kinda cute.
Insectivorans: Mammals that specialize in eating bugs. I believe things like aardvarks, armadillos, and shrews end up in here...
_________________
"Doktor! Are you sure this will work?!" "HAHA! I HAVE NO IDEA!" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Symphony
Royal Member of BonBon
Joined: 13 Apr 2008
Posts: 2620
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 11, 2011 6:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| kommy wrote: | | However, I felt justified in separating out foxes from wolves and dogs due to them having some rather special traits that separates them. Semi-retractable claws, some low-light vision, etc. Not to mention the popularity of foxes amongst furries as distinct from wolves, dogs, and other canines. Also, I'm a fox and I like being special. |
Bah, you canines all look the same to me 
| kommy wrote: |
Also choose to use the ungulate category because... well, they're just not that popular, other than horses. Not many people care to be farm animals, like pigs, goats, cows, or the big wild ones like bison, deer, antelope, zebra, etc.
|
I still wouldn't use the ungulate category, though. Just doesn't seem right to me, to put such different animals as sheep, horses and hippos in the same group, just because of how their feet look. As Bon Bon's resident (mad)scientist, you should know better 
_________________
Constance Mayflower's bio
Constance Mayflower's diary
The Mayflower Diaries |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rikardo
Royal Member of BonBon
Joined: 11 Feb 2011
Posts: 1436
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
furrynerd
Rank: Super Veteran
Joined: 07 Nov 2009
Posts: 2846
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arcanus
Rank: Super Veteran
Joined: 28 Aug 2011
Posts: 1386
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Symphony
Royal Member of BonBon
Joined: 13 Apr 2008
Posts: 2620
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 11, 2011 3:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Rikardo wrote: | | Then I guess I fall under Aviary then! |
And even that isn't exactly right, if you're grouping the fursonas by their biological family. It'd the same as if I classified my fursona as a mammal. It'd be true, but not very useful for something like this.
I think that avians and reptiles in furry communities, are so uncommon, that people don't bother trying to sort them by their biological family.
| furrynerd wrote: | | Well beforeif roget what ould a sloth be i think other? |
Depends on the type of sloth. The two-toed apparantly isn't of the same family as the three-toed.
| Arcanus wrote: | we canines may look the same, but we have different personality's that make us who we are  |
Of course. There are many ways for a fursona to be unique. Sure it's nice to see an uncommon species, but if people really want to have a feline or canine(including foxes ) fursona, then that's what they should create.
_________________
Constance Mayflower's bio
Constance Mayflower's diary
The Mayflower Diaries |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
furrynerd
Rank: Super Veteran
Joined: 07 Nov 2009
Posts: 2846
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Register
Profile
Log in
