Creative Commons license icon

Reply to comment

I'm not a normie who yells art design like this alone is bad since thinking so would be stupid since 'beauty' is subjective, and knowing so, I cannot really argue that even these designs are really "bad" unless it was aimed at the general audience (which obviously isn't very happy for the designs). Otherwise I would be arguing "Art is objective!" which is usually ill saying.

Speaking from the personal perspective though, these CATS characters are so bad, that it might effect my sexual development that I thought was already over causing me to prefer furry characters that look far away from human anatomy as much as possible. I mean, I'm already far away with a little mixture of shapes that are neither human or earth animal, but this could make me move even further away from human that I might start to worry a bit.

Are these CATS people more ugly than humans? My answer is usually "No." for beings that don't look personally nice. But this is so bizarre that this attempt of humanizing cats (if that is still really the case) is an example in on itself is like an offense that is additional. So it's like a "No, but maybe yes." type of thing.

Reply

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <img> <b> <i> <s> <blockquote> <ul> <ol> <li> <table> <tr> <td> <th> <sub> <sup> <object> <embed> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <dl> <dt> <dd> <param> <center> <strong> <q> <cite> <code> <em>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This test is to prevent automated spam submissions.
Leave empty.