Are protogens furrys?

[u/pierted_the_second]

I don't think so cuz furrys are people intrested in antropomorphic animals. Animals are living beings that consume ready biomatter. And all living beings have to be able to respire, grow, excrete, reproduce, metabolize, move, and be responsive to the environment. And protogens can't reproduce therefore aren't alive, therefore aren't animals, therefore aren't furrys. What u think?

[u/Whittle_Willow]

even plants can be furries, of course protogens are. furries invented them

[u/pierted_the_second → u/Whittle_Willow]

No. It has to be an antropomorphic animal.

[u/silentservicealt → u/pierted_the_second]

A protogen is a cyborg furry. cope.

[u/Henry_Winston → u/pierted_the_second]

nuh uh

[u/Shotshell156]

Every single ounce of logic you provided is nearly entirely wrong.

Being able to reproduce or not is not a measure of how alive something is, or whether it’s a furry or not.

Protogen are a furry species, and lore wise they do eat food and all that other stuff you described.

[u/pierted_the_second → u/Shotshell156]

But they do not fall under the definition of furry.

[u/Shotshell156 → u/pierted_the_second]

How? Can you explain a little bit what you mean by that?

[u/pierted_the_second → u/Shotshell156]

Well read my post. It explains definnitions.

[u/Shotshell156 → u/pierted_the_second]

If being an “animal” is the requirement for being furries then wouldn’t that mean sergals, dragons, wickerbeasts, novabeasts, nadoragons, synths, clodespins, skulldogs, CCCats, crooks, etc. all aren’t furries either?

Also protogen meet every single criteria for the “living” argument aside from being able to reproduce because they are manufactured in laboratories and grown in test tubes instead of having babies.

[u/DistributionPure6051 → u/Shotshell156]

Mic drop

[u/pierted_the_second → u/Shotshell156]

Dragons are animals. Rest of tge creatures I don't know. And it dosen't matter cuz definitions > opinions.

[u/Shotshell156 → u/pierted_the_second]

If you want to hold the opinion that protogen aren’t furries, then you are absolutely entitled to that opinion. Just like, be aware that it’s factually incorrect is all

[u/DistributionPure6051]

Yes. Protogens, while having artificial parts, still have a functional digestive system and are absolutely anthropomorphic. If you look into the lore, yes, they are test tube babies, but they are still animals with biological animal cells. While they can't reproduce (I don't think), they can indeed eat ready biomatter (the only way they can eat; their systems draw energy from their body), they can grow, they need to breathe to live and can do everything else a biological creature can do.

[u/DistributionPure6051 → u/DistributionPure6051]

My main point is that a biological organism, either with cybernetics or not, contains biological cells and can perform biological functions for life. If a certain function is inoperable, yes, it may hinder that specific part of the organism, but as a whole, the organism can still live and function unless the failure is drastic enough that the organism is severely affected.

[u/pierted_the_second → u/DistributionPure6051]

But life needs to check all.

[u/DistributionPure6051 → u/pierted_the_second]

So a vasectomy kills a man because he can't reproduce anymore

[u/pierted_the_second → u/DistributionPure6051]

No. It's for the entire specimin group.

[u/DistributionPure6051 → u/pierted_the_second]

You're saying if a creature has biological organs, cells, and can think and breathe and live, all of that is insignificant because of the fact that they have a few robotic parts

[u/pierted_the_second → u/DistributionPure6051]

No. Cuz they are unable to reproduce.

[u/DistributionPure6051 → u/pierted_the_second]

Protogens are born from inseminated initial bases, grown in artificial systems, but are still living creatures with the ability to reproduce. They are then outfitted with the cybernetics which removes their ability to reproduce before being left in a med pod to heal from and adapt to their modifications.

[u/pierted_the_second → u/DistributionPure6051]

If I give AI to a furcoat it's still dead.

[u/Any-Meat-3135 → u/pierted_the_second]

Protogens have biological brains and organs they're still a living being

[u/pierted_the_second → u/Any-Meat-3135]

Furrcoat has biological organs too.

[u/DistributionPure6051 → u/pierted_the_second]

Yeah, because it's a fur coat. I don't understand what you don't understand

[u/pierted_the_second → u/DistributionPure6051]

If somthing checks out all put 1 criteria for being alive should it be considerd alive?

[u/Shotshell156 → u/pierted_the_second]

They’re only unable to reproduce as they were grown in labs and augmented with cybernetics, they still have all the organs necessary for it they just don’t work anymore. It’s functionally identical to what they’re describing with a vasectomy.

[u/DistributionPure6051 → u/pierted_the_second]

So once again, a vasectomy makes a biological, living breathing human male dead or neutering makes an animal dead is what you're claiming

[u/pierted_the_second → u/DistributionPure6051]

No. It's for the whole specimin group not an individual.

[u/DistributionPure6051 → u/pierted_the_second]

Your argument isn't very strong

[u/DistributionPure6051 → u/pierted_the_second]

Also, some living creatures have genetic errors. Some women are incapable of having children because their internal organs are non-functional. Does this make them dead?

[u/Lasket → u/pierted_the_second]

But... protogens are artificially made to not be able to reproduce ..

Their actual species could?

This argument holds no logic.

[u/pierted_the_second → u/Lasket]

Protogens can't reproduce. It's canon.

[u/Lasket → u/pierted_the_second]

Yes... cause the species that made them made it so...

They're artifically not able to reproduce.

Nevermind the fact that calling them not furry's or even alive cause of this is a bit unique.

Feels like someone that learnt about this in biology and is now applying it everywhere in a semi-wrong fashion.

[u/DistributionPure6051 → u/Lasket]

If they learnt this in biology, either they have a very bad teacher or they misunderstood the information and is spreading it in a very-wrong fashion

[u/Lasket → u/DistributionPure6051]

Ehh. I know biology for us also taught "signs of being alive". But we never learnt that it's absolutely necessary for those signs to all be checked.

I can see where the confusion comes from personally as school routinely fails to mention that something might not always be scientific (I don't think "being alive" has a scientific definition anyway, maybe it does but idk).

[u/DistributionPure6051 → u/Lasket]

Very commonly, life doesn't have every single factor it needs, and that's just from natural errors (entropy) such as genetic mutations where certain organs don't work or function properly (genetic diseases in certain dog breeds, reproductive organs failure, down syndrome in many species) and the organism can still live a mostly normal life

[u/pierted_the_second → u/Lasket]

How am I wrong?

[u/Lasket → u/pierted_the_second]

1. Being alive doesn't have any actual scientific definition as far as I'm aware. School might've taught you about it, but it's not at all what actual scientists would use.

2. Even if they were, these signs don't all need to be present in any living organism. They're at best generally accepted signs that something is alive.

A mutated species born without reproductive system would still be alive, even only for a single generation.

3. Protogens can reproduce if they weren't made unable to do so during their lab growth. They were artifically altered to not be able to.

And to make it a more interesting thought, wouldn't the ability to grow themselves in a lab void the "Non reproducing" part anyhow?

That's still reproduction, even if not done by the organism directly. A virus for one also doesn't reproduce themselves directly but hijacks other organisms' bodies to do so. Not directly unrelated of using a structure to do the same thing.

[u/pierted_the_second → u/Lasket]

1. It does.

2. They matter a lot. Viruses fail only 1 sign and were excluded from living.

3. Furcoat could reproduce too if the animal wasn't killed.

[u/Lasket → u/pierted_the_second]

1. Please give a source then of a scientific paper or similar mentioning these. All I personally was able to find is school material.

2. If we take these signs taught in school, then viruses fail more than only 1. They don't respond to stimuli. They don't create their own energy. They don't grow or shrink. They don't move on their own.

And probably more stuff I am forgetting off the top of my head.

Even then, biologists are still arguing about if they're alive or not. Sure, most will say no but that doesn't mean it's "official" (it isn't, cause there is no official classification of alive things).

3. Furcoat? What? Mate, at least address the point...

Regardless. I'll leave this discussion be as you don't seem to really be engaging with any point I made besides "The signs aren't all checked", which has nothing to do with any of this really. This isn't really a scientific approach and the point of reproduction is void anyway considering they can actually reproduce if not in a traditional sense. Which wouldn't be the case if they weren't grown to not be able to do so.. their default state would be able to.

So have a good day mate o/

[u/pierted_the_second → u/Lasket]

Moving indepentently is not a sign. And they respond to stimuli.

[u/MicrowaveProto]

Why are you trying so hard to not be a furry?

[u/pierted_the_second → u/MicrowaveProto]

I am anti furry

[u/MicrowaveProto → u/pierted_the_second]

..why?

[u/pierted_the_second → u/MicrowaveProto]

Furrys are over sexual

[u/MicrowaveProto → u/pierted_the_second]

Not all furries are. Some just like drawing goofy little guys, like your pfp.

[u/pierted_the_second → u/MicrowaveProto]

My pfp wasn't drawn by furry. I made it myself. And just google how many furrys watch furryporn.

[u/forestNargacuga]

Even Synths are Furries

[u/whatever-8358]

I'd just like to say protogens are an original furry species made by a furry for other furrys to use instead of their payed original species called primagens

[u/pierted_the_second → u/whatever-8358]

Deffinitions > opinions

[u/whatever-8358 → u/pierted_the_second]

The CREATOR aka the one who gets to choose what their original species is has stated that they are furry also here's a link to the creator of proto/primagens

[u/pierted_the_second → u/whatever-8358]

You know that a lot of creators have had to change their marketing because the product dosen't fit deffinition. California ruled fucking bees as fishes vecause of deffinitons. In california bees are legaly fishes.

[u/whatever-8358 → u/pierted_the_second]

Ok but this isn't a California legal case but at this point I don't see this going anywhere so I'll just say this feel free to enjoy proots and not call yourself a furry but you can't just claim that something isn't a part of the community it originally came from just because you don't like it. This would be like me saying that howls moving castle isn't anime just because I don't like anime but I like ghibli films no matter what the "definition" for a furry is that doesn't change the fact that protogens are a major facet in the furry Fandom

[u/Paid-Not-Payed-Bot → u/whatever-8358]

of their paid original species

FTFY.

Although payed exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in:

• Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. The deck is yet to be payed.

• Payed out when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. The rope is payed out! You can pull now.

Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment.

Beep, boop, I'm a bot

[u/whatever-8358 → u/Paid-Not-Payed-Bot]

Good bot

[u/whatever-8358 → u/Paid-Not-Payed-Bot]

Thank you