Can I capture and eat the squirrels/critters from my backyard or are they apt to be diseased?

It's also possible they've gotten into a neighbor's rat poison.

>>Can I capture and eat the squirrels/critters from my backyard
Of course.

>> or are they apt to be diseased?
I have no idea, you didn't tell us anything about your location. But that said, it doesn't really matter: inspect the animal after you kill it and if it shows signs of disease then don't eat it.

>blue board
I can see mouse nipples, user...

You think a job that entails drawing anthropomorphic animals isn't going to attract furfags? One could easily make the case that Disney's Robin Hood started the whole damned thing in the modern sense. So the answer is OF COURSE some of the artists responsible for this show drew Gadget in a way they found sexy, so of course other furfags responded to that.

even non furfag male animators would sexualize the design because men need to sexualize everything.

t. Woman who's upset she's less attractive than an animated anthropomorphic rat

Of course. But a job at Disney is the dream for a lot of furfags, because it's getting paid to draw stuff you find sexy in the first place.

t. man whose ego is hurt by the truthfulness of the statement

if you have rabbits they're pretty foolproof disease-wise.

but its not human nipples is it

Practically seething tbqh
Any examples of animated movies about animals that aren't sexualized?
Watership Down, Fantastic Mr. Fox, and Plague Dogs come to mind

those are just sexualized in ways that you can't even comprehend

You say that like it's a bad thing. There's literally nothing wrong with sexualizing things.

More then likely even if they aren't not much meat so not even really worth it.

>you say that like it's a bad thing
projection

Think about it: in most movies some kind of romance is at least a subplot, if not the overriding plot. No matter what the characters are if there's any element of romance they will be sexualized as a result.

Ah, the old internalized patriarchy

>romance = sexualization

>>romance = sexualization
Nobody said they were literally the same, user. But where you find the former you usually do end up finding the latter.

>expecially
>that sentence structure
You've eaten too much tainted squirrel meat, and it's affecting your brain.

>romance = sexualization
You can't have romance without sexual attraction, and you can't have sexual attraction with neutered characters.

Animating and characterizing animals is easier than humans and they are more appealing to children

I dunno, most anime is pretty basic animation wise and they have animals and humans in it.

>I dunno
That's obvious

>>most anime is pretty basic animation wise and they have animals and humans in it.
Yes...and? What does that have to do with the fact that humans are more difficult to animate (or even outright draw) than animals are? Humans have complex body language that's complicated to express artistically. That's one of the reasons why we think that art or CG can look "off" even if it is very high detail and/or framerate. Those problems don't exist when you're drawing animals.

gadget is not for sexual!

That's sort of what I was getting at.
It is pretty basic and simplistic to ensure conformity between human animes and animal animes in the same cartoon.

>That's one of the reasons why we think that art or CG can look "off" even if it is very high detail and/or framerate.
That's the Uncanny Valley, and most anime sidesteps that problem by being very simply drawn in a style that avoids hyper realism. Of course when you start with talking animals you've thrown realism out the window to begin with, so there's no risk of that.
Remember when fans of the show were flipping out over the astounding volume of Gadget pron out there? Furfags really found her attractive that way.

Who said anything about conformity? What does that even have to do with the thread?

>>human animes and animal animes in the same cartoon.
What does that even mean? cartoons in the same cartoons? Are you using the word "animes" when you mean "characters"??

Well yeah, so a character is an anime.
I know it's a generic term for the art form as a whole but the characters are known as animes I guess.

>Of course when you start with talking animals you've thrown realism out the window to begin with, so there's no risk of that.
Yes, that was my point.

Whenever you draw, 3Dmodel, or film a human being then people expect the body to move a certain way, body language to follow physical and verbal expressions, etc. Even if a person can't consciously name what they are looking for their brain is processing all of that stuff subconsciously, so if something isn't perfectly done it's immediately obvious. But draw a bunny, mouse, dog, or whatever and all that goes out the window. We humans only expect the most basic of "body language" from an animal (like, say, a mad dog baring its teeth, or a scared cat with all its fur poofed out).

Ah, OK, I follow you now.

>What does that even have to do with the thread?
About as much as your pathetic attempt to derail it into an anime discussion.
Faggot.

>We humans only expect the most basic of "body language" from an animal
I don't know. Half the gags on Bojack Horseman involve the very anthro animal characters suddenly behaving like the animals they are. Half the time this happens in the background, so it's coming from the animators as much as the writers.

How is assuming tone projecting, especially when the assumption leads to a counterpoint. I mean, I might have assumed wrong, but then there's no discussion.

you assumed wrong because you felt yourself that it is bad

I can't say I've ever seen Bojack so I can't comment on that, but I'd be willing to bet big money that most human beings are completely ignorant of most animal body language. Sure, we can recognize obvious stuff like a scared dog with a tail between its legs or an angry one that's growling and showing its teeth, but I think we miss the vast majority of everything else. You ever notice how if you're around a pet for many years you can then start to "read its moods" (for lack of a better term)? You've become familar enough with that animal that you notice subtle changes in its behavior. Now look at any random animal that's not your pet: can you read its body language? Highly doubtful.

Those are gags not facts about animating and perception. Even though some animals can be almost as expressive as humans we don't really read into it since it's mostly basic information so you have agency to make shit up. You try that with people and the first thing anyone notices is where you fucked up, it triggers the "thats not a human, must be a threat" part of our brains. Bojack horseman also isn't a very complex animation.

>There's literally nothing wrong with sexualizing things

??

Maybe so, but let's not forget the standard Disney set for getting some of that shit right in a number of their classic films. Animators actually spent time with live animals to be sure to get how they move and some of their body language correctly animated. That's part of what made some of those Disney classics so amazing.

I'm sure that they did get a lot of it right, for the exact reasons you mentioned. But I'm also sure there's a HUGE amount of it that we humans are completely ignorant of.

Watching a horse run & getting it's body movement correct is one thing. Animating the subtle differences between facial expressions of envy and jealousy on the part of a giraffe is another thing entirely. I'm sure there are countless things in the world of animal body language that we aren't even aware of, let alone attempt to get correct.

>why do Jews want to spread their degeneracy to the goyim

Children.

Disney was a famous anti Semite. Try again.

That movie was made well after Disney's death, the company has been pozz'd for a while.

I wanna fuck that mouse!

Back in ma day cahtoons jus had animal people for caacters. We's all jus accepted it cause cahtoons aint sposed ta make sense. Was jus a funny thing t'do is all. Then the innanet come along and suddenly everyone want to have sex with the cahtoon animals. I's sick ah tell ya. You'ah shud be ashamed a youselfs.

Someone storytime a Tijuana bible.

>eating plastic wrapped hormone filled meat

why did you feel the need to make this statement if you didn't interpret wrongness in it?