Humans have been telling "animal fables" since they began telling stories. Ever read the Native American (mostly Navajo and Inuit) stories of the "Before Times"? Totally "furry". Basically, their stories and myths of the "beginning" is this: The other species were basically "anthros", who did things the way humans do now, but still had their fur and tails and shit. The point of them was to figure out how do things the hard way, so that they could teach Humans how to do things once they show up. Then, once humans are around, and taught how to do things, the Others just sort of "step aside" and let humans dominate them.

Then you have Aesop's fables, and the entire Reynard the Fox cycle of the European middle ages.

In times of heavy censorship, one might use animal fables as a stand-in for humans. In times of low literacy, the use of animal imagery (such as in Catholic churches) help as a short-hand to story-telling. You can get away with a lot more if you don't use humans. Look at the current bullshit, if you want to say anything unpopular, do not use human characters, because people will be nitpicking the fucking casting otherwise. Also, you can flay Bugs Bunny all you like, but by gods don't bop a nigger in the head, or show them in any realistic light (with big-ass lips or anything.)

Oh, also teaching stories. The Big Bad Wolf of Red Riding Hood would have been understood by medieval children to mean the Bad Men who lived in the woods, who were bandits, rapists and murderers (and sometimes cannibals, probably thanks to vit B12 deficiency). And one of the longer Navajo stories I vaguely remember, was a flat-out comedy starring Coyote and an insulting piece of shit (literally, I'm serious) that is meant to teach you how to make nets and fish in a river.

Oh, also, see "Bestiaries". Books about animals that weren't about animals at all, by monks who'd never seen the animals in question, and included mythological beasts and beings. They were more about religious education than anything else, but like the Reynard stories, both codified, preserved, and passed on various stereotypes about other species that have been useful for "code" since then.

Watch people's minds bend when they find out that the griffin is just a visual shorthand for Jesus .... and this is why it appears as the beast that pulls the chariot that brings Dante to Heaven at the end of Purgatorio ...

(Edit: My bad, Virgil had to be left behind.)

Humans have been telling "animal fables" since they began telling stories. Ever read the Native American (mostly Navajo and Inuit) stories of the "Before Times"? Totally "furry". Basically, their stories and myths of the "beginning" is this: The other species were basically "anthros", who did things the way humans do now, but still had their fur and tails and shit. The point of them was to figure out how do things the hard way, so that they could teach Humans how to do things once they show up. Then, once humans are around, and taught how to do things, the Others just sort of "step aside" and let humans dominate them.

Then you have Aesop's fables, and the entire Reynard the Fox cycle of the European middle ages.

In times of heavy censorship, one might use animal fables as a stand-in for humans. In times of low literacy, the use of animal imagery (such as in Catholic churches) help as a short-hand to story-telling. You can get away with a lot more if you don't use humans. Look at the current bullshit, if you want to say anything unpopular, do not use human characters, because people will be nitpicking the fucking casting otherwise. Also, you can flay Bugs Bunny all you like, but by gods don't bop a nigger in the head, or show them in any realistic light (with big-ass lips or anything.)

Oh, also teaching stories. The Big Bad Wolf of Red Riding Hood would have been understood by medieval children to mean the Bad Men who lived in the woods, who were bandits, rapists and murderers (and sometimes cannibals, probably thanks to vit B12 deficiency). And one of the longer Navajo stories I vaguely remember, was a flat-out comedy starring Coyote and an insulting piece of shit (literally, I'm serious) that is meant to teach you how to make nets and fish in a river.

Oh, also, see "Bestiaries". Books about animals that weren't about animals at all, by monks who'd never seen the animals in question, and included mythological beasts and beings. They were more about religious education than anything else, but like the Reynard stories, both codified, preserved, and passed on various stereotypes about other species that have been useful for "code" since then.

Watch people's minds bend when they find out that the griffin is just a visual shorthand for Jesus .... and this is why it appears as the beast that pulls the chariot that brings Dante to Heaven at the end of Purgatorio ...

(My bad, Virgil had to be left behind.)

Humans have been telling "animal fables" since they began telling stories. Ever read the Native American (mostly Navajo and Inuit) stories of the "Before Times"? Totally "furry". Basically, their stories and myths of the "beginning" is this: The other species were basically "anthros", who did things the way humans do now, but still had their fur and tails and shit. The point of them was to figure out how do things the hard way, so that they could teach Humans how to do things once they show up. Then, once humans are around, and taught how to do things, the Others just sort of "step aside" and let humans dominate them.

Then you have Aesop's fables, and the entire Reynard the Fox cycle of the European middle ages.

In times of heavy censorship, one might use animal fables as a stand-in for humans. In times of low literacy, the use of animal imagery (such as in Catholic churches) help as a short-hand to story-telling. You can get away with a lot more if you don't use humans. Look at the current bullshit, if you want to say anything unpopular, do not use human characters, because people will be nitpicking the fucking casting otherwise. Also, you can flay Bugs Bunny all you like, but by gods don't bop a nigger in the head, or show them in any realistic light (with big-ass lips or anything.)

Oh, also teaching stories. The Big Bad Wolf of Red Riding Hood would have been understood by medieval children to mean the Bad Men who lived in the woods, who were bandits, rapists and murderers (and sometimes cannibals, probably thanks to vit B12 deficiency). And one of the longer Navajo stories I vaguely remember, was a flat-out comedy starring Coyote and an insulting piece of shit (literally, I'm serious) that is meant to teach you how to make nets and fish in a river.

Oh, also, see "Bestiaries". Books about animals that weren't about animals at all, by monks who'd never seen the animals in question, and included mythological beasts and beings. They were more about religious education than anything else, but like the Reynard stories, both codified, preserved, and passed on various stereotypes about other species that have been useful for "code" since then.

Watch people's minds bend when they find out that the griffin is just a visual shorthand for Jesus .... and this is why it appears as the beast that pulls the chariot that brings Virgil to Heaven at the end of Purgatorio ...

Humans have been telling "animal fables" since they began telling stories. Ever read the Native American (mostly Navajo and Inuit) stories of the "Before Times"? Totally "furry". Basically, their stories and myths of the "beginning" is this: The other species were basically "anthros", who did things the way humans do now, but still had their fur and tails and shit. The point of them was to figure out how do things the hard way, so that they could teach Humans how to do things once they show up. Then, once humans are around, and taught how to do things, the Others just sort of "step aside" and let humans dominate them.

Then you have Aesop's fables, and the entire Reynard the Fox cycle of the European middle ages.

In times of heavy censorship, one might use animal fables as a stand-in for humans. In times of low literacy, the use of animal imagery (such as in Catholic churches) help as a short-hand to story-telling. You can get away with a lot more if you don't use humans. Look at the current bullshit, if you want to say anything unpopular, do not use human characters, because people will be nitpicking the fucking casting otherwise. Also, you can flay Bugs Bunny all you like, but by gods don't bop a nigger in the head, or show them in any realistic light (with big-ass lips or anything.)

Oh, also teaching stories. The Big Bad Wolf of Red Riding Hood would have been understood by medieval children to mean the Bad Men who lived in the woods, who were bandits, rapists and murderers (and sometimes cannibals, probably thanks to vit B12 deficiency). And one of the longer Navajo stories I vaguely remember, was a flat-out comedy starring Coyote and an insulting piece of shit (literally, I'm serious) that is meant to teach you how to make nets and fish in a river.

Oh, also, see "Bestiaries". Books about animals that weren't about animals at all, by monks who'd never seen the animals in question, and included mythological beasts and beings. They were more about religious education than anything else, but like the Reynard stories, both codified, preserved, and passed on various stereotypes about other species that have been useful for "code" since then.

Watch people's minds bend when they find out that the griffin is just a visual shorthand for Jesus ....

Humans have been telling "animal fables" since they began telling stories. Ever read the Native American (mostly Navajo and Inuit) stories of the "Before Times"? Totally "furry". Basically, their stories and myths of the "beginning" is this: The other species were basically "anthros", who did things the way humans do now, but still had their fur and tails and shit. The point of them was to figure out how do things the hard way, so that they could teach Humans how to do things once they show up. Then, once humans are around, and taught how to do things, the Others just sort of "step aside" and let humans dominate them.

Then you have Aesop's fables, and the entire Reynard the Fox cycle of the European middle ages.

In times of heavy censorship, one might use animal fables as a stand-in for humans. In times of low literacy, the use of animal imagery (such as in Catholic churches) help as a short-hand to story-telling. You can get away with a lot more if you don't use humans. Look at the current bullshit, if you want to say anything unpopular, do not use human characters, because people will be nitpicking the fucking casting otherwise. Also, you can flay Bugs Bunny all you like, but by gods don't bop a nigger in the head, or show them in any realistic light (with big-ass lips or anything.)

Oh, also teaching stories. The Big Bad Wolf of Red Riding Hood would have been understood by medieval children to mean the Bad Men who lived in the woods, who were bandits, rapists and murderers (and sometimes cannibals, probably thanks to vit B12 deficiency). And one of the longer Navajo stories I vaguely remember, was a flat-out comedy starring Coyote and an insulting piece of shit (literally, I'm serious) that is meant to teach you how to make nets and fish in a river.

Oh, also, see "Bestiaries". Books about animals that weren't about animals at all, by monks who'd never seen the animals in question, and included mythological beasts and beings. They were more about religious education than anything else, but like the Reynard stories, both codified, preserved, and passed on various stereotypes about other species that have been useful for "code" since then.

Humans have been telling "animal fables" since they began telling stories. Ever read the Native American (mostly Navajo and Inuit) stories of the "Before Times"? Totally "furry". Basically, their stories and myths of the "beginning" is this: The other species were basically "anthros", who did things the way humans do now, but still had their fur and tails and shit. The point of them was to figure out how do things the hard way, so that they could teach Humans how to do things once they show up. Then, once humans are around, and taught how to do things, the Others just sort of "step aside" and let humans dominate them.

Then you have Aesop's fables, and the entire Reynard the Fox cycle of the European middle ages.

In times of heavy censorship, one might use animal fables as a stand-in for humans. In times of low literacy, the use of animal imagery (such as in Catholic churches) help as a short-hand to story-telling. You can get away with a lot more if you don't use humans. Look at the current bullshit, if you want to say anything unpopular, do not use human characters, because people will be nitpicking the fucking casting otherwise. Also, you can flay Bugs Bunny all you like, but by gods don't bop a nigger in the head, or show them in any realistic light (with big-ass lips or anything.)

Oh, also teaching stories. The Big Bad Wolf of Red Riding Hood would have been understood by medieval children to mean the Bad Men who lived in the woods, who were bandits, rapists and murderers (and sometimes cannibals, probably thanks to vit B12 deficiency). And one of the longer Navajo stories I vaguely remember, was a flat-out comedy starring Coyote and an insulting piece of shit (literally, I'm serious) that is meant to teach you how to make nets and fish in a river.

Humans have been telling "animal fables" since they began telling stories. Ever read the Native American (mostly Navajo and Inuit) stories of the "Before Times"? Totally "furry". Basically, their stories and myths of the "beginning" is this: The other species were basically "anthros", who did things the way humans do now, but still had their fur and tails and shit. The point of them was to figure out how do things the hard way, so that they could teach Humans how to do things once they show up. Then, once humans are around, and taught how to do things, the Others just sort of "step aside" and let humans dominate them.

Then you have Aesop's fables, and the entire Reynard the Fox cycle of the European middle ages.

In times of heavy censorship, one might use animal fables as a stand-in for humans. In times of low literacy, the use of animal imagery (such as in Catholic churches) help as a short-hand to story-telling. You can get away with a lot more if you don't use humans. Look at the current bullshit, if you want to say anything unpopular, do not use human characters, because people will be nitpicking the fucking casting otherwise. Also, you can flay Bugs Bunny all you like, but by gods don't bop a nigger in the head, or show them in any realistic light (with big-ass lips or anything.)

Oh, also teaching stories. The Big Bad Wolf of Red Riding Hood would have been understood by medieval children to mean the Bad Men who lived in the woods, who were bandits, rapists and murderers (and sometimes cannibals, probably thanks to vit B12 deficiency). And one Navajo stories I vaguely remember, was a flat-out comedy starring Coyote and an insulting piece of shit (literally, I'm serious) that is meant to teach you how to make nets and fish in a river.

Humans have been telling "animal fables" since they began telling stories. Ever read the Native American (mostly Navajo and Inuit) stories of the "Before Times"? Totally "furry". Basically, their stories and myths of the "beginning" is this: The other species were basically "anthros", who did things the way humans do now, but still had their fur and tails and shit. The point of them was to figure out how do things the hard way, so that they could teach Humans how to do things once they show up. Then, once humans are around, and taught how to do things, the Others just sort of "step aside" and let humans dominate them.

Then you have Aesop's fables, and the entire Reynard the Fox cycle of the European middle ages.

In times of heavy censorship, one might use animal fables as a stand-in for humans. In times of low literacy, the use of animal imagery (such as in Catholic churches) help as a short-hand to story-telling. You can get away with a lot more if you don't use humans. Look at the current bullshit, if you want to say anything unpopular, do not use human characters, because people will be nitpicking the fucking casting otherwise.

Oh, also teaching stories. The Big Bad Wolf of Red Riding Hood would have been understood by medieval children to mean the Bad Men who lived in the woods, who were bandits, rapists and murderers (and sometimes cannibals, probably thanks to vit B12 deficiency). And one Navajo stories I vaguely remember, was a flat-out comedy starring Coyote and an insulting piece of shit (literally, I'm serious) that is meant to teach you how to make nets and fish in a river.

Humans have been telling "animal fables" since they began telling stories. Ever read the Native American (mostly Navajo and Inuit) stories of the "Before Times"? Totally "furry". Basically, their stories and myths of the "beginning" is this: The other species were basically "anthros", who did things the way humans do now, but still had their fur and tails and shit. The point of them was to figure out how do things the hard way, so that they could teach Humans how to do things once they show up. Then, once humans are around, and taught how to do things, the Others just sort of "step aside" and let humans dominate them.

Then you have Aesop's fables, and the entire Reynard the Fox cycle of the European middle ages.

In times of heavy censorship, one might use animal fables as a stand-in for humans. In times of low literacy, the use of animal imagery (such as in Catholic churches) help as a short-hand to story-telling. You can get away with a lot more if you don't use humans. Look at the current bullshit, if you want to say anything unpopular, do not use human characters, because people will be nitpicking the fucking casting otherwise.

Oh, also teaching stories. The Big Bad Wolf of Red Riding Hood would have been understood by medieval children to mean the Bad Men who lived in the woods, who were bandits, rapists and murderers. And one Navajo stories I vaguely remember, was a flat-out comedy starring Coyote and an insulting piece of shit (literally, I'm serious) that is meant to teach you how to make nets and fish in a river.

Humans have been telling "animal fables" since they began telling stories. Ever read the Native American (mostly Navajo and Inuit) stories of the "Before Times"? Totally "furry". Basically, their stories and myths of the "beginning" is this: The other species were basically "anthros", who did things the way humans do now, but still had their fur and tails and shit. The point of them was to figure out how do things the hard way, so that they could teach Humans how to do things once they show up. Then, once humans are around, and taught how to do things, the Others just sort of "step aside" and let humans dominate them.

Then you have Aesop's fables, and the entire Reynard the Fox cycle of the European middle ages.

In times of heavy censorship, one might use animal fables as a stand-in for humans. In times of low literacy, the use of animal imagery (such as in Catholic churches) help as a short-hand to story-telling. You can get away with a lot more if you don't use humans. Look at the current bullshit, if you want to say anything unpopular, do not use human characters, because people will be nitpicking the fucking casting otherwise.