Funny Pictures Thread. It begins again

No pants clearly shows he's nonbinary-presenting: he goes by "he", but there's no external genitalia. Pants raises the question: what's in there? What are they hiding? Was someone uncomfortable with seeing a nongendered cartoon? Why?

I think it's far more polarizing to suddenly clothe him than to simply leave him as-is, especially since the design otherwise doesn't change. It's not "we're re-designing him and oh yeah there's pants now", it's "we want to make minimal changes but yeah we have to put pants on here now".

I don't mind furries and all, but who is the pearl-clutching retro-evolutionary end point that saw a cartoon animal with no genitalia and thought "oh my goodness, how sexual and provocative, cover this up this instant"?


Staff member
"I find that when the title on the cover of the book says ... 'no pants,' I don't need to read it." - Abdul Amir, GTA IV - The Ballad of Gay Tony
I absolutely understand the dad.
My family isn't bad, but on the in-law side I bloody well make sure to like/love/laugh/hug/etc dozens of images a day. I once liked only two pictures from a group of 6-7, and apparently both pictures I liked had niece #1 but not niece #2 so nr 2 was butthurt about it. Gotta be careful.