Taurs/Chakats- Thoughts?

[AlanTabby]

So, what do you folks think about either Taurs (like Greek centaurs but with anthro animal torsos too) and/or Chakats (Herm feline Taur species by Bernard Doove  http://en.wikifur.com/wiki/Chakat)?

Are they weird, cool, even biologically possible? Do you have a character?  Whats special about them? 


I have recently discovered my love for both Taurs & Chakats, they just appeal visually to be as they have both anthro and feral sides joined...plus i always loved centaurs, but thought 2 species joined together looked a tad odd.  I don't know if mammals could evolve that way, although insects have. An extra pair of limbs with hands would be rather useful without giving up the advantage of four.
My new fursona, Alanna, appears mostly as a female Taur (NOT a Chakat)  Quick pic: http://www.furaffinity.net/view/5745968 

So comment away!!!

Alanna out!

[Wotan]

Ah.
  Now HERE'S an old topic on this board.
  With regards to the whole herm, hexapod 'taur thing, I can't fault Bernard Doove for being extremely ambitious, at least from a fantasy perspective. I can also credit the people in the Fandom who identify with chakats as being some of the most vocal and fanatical about their interests, right down to insisting that others refer to them as 'shi/sie' and 'hir'.  I've only found babyfurs to be more 'in your face' about what they're into.
 I've never been able to accept the character concept mainly because I'm a trained biologist (M.Sc.), and I know how morphologically impossible they really are on so many different levels: essentially a mishmash of carnivore and herbivore body forms, and on top of that, being hermaphrodites with a chimaera of human and equine genitalia.
 Even that doesn't bother me as much as some of the enthusiastic descriptions that Doove (aka Chakat Goldfur) puts on his own website about how chakats' "mixture of genders allowed them to be beneficial and helpful sex therapists to humans".  Uhm, yeah.
 Personally, if I ever met a real chakat, I'd certainly need a therapist... AFTERWARDS.
 The other thing that just really squicked me on a personal level is how Doove believes that chakats are always lactating, and that the adults suckle each other for a "refreshing beverage".  GAH!
I always got the impression that chakats played more to fetishes than fantasy.

Now, with regards to mythological 'taurs, such as centaurs, that's a different kettle of fish altogether, as they've had their place in literature for centuries, just like gryphons, hippogriffs, satyrs, minotaurs, and fauns.

[Kesarra]

Now, with regards to mythological 'taurs, such as centaurs, that's a different kettle of fish altogether, as they've had their place in literature for centuries, just like gryphons, hippogriffs, satyrs, minotaurs, and fauns.

Near the end of my Biology course this quarter the instructor had us make up an animal by covering everything from their place in a basic phylogenetic tree to the behaviors/mechanics of eating. It was challenging but fun to adapt a classical Hippocamp into strict categories given some of the differences in what sort of morphology it has in historical art. They definitely wouldn't have lasted very long in the wild.

[Lady Serpent]

Personally, I've always liked mantids, which are very much taur-like in body structure.  Centaurs are pretty groovy, as well.  As far as Chakats go, I've never been overly fond of them particularly, simply because most of the art depicting Chakats is not really in a style I prefer.  They're very comfortable and happy and carefree (along the lines of 'Redwall' characters), often sci-fi-oriented, and generally quite family-oriented.  I avoid almost all of these things in the stories, art, and characters I'm in tune with.  They don't have enough struggle, violence, and inner turmoil for me.    Anything that has the potential to have happy cubs and a loving family is not something I find particularity fascinating, no offence to any happy parents out there.  It's just not my thing.  I don't particularly find them sexually attractive, either, mostly because they're very soft and curvy.  One could say 'cuddly', even.  My attraction lies in jutting angles, blood and violence.  (Although there are some lovely curves out there.  They're just more fun when they're attached to inner struggle.  Cuddly and blissful is not a combination I find all that appealing, peculiarly enough.)


Andelites, an alien species from the Animorphs book series (a la K.A. Applegate), were entirely believable and very well-portrayed in my opinion.  Those, I think are neat.  There's nothing inherently wrong with Chakats, I just haven't found myself particularily drawn to that particular line of taurs.  I find them to be often rather stocky and occasionally I get strung up on the idea of one running around; the bending of the spine doesn't always make sense to my logic-oriented brain.  There are some neat drawings out there of well-built Chakats, though, and those I've found pretty interesting..

This one, actually, I always found intriguing.  The anatomy seems believable in the sense that it captures fluid motion.

(Warning, breasts.)
http://www.elfwood.com/~meg/Chakat-Mythril.3028416.html

Credit where credit is due; the link is to the piece on the artist's actual page.

Interesting subject.

How do you feel about them?  I think they're a neat creation, and he did a good job of getting the name to stick, instead of just a regular 'cat-taur'. 

Interesting that there aren't more 'wolf-taurs' and such, given the nature of the fandom's fursona choices.    It almost seems as if there are fewer Chakats around these days, compared to when I was first exposed to the fandom.  Interesting how things come around like that.

Cheers;
-LS