Home
Creators
Search Recent Missing Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Oren's Forge PG 347 (Patreon)

Published:
2025-06-23 21:00:07
Imported:
2026-06
Tags:

Content

New page out next Monday!

Files

Comments

Dhaka Yeena

Asking the big questions!!! Also if I’m understanding this correctly, that would explain why Singer looks a bit different from the others. They are a coy-wolf

Grey

Oh I am SO curious about this one, thank you Ramble

Larthan

Because they might grow to resent their mother being killed by the Zenith, same as how you're starting to act now.

Remony Ravine

Oooh, interesting new lore with the halfbreeding. I wonder if we'll see them as characters

BuffDuckArtz

Oh so now you ask questions after abandoning them

Julian Seguin

It's good that were finally hearing Ramble voice his feelings for his niblings, even if it reveals him to be somewhat racist. Of course, why it matters whether the pups are pure or not is beyond me.

Flann Moriath

Ohhhh I am SO curious if this is going to be the first time Hap is hearing about the pups! And also thinking, if the answer is yes, how Singer will react, as he couldn’t have really expected that it would never come up with Swift’s family having joined this pack. So excited to see where this goes!

Kairo

i KNEW he was a coywolf. The name, the look...the slimyness

Microgrampup

This should have been Ramble’s first response to Singer twisting his lack of trust in them into just being about struggling for food then be awestruck seeing a different situation. Stop letting them derail the topic to being about lack of resources or just being plain stupid and aggressive, get to the point of exactly what made this all come down to teeth. The wild wolf actions that are speaking so much louder to Ramble than the words about new world values.

Chasey

I think it is, but I hope he actually gets a chance to speak instead of being silenced... although, maybe it won't matter since Singer is a slimy smooth-talker so Hap will probably believe him over the new, angry guy anyway :(

Furlop

Whaaat, I thought all the 'yote fuckers were out west!

treefiddy

I'm gonna be big mad if Singers mom isn't named weave

Teagan Gavet

Just popping by to say it isn't race-- it'd be species. The story isn't about race or an allegory for one, and being "speciest" isn't comparable to human racism. If you swap out "coyotes and wolves" with "chimpanzees and gorillas," or "human and Neanderthals" or "human and extraterrestrial alien," maybe it tweaks your perception of Ramble's POV? Not saying he's right, but if someone was to say "we prioritize alien DNA here at the expense of humans" a lot of people would be like "but this is Earth." It wouldn't make them racist, but maybe "pro human". Is Ramble wrong to be "pro wolf"?

Sarah

Maybe you have to be born into the zenith so they can mould you? But then they let adults join so that makes no sense… Ramble’s being speciesist but he has a point, acknowledging that fresh genetics are a good thing means this pack can’t just be purely into eugenics, so why would Swift’s pups be a worse option than any other wild-genetics pups?

treefiddy

ok, so I have some very strong feelings on this topic. Mostly because this became a fairly heated topic in the discord server about a month ago after a particular user tried making the argument that racism isn't racism as long as it's factually correct (in reference to Hemlocks biases against predator species). One of the things that conversation morphed into was whether or not specie-ism found within stories like Oren's Forge or Zootopia are actually good analogues to human racism. I don't really want to get too much into the specifics of the arguments here, but I will say the outcomes of those arguments really point out how the two concepts (specie-ism and racism) are nearly identical in how they form, operate, and how they affect society. If we go by the strict definition of the word racism (without considering the social consequences of calling someone racist, more on that in a bit), I would say that Ramble is in fact racist. In these worlds, everyone is presented as more or less having the exact same mental capabilities, desires, and 'value' as an individual. Everyone has their own lives they are trying to live, and their own families they are trying to protect and feed. I wouldn't say that any single individual is less deserving of life than any other simply based on what species they are, for the exact same reason I wouldn't say any particular human is less deserving of life simply based on what their skin color or nationality is. If the latter would make me racist, and the former would make me speciest, then I would argue the two ideas are the same and can be used interchangeably to communicate the concept trying to be portrayed. Now with that said, there are a lot more nuances specifically surrounding the word racist than just someone who acts in line with the definition of racism. Calling someone racist in our society is very much a slur, and should not be used lightly. There are a lot of relatively normal actions and behaviors that we make every day that would by the most strict definition slap the racist label on us. But that doesn't mean that those actions are equal to say burning a cross in someone's yard, or that the social consequences of those two actions should be treated the same. Because of that, the label of 'racist' is a very specific term that should be corrected or have context added if it is ever applied incorrectly or unfairly. As I believe it is in Ramble's case. To that end, I would say the statement "It wouldn't make them racist, but maybe "pro human". Is Ramble wrong to be "pro wolf"?" is trying to make the wrong argument. It's trying to say racist actions and tendencies are OK as long as they are personally justifiable or with good reason. The problem is that this argument can be easily misconstrued or applied by people to justify their own actions that may actually rise to the level of necessitating the racist label. It easily leads to the wrong conclusions. Ultimately, all forms of racism are bad for society as a whole. It's a form of anti-social behavior who's goal is to restrict the social interaction of individuals. Sometimes this anti-social behavior is for a good purpose, such as keeping an individual alive (this presents itself as prey species being scared of predator species in this story). But no matter what, anti-social behavior is bad, even when it's for good reasons. Because even when it is for good reasons, it only means that there is a larger form of bad anti-social behavior that led to those feelings. Saying that some anti-social behavior is good as long as it's reasonable is just rewarding that anti-social behavior, and in the words of Hank Green, "A society that rewards anti-social behavior is a worse society".

Julian Seguin

Funny you mentioned that. I was going to say “speciesist” but then I decided that it didn’t fit because these creatures are anthropomorphic. Also, I have to say that seeing a wolf and a bison as a couple is far more unnatural than a coywolf.

Amethysmus

Think I mentioned many pages ago that Singer looked like a coyote. I guess I was right for once! :P

Teagan Gavet

I don't want to get into a big thing so I'll just be blunt. As the author, I'm saying this story is not an allegory, and animal allegory is a bad way to talk about race. If it is "anything," the story is a thought experiment about ways in which society might form, function and fail in a world of multiple sapient species with competing needs.  That said, people's personal experiences inform how they interpret media and that's great. I'm not here to say how someone should read or interact with my (or any) work. I want people to read it and hopefully take some small part of it with them. Me, getting into a big thing: This is my personal feelings, but I don't think animals are a good vessel to talk about race; in fact, I go further to say that animal allegory about race is harmful. I think it leads to very flawed logic that only strives to highlight differences. This is the most visceral example I can think of right now: There is a (real) conservative anti-trans childrens book out there. It's about a hippo that wants to fly. The hippo goes from animal to animal who essentially says, "you're silly, hippos can't fly, stay in your lane." The hippo says, "But I really think I can." The hippo jumps off a cliff and hurts itself. In the end, the "moral" of the story is: the hippo can't fly and learns to accept life on land, just like "how boys cannot be girls, etc". But *gender* is not the same thing as *species*, even if the terrible children's book tries to use animal allegory to make it seem like it is. And that's the exact same thing that happens if you use animals to talk about race-- you segregate human beings into made-up categories with insurmountable differences that instantly put them in a static "place" that they must stay. But race is as fluid as gender. It is a societal construct that changes depending on who is in power. The powers given or taken from you depending on race is ultimately a cultural and political force, not a natural one. To put it another way, all humans are born with the same spectrum of abilities; ie, one human is not born with a prehensile tail and another comes with wings, etc. That is why race =/= species, nor racism =/= speciesism.  And I still do not think racism and speciesism are the same in an animal world. Racism in an animal world would be house cats dividing themselves up by fur patterns. (Blacksad Vol 2 explores this concept, for better or for worse.) It could simply be that racism (as we are talking about it,) does not exist in the anthro context, unless you are specifically talking about subsects of a single species. If Hap was murdering every puppy that didn't have blue eyes and black fur-- *that* is racism. If Hap is murdering everything that isn't a wolf, that is speciesism. Which I agree, is BAD if the goal is egalitarian-- "anti-social behavior is bad, even when it's for good reasons" as you said, is spot on imho. I would love a world where everyone, and every species, survives. I /want/ the vampires to have their fake blood and weird nightclubs, and I want Starfleet to keep adding new planets to the Federation. However-- it is impossible to say what speciesism would actually mean in practice today (unless we meet sapient extraterrestrial aliens). We know what it meant to ancient hominids; we killed, outcompeted and outbred all our kissing-cousins (Denisovans, Neanderthal, etc.) Only *one* sapient species made it through the gauntlet. But that brings me back to what I think this story is: not an allegory, but a thought experiment about competing alien forces. And I'll be honest-- I've said it before, but I don't think every species is going to make it in the world of Oren's Forge. I want them to, but some species just don't survive huge changes or shifts.  With animals, it's never a moral choice, but a life or death choice. With *anthro* animals, it becomes both, which is what is interesting. Is it moral to choose to preserve your own species at the expense of another? Anyway, call it speciesism if we must have a term (as though one wolf or marten is a monolith for their species), but don't call it race. Using "race" to describe insurmountable species-related differences waters down what "race" really means-- which, again, is a social construct, not a biological one.

Gale Tazzin

Ramble was absolutely trying (and, admittedly, failing) to keep his head down. He hoped he'd be heading into this new pack with Seral and Scree; instead, he's practically alone. As the only capable hunter of his pack, he probably feels responsible for defending Gristle too. He's surrounded by potential enemies and couldn't survive without them. Singer made it clear that Mishap's wisdom was not to be challenged, and the imperative to kill the pups was at least logical, if cruel, under the rules of the universe as Ramble knew, so he could grudgingly accept that. He's only speaking up now because he's pieced together that this new pack has different rules that seem more lenient than Gristle's.

Gale Tazzin

I don't know about that. Fury like that can be pretty hard to fake, and Ramble has little to gain by saying it - Swift is long gone, and he's risking provoking an alpha wolf who has already threatened him. The best he could hope for is Singer losing Mishap's trust, and he has no reason to want that if his story wasn't true

Gale Tazzin

why would the Zenith want Swift dead if she was going to join them?

Gale Tazzin

also to this point - he's only snapped back when Pivot directly antagonized him. this is the first time he's instigating instead of responding and holds more weight than those previous times

Gale Tazzin

i am extremely curious to see if Hap will defend Singer here or if she didn't know about it at all

Microgrampup

Ramble just snapped back about their food situation from the invasion and mocked Hap’s name.

treefiddy

To put it in slightly different words, you're not writing Oren's Forge to be some political statement for or against any concept or ideal. It's written purely from an uninterested, apolitical perspective given how human sociology would apply to theoretical animals. Any potential take-aways are purely coincidental, and based on simple rules and observations of human-human social interactions. As opposed to some other forms of media its often compared to, such as Zootopia, which is arguably written with a clear political/moral message that directly relates to some issue in modern society. With that said, there are some things I want to add though. The hippo story is not a bad story because it uses animals as an analogue, it's a bad story because it's a non sequitur. It employs flawed logic and tries to draw an incorrect conclusion based on missing context. A hippo on it's own cannot fly, but a hippo with sufficiently advanced technology can. It completely ignores the fact that today, it is possible to entirely change someones external sex characteristics, it is possible to give the metaphorical hippo wings. Ironically, the hippo story would be more accurate if it were told from the pro-trans side of things. Because at least with today's knowledge, we know that someone's perceived gender cannot be forcibly changed by external forces, that things like 'conversion therapy' or 'sucking it up and dealing with it' do not work. So a more accurate form of the story would be that while the hippo cannot force itself to fly on its own without hurting itself, it can achieve it's dreams of flight by following the right steps and employing the correct technology, even if it's more difficult than someone born with wings. Basically, you can't will yourself to change your gender, but you can change other aspects of yourself to better align with that gender even if it's not absolutely perfect. If the end goal is to fly, does it really matter how it happens? The more accurate form of the story is much better, not only because it doesn't rely on flawed logic, but it also sets important expectations about life. Not everything is fair, some people have more hoops they have to jump through. But even if one person may not be able to achieve their dreams, maybe their children or childrens children can because of their effort. And maybe, the the number of hoops future people have to jump through can be reduced because of their efforts. That book is just terrible in general because the moral of the story is essentially just shut up and don't try to change anything; nothing will ever get better. Which is just a shitty childrens book regardless of the analogies it uses or political background it came from. So, leading into the (spicy) idea of comparing species to race within the context of these worlds: Humans are not all born exactly the same. Some humans are more tolerant to sunlight. Some humans have larger muscle masses. Some humans are better runners. Some can grow long hair, some cant. Most of these traits will show up more predominately in certain regions than others. Since we typically define race as groups of populations from specific regions, certain races will have different physical traits based on those regions. While some of them are statistically measurable, and most of them don't mean anything in reality, there are some differences that can have big impacts on real world outcomes (namely melanin concentration). None of these are actually insurmountable differences in modern society, and don't really show up until you are selecting for very exaggerated populations such as the olympics. Which is why we call it racist when people try and negatively judge other people based on these insignificant differences. Technology has made these differences irrelevant. But this hasn't always been true. Today, I still would call the historical plantation owner racist for preferring one (darker complexion) race over the other. Even though at the time the tangible benefits of having a darker complexion were real and insurmountable. Basically, technology had not advanced far enough to make that difference irrelevant yet. I can say that, and still call them racist, because I have the advantage of hind-sight and have witnessed the broader effects and implications of those mentalities. In the world of Oren's Forge, there are no physical differences in species that are presented as completely and totally insurmountable with sufficiently advanced technology. All predators could **in theory** entirely subsist on protein sources that don't rely on actively killing other sapient organisms. Rask could in theory start farming ducks and fish, and could scale those up to the point where the hollow could support tens or even hundreds of carnivores relatively easily. All of the conflict within this world is based around either a social construct (wolves and coyotes) or a physical difference/need that is not yet insurmountable by technology (predator and prey). Which is why I can say that speciesm within this world is just as bad and harmful as racism is in our world. I would hope that in a hundred generations, animals in this world would treat speciesm with a very similar taboo that we treat racism. I would agree that using the word racist to describe any character in this universe only serves the purpose of watering down the definition and severity of word. But I would also say that saying speciesm and racism are not analogous is fundamentally wrong, simply because it detracts from what the two ideas actually are and how these mentalities might apply to individuals in the past, present, and future.

Gale Tazzin

yeah, he mocked her name because she called him Runt, and he snapped back about the food situation after Pivot insinuated their struggle was a skill issue. and Hap is letting him defend himself and willing to shrug it off. but this was a benign comment he's reacting to, so it's a definite escalation

Microgrampup

Ramble mocked her name after she mocked him for not being happy about his “better” lifestyle, and it was Singer who claimed that Ramble was acting untrusting of them out of being overwhelmed and assuming that his pack was struggling to get food before they invaded.

Microgrampup

Gale, do you understand that I’m talking about the time that Hap asked why every wolf that joins the Zenith lacks trust in them? I’m trying to say that Ramble should have responded to Singer’s twist on their behavior as being out of awestruck with the fact that they tried to kill their young and injured rather than trying to argue that their food situation was fine.