This is an old revision of this page, as edited by ThrowawayEpic1000 (talk | contribs) at 02:40, 5 December 2023 (→In the old days we just called these people freaks and weirdos). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 02:40, 5 December 2023 by ThrowawayEpic1000 (talk | contribs) (→In the old days we just called these people freaks and weirdos)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Otherkin article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10Auto-archiving period: 8 months |
This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed. Before making any potentially controversial changes to the article, please carefully read the discussion-page dialogue to see if the issue has been raised before, and ensure that your edit meets all of Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Please also ensure you use an accurate and concise edit summary. |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Otherkin. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Otherkin at the Reference desk. |
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
In the old days we just called these people freaks and weirdos
I know it's part of your ideology now that if people think they are this and that, like a 50 year old man thinking he's a 6 year old girl, then he must be. These kinds of articles denigrate from Misplaced Pages's credibility as a reliable source of information. It's anything goes on this website. Most, if not all the other webpages on the subject of the Otherkin overwhelmingly agree that these people are just stupid freaks and weirdos and should not be afforded any respect. I think there needs to be an international hashtag movement to get Misplaced Pages to improve on its standards and to stop treating these complete nuts as a legitimate minority group. #GetYourActTogetherWikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.240.79.144 (talk) 21:40, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
- Who exactly are you talking to? Misplaced Pages is edited by volunteers, this article has been written and edited by a ton of different people. You're more than welcome to join in and make it better if you imagine that you can. But honestly, you probably need to read our content policies first. This is an encyclopedia, we don't call anyone 'freaks' or 'complete nuts' in Misplaced Pages's voice. Your opinions might be more welcome on Tumblr. This talk page is for discussing how specifically to improve this article, not for general rants about the topic or about Misplaced Pages. — Jeraphine Gryphon 21:50, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
- Let's unpack that barrage of hateful, dehumanising prejudice used to fashion a carefully crafted narrative that appeals to the "transgender predator" moral panic and tries to capitalise on the right-wing histrionics surrounding that queer cryptid, which makes Bigfoot almost appear like solid, established science. First, note that in mainstream discussions, the prototypical transgender person is always male-assigned, their female-assigned counterpart passed over in near-total silence, and this example is no different. Second, the choice of an adult person as example, since transgender children cannot be easily demonised as dangerous deviants and perpetrators of heinous crimes (only as victims of a sinister "transgender lobby"). Third, the assumption that transgender people are deluded, hence seriously mentally ill, believing themselves to be what they are patently obviously not – instead of feeling detached from and (usually) uncomfortable to some (often major, not infrequently crippling) extent with their assigned gender (which can easily lead to psychological troubles and consequences as harsh as suicidal tendencies if left untreated), while (typically) harbouring a profound longing and desire to live and to be perceived as their "chosen" or identity gender. Fourth, the implied assumption that mentally ill – and by extension, via the preceding assumption, transgender – people inherently pose a grave danger to society (instead of, as is the case in the real world, being far more likely to be victims than offenders of serious criminal acts). Fifth, the conflation of mental illness in the form of delusion, pedophilia, child sexual abuse, transgender and otherkin in order to portray unconventional, minority, rare or stigmatised identity perceptions as somehow completely unacceptable and in need of ruthless pushback. Sixth, the choice of the epitome of "creepiness", an older adult man (of never explicated sexual orientation), at the age when they are considered the "creepiest", about 50, too old to be likely judged attractive, but too young to be likely judged frail and harmless. Seventh, the choice of a little girl as the man's "target persona" to imply that he would specifically endanger the most vulnerable (at least to sexual abuse) members of society (apart from, you know, the disabled or mentally ill) – and also those most likely to be judged "cute" and appeal to our protective instincts, an appeal to emotion if I ever saw one –, children at the age of about 6, by seeking out their company – presumably to prey on them sexually. Of course, in reality that makes no sense, because a man who believed he was a little girl would presumably behave like one, which might look utterly goofy, eccentric or weird to outsiders (another way to portray transgender as wrong and shameful, by having the putative transgender person come across as absolutely ridiculous – an older woman behaving in a boyish way, for example, not to mention other possible constellations, would be percieved much more positively), but not pose a grave danger at all, considering that little-girl behaviour does not involve preying on other children, luring them into dark corners and sexually abusing them, as is clearly implied here! Note further the implied assumption that typical sexual abusers are creepy, weird strangers ("Slavering Beasts"), while the actual fact is that they are rarely strangers but usually family members or other acquaintances who have gained the victim's trust already. (Not to mention that I've never heard of a transgender person who intended to "transition to child", as it were, or live as a child; transgender is about changing your gender only, not your age, considering that the desire to change to a younger age medically or surgically is an absolutely mainstream preoccupation in our society, and feeling like a child inside, childlike behaviour in adults, and longing one could be a child again is not exactly rare, either.) The amount of hateful, stupid and wrong is breath-taking here, and makes one wonder which side rightfully deserves to be called "mentally ill", "freak" or "weirdo". As usual, bigoted right-wing fanatics construct an actually delusional mirror world by inverting the roles of perpetrator and victim – "freaks" and "weirdos" are almost invariably on the receiving end of abuse (of all kinds), not those who dish it out. Instead of questioning the alleged sinister "gay agenda", it is necessary to put the right-wing agenda under the lens, namely the preservation of the ability to bully, hurt and torture all those who do not fit into the narrow worldview of hateful zealots in denial of their own giant privilege. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 18:02, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
- This is not a forum. — Jeraphine Gryphon 06:02, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
- You know, every time someone makes this page redirect to http://en.wikipedia.org/Psychotic_disorders#Delusions that person IS improving Misplaced Pages, just as you suggest--and then you call the change "vandalism" and revert it. This kind of thing is why Misplaced Pages has lost so much credibility in the past several years. And let's not even get started on the number of pages that are "protected" from similar improvements, where IP bans are handed out for trying. "The encyclopedia anyone can edit," indeed. "Anyone" who's PC and doesn't hurt anyone's feewings with the truth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:400:8001:6EC0:CC50:6D44:6398:3734 (talk) 03:09, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages was the last place I expected to see a comment like this, though I suppose it was inevitable; Were this not so long ago, perhaps I would have debated the person who sent it, but then again, Misplaced Pages is not a forum :P (maybe i should not even be making this post...) ThrowawayEpic1000 (talk) 02:40, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- Whatsamatter, brave hater behind the anonymous mask— hoits you? --Thnidu (talk) 20:01, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
- You don't have to accept otherkin identities to acknowledge there are real communities based on nonhuman identities, that they first surfaced in the neopagan movement in the 1970's, that they have an online presence, and so on. I mean these are just the facts. That's what Misplaced Pages is supposed to be about, verifiable facts not opinions. To the other point, the DSM-V does not consider otherkinism as even a mental illness let alone "psychotic". For it to be an illness it has to result in "distress" and "trouble functioning in one or more major life areas". I really wonder if someone is an expert on "psychotic disorders" why they missed what every beginning Psych student knows concerning the DSM and its authority within psychology. Otherkin is simply a belief and a set of practices organized about a belief, just like many people believe in a god who died on a cross, but that doesn't prevent them from functioning in the world. (I am not claiming that otherkin is a religion, just that it contains certain beliefs/practices and is structured in many ways like a religion with exoteric elements (the literal beliefs and practices) serving performatively as gateways to esoteric truths . Now, you're free to have whatever opinion you want on otherkin, but it has no bearing on the facts or the reason this page should or should not exist. Sure, if there was a community of "50-year old men who think they are 6 years old", not just isolated instances but a large community that intersects many other notable communities, that had over years evolved consistent structures and practices, there would no doubt be a page on that too. But that community doesn't exist. This one does. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.216.158.9 (talk) 04:22, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
- First, Furry and all of us other people haters, PLEASE, KEEP YOUR OPINIONS TO YOURSELF. If your going to get mad at us, take that to tumblr. Whatever you believe in, whether its atheism, Muslims, Jews, or Christianity, or legitimately anything else, we believe in our own things too. You can not force us to change our whole tradition simply because you don't like it, and you believe in something else. Take this out of Misplaced Pages, and to something like Reddit. Because if you're going to hate on everything that is not your religion. Also, hating on us gets you nowhere aside from suicide and anger. If you want chaos, it's haters lucky day. ABookForToday (talk) 16:23, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
I'll go this far here: This page should be very careful to not lend credibility to the non-spiritual claims of otherkins, although it should document the existence of the belief and the overall subculture. There is no objective merit in the beliefs- the "otherkin identity" is, like any identity claim, defined in the subjective. These people are not descended from animals and many of the "kin" are entirely fictitious creatures. If there is any good psychological scholarship on the subject, it should be prominent in the article. I am not suggesting that the article be aggressive or mean-spirited for its own sake. Lukacris (talk) 01:49, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
90% of this article is absolutely wrong and describes those who abuse this term. Why is that?
Why does this entre article describe the definition of the ones who stole the term "Otherkin"? Why does it describe these people why say it means they are something completely else with their entire being and use it to justify their weird social behaviour etc? It's embarrassing and ruins the reputition of the ones who use this term the correct way.
Being an Otherkin means the same as being a Therian, just it's the umbrella term for those who feel a spiritual connection to a mythical non-existing creature. It's nothing else but that. StarSuicune (talk) 12:17, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Are there particular sources in the article that are invalid, or other sources that argue differently? The current sources seem to clearly define "otherkin" as a person identifying as non-human, similarly to this article; source #14, Otherkin Timeline: The Recent History of Elfin, Fae, and Animal People, Abridged Edition, even traces usage of the term through the 1990s.
- Avoyt (talk) 18:32, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- I agree with Avoyt that we need more specific information on what you're asking for. Tathar (talk) 11:41, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
- I agree. I'm otherkin and this article is completely wrong. My identity as otherkin purely stems from not being comfortable looking like a human and wishing i could look like a different species. I find the appearance of the human body boring and uninteresting, and wish i could look more unique in a way clothing cannot fix. None of this has anything to do with religion or belief that I am literally part animal. It's all to do with the appearance I am comfortable with. Otherkin are one of the most discriminated groups in modern times because of articles like this. TidalTempestBM (talk) 08:58, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
- @TidalTempestBM Your personal experiences with the term "Otherkin" are not relevant to the contents of an encyclopedic article about the subject.
- If there is to be an encyclopedia entry for "Otherkin" it should adhere to the most commonly recognized definition of the term as described in scholarly sources, as is the case for all of Misplaced Pages.
- If this definition shifts, the article should reflect that. However, this article is not "completely wrong" simply because it doesn't reflect your personal relationship to the term. Agentdoge (talk) 05:24, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
- I agree. I'm otherkin and this article is completely wrong. My identity as otherkin purely stems from not being comfortable looking like a human and wishing i could look like a different species. I find the appearance of the human body boring and uninteresting, and wish i could look more unique in a way clothing cannot fix. None of this has anything to do with religion or belief that I am literally part animal. It's all to do with the appearance I am comfortable with. Otherkin are one of the most discriminated groups in modern times because of articles like this. TidalTempestBM (talk) 08:58, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
Complete rewrite needed
This article, as is, is a bit of a mess. There are far too many self-published and generally unreliable sources and it reads far more like something which I'd expect to find on some kind of Otherkin-specific wiki. I am not trying to ruin anyone's fun here and definitely believe this article has a place on Misplaced Pages, but this is not encyclopedic as is. I'd encourage those with a vested interest in the topic to help clean this up and grab some sources which meet Misplaced Pages's standards. I can't imagine at least half of the information in this article will stand once WP:VERIFY is met, but I also don't want to be too heavy handed on a topic I'm not as intimately familiar with. Warrenmck (talk) 18:03, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
- I've cleaned up a lot of the article to remove blogs and self-published sites. I've tried to leave in everything with credible references and clean up the language in a couple of places. I'm uncomfortable with "psychologically dysfunctional" being used but didn't really want to be responsible for the alternative, and I think the source to a pro-life network is terrible but it does make the claim the source says, so if anyone has a good source for that please check the better source needed tags I added. Warrenmck (talk) 18:54, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
Umbrella
I think this article should add all of the different alterhumans that exist under this category. It helps people looking for the different alterhumans find the ones their looking for, under the Otherkin umbrella. As I want to write a google slide about therians, and I mentioned Otherkin. But I can't find anything that helps me figure out the alterhumans under this umbrella. Someone who knows all of them, please edit this. ABookForToday (talk) 16:16, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Categories: