blog for me reblogging general kin stuff. i use the term kinnie for myself but if you kin for fun i will break your kneecaps. will reblog anything i want to thats kin related. been vaguely in the fictionkin community for about 5-6 years now.
From what we can tell, KFF was more of a troll term at first, and there are already labels like otherhearted if people mean something that isn't RP'ing? Our understanding is that KFF is usually interchangeable with RP and that annoys some older folks.
But then our head goes to how that could be used against other people. Mostly we hear more about this stuff from Community Olds(TM; relatively speaking) and it sounds like the history in the community is very different, so like, we could always be wrong.
@a-dragons-journal might be a better reference so we'll tag that account here. :v
Basically, it comes down to: people misusing a word that means âI actually am this thingâ as a synonym for âhaha moodâ while explicitly saying they donât actually identify as the thing in any way is a) kind of insulting, frankly, and b) something that has made it much, much harder to find other actual identify-as people (especially for fictionkin) in recent years, especially since a lot of people who âkin for funâ will then turn around and say that the people who actually created these words to describe our own experiences are the ones misusing them and âtaking it too seriouslyâ. It is kind of frustrating to have an identity label used as basically a meme by people who donât actually fit the thing the term was created to mean at all.
And like, to be clear - this is not me saying âoh, youâre not taking it seriously enough/donât fit my arbitrary criteria to be Validâąïž, so youâre not REALLY âkinâ - though those people definitely do exist and itâs awful - itâs the KFF individuals themselves saying that they donât actually identify as their âkinsâ in any way, and us going âso⊠why are you calling them âkins,â the word that means âI identify as this thing,â then??â If youâre not sure if you actually are [x] or not, if you kind of are but kind of arenât, if you are but you like to joke around about it a lot and donât take it super seriously, if you are but your kintype is âweirdâ or âcringy,â thatâs all totally fine by me - I only get annoyed by it when youâre explicitly stating that you donât at all fit the actual meaning of the word, and still insisting on using it instead of something that actually means what youâre trying to get across, which would be clearer for everybody. (Especially when you proceed to insist that everyone who actually does identify as nonhuman is âtaking it too seriouslyâ - not that everyone who âkins for funâ does that, to be fair, but an unfortunate number of them do and I think that is where a lot of the frustration and aggression end up coming from in the whole debate.)
That being said, Iâm to be honest starting to wonder if itâs worth the fight at this point/starting to recalibrate my opinions on the whole thing based on some recent conversations myself, but thatâs the basic reasoning behind people not liking KFF in general.
A handful of things I just want to say and forgive me if it sounds like Iâm vagueposting anyone in specific Iâve just seen these things said in a number of places by a number of different people today and I honestly cannot find a good singular post to respond to with all of them in one place:
1) If your response to people not liking âkinning for funâ is âstop policing how other people understand their identity,â you have fundamentally misunderstood the problem. The entire problem is that itâs NOT their identity, and theyâre explicitly stating that. Policing how other people understand their identity would be telling them that if they have more than [x] number of kintypes theyâre not serious about it, or if they âdonât take it seriously enoughâ theyâre not ~really~ âkin, not âhey if youâre explicitly saying you donât actually identify as the thing in any way, why are you using the word that means you identify as the thing in some wayâ. (And donât get me wrong - the former definitely exists, but itâs not what the KFF argument is about. Thatâs a separate argument entirely (and it is shitty and gatekeepy to arbitrarily decide that someone who is telling you they actually do identify as something actually doesnât do it seriously enough for you) and I am a little tired of people conflating the two, honestly.)
2) âpeople find out theyâre otherkin through roleplay a lot, so âkinning for funâ in that sense is okay and validâ - the former statement is true, but it doesnât actually support the latter imo. Roleplay is great, and people absolutely explore identity using it a lot - but that doesnât mean itâs the same thing as identity. Someone playing a character of a different gender in D&D might be a step in them figuring out theyâre trans, and it may even be a sign that theyâre trans, but it doesnât inherently make them trans and it would be kind of insulting (and just. objectively incorrect) to call it âtransingâ, yâfeel?
3) One of the biggest differences between, like, queer exclusionism and syscourse versus this whole thing (since I keep seeing this comparison occasionally), even ignoring the whole ânowhere is anyone telling KFF theyâre wrong about their own experiences, just that the actual word theyâre using is Not Itâ aspect, is that exclusionism is driving people out of spaces and communities theyâve historically been a part of. As far as I am aware, and please correct me if I am wrong here, otherkinity has always and exclusively been about being your kintype - people who just relate to a thing have, as far as I have ever seen in all my reading, never been a part of it. Itâs not people suddenly being shoved out of a community theyâve historically been a part of, itâs outsiders trying to shoehorn themselves into words that were never meant to describe their experiences and getting mad when theyâre told âhey, thatâs not what that actually means.â (At risk of a controversial comparison here, itâs not m-spec lesbians suddenly being pushed out of the word âlesbianâ because they donât fit an increasingly narrowing label even though they were historically a part of it, itâs white people trying to insist that theyâre âsmudgingâ and that the spirits theyâre interacting with are their âtotem animalsâ even when theyâre being repeatedly told by Native people that no, you have misunderstood what those words mean, stop misusing them that way, please use these other words that actually mean what you are describing instead. Obviously with a little less weight courtesy of the history tied in with cultural appropriation, but like - you get my point.)
There has to be a point at which a community is allowed to go âhey, youâre not allowed to try and force the word we created to describe a specific phenomenon to include a hundred other things that have very little in common with that specific phenomenon, or it becomes impossible for us to actually talk about our own experiences clearly because suddenly words mean borderline nothing.â I am all about inclusion, but words have to mean something or why do we have them at all? There are at this point literally dozens of other words for the things âkinning for funâ is supposed to mean - there are not other words for actually being nonhuman, which is the entire reason we created these words to begin with. If you want an umbrella term to cover all these things, thatâs what âalterhumanâ is for - we seriously do not need to be trying to force âotherkinâ to be the umbrella term âalterhumanâ was always supposed to be.
should make a quick post clarifying my stances since my feelings are complicated but i have a few standard opinions
"kin for fun" experience a few distinct experiences and describing them in ways that are more commonly used and defined are good (examples like copinglink and synpath and fictionhearted and all that)
"kin for fun" should stop associating directly with fictionkin and otherkin communities if it is a conscious choice (ex, using fictionkin/otherkin tags and terms and redefining them), at least until there are terms similar to how copinglink and otherhearted and such exist that describe the specific identities of otherkin/fictionkin that are psychological and/or spiritually connected to their kintype(s) involuntarily
not saying that the experiences should be entirely separated, but similar to fictionkin and fictives, they may be similar but also deserve their own spaces as well. shared spaces for involuntary and voluntary alterhumans are super important and should NOT be ignored though, and can sometimes be helpful (especially when you're questioning and trying to explore different labels to figure out what your experience truly is and how to explain it to others)
also if anyone DOES know any terms that specify involuntary psychological and/or spiritual otherkin/fictionkin experiences, PLEASE share it with me.
identifying temporarily with an animal or fictional character or whatever else is fine, that experience is real. saying something is temporary and doesnt fall under the most common definition of otherkin is NOT bad.
Shut up about KFF on my timeline. They're not -kin, they're -lith, -hearted, -click or -link and if they don't want to use our terms and instead use "Kinnie" or "Kin for Fun" they ain't fully otherkin/alterhuman.
Shut up about KFF on my timeline. They're not -kin, they're -lith, -hearted, -click or -link and if they don't want to use our terms and instead use "Kinnie" or "Kin for Fun" they ain't fully otherkin/alterhuman.
Honestly seeing everything you've said on the KFF topic I'm starting to see it your way.
I've dealt w/ a lot of ableism, and anti-kin in the KFF community, but I see your point that it shouldn't represent the greater community and as long as they individually aren't anti-kin or ableist then it's fine.
A lot of it sources from the fact they they tend to blithy use a term that was created to mirror the t-slur and then proceed to be derogatory and ableist at the mere suggestion that it could be similar in any way, when I saw the terms inception, I saw the anti-kin blogs outright state its purpose was to infantilize and dehumanize us.
I've got a lot of hurt to deal w/, but I'm realizing it's not necessarily the KFF community as a wholes fault.
Im kinda confused abt what term you mean
But thank you for considering things from our point of view. I'm really sorry you've had to deal with such shitty stuff
could be incorrect but i read somewhere that "kinnie" (the word im assuming the asker is referring to) was not intended to be related to the t-slur at all and was an inside joke amongst some fictionkin/otherkin that got spread around by antikin and then later on, "kin for fun".
That person's response about kin stuff is so weird, wdym "if you can remove a label at will" you literally can do that with any label. Sure how you actually feel inside (whether about gender, sexuality, kin stuff, system stuff whatever) might not change/might not be a choice but the whole point of labels (at least in terms of using them for yourself) is that You get to choose which ones are useful to you, which ones you relate to and which ones don't make sense to you and you can stop or start using a label at any time. Why do people never get this about labels I don't understand
Yeah exactly?? I have used labels in the past then decided to stop even when my internal identity and experience stayed the same. It was just the label itself wasn't useful for me and wasn't what i wanted to present to the rest of the world anymore. You are not stuck with a label forever? It's such a weird way of seeing things tbh
if you were responding / referring to me (idk if you were but im just reblogging this since i saw it on the dashboard), then i should probably let you know that i agree in some way, but the label is still important to describing the experience. example, if you experience the feeling of being a fox in your soul / personality / core, the label foxkin is a "choice" to put on, but the experience that foxkin explains (the experience you feel) is not a choice. being foxkin, as in experiencing being a fox in some core way, is not a choice.
Where I'm at on the KFF discourse is, I have trouble telling whether my feelings are voluntary or involuntary. That uncertainty makes me afraid to id as kin because I don't want to be accused of being an invader, but I also really really need/want a space to explore my relationship to humanity and nonhumanity.
Honestly I'm pretty sure a lot of people can relate to this feeling
Like, how does anyone ever understand their feelings to be voluntary or involuntary? -Faye
Such a deep philosophical hole that could be dug by that question. And since it's not at all a settled issue, it's probably far safer to just openly accept people for their identities rather than try to gatekeep based upon how much someone "chose" to be the way they are. -Moxie
i think there's really only voluntary when you consciously make the decision.
if you go "oh, i want to be a foxkin" or whatever, or you choose to identify with foxes for some reason, that kintype would be a choice
if you feel yourself drawn to foxes, do fox behaviors unconsciously, see yourself as a fox on the inside, and it's an unconscious thing? it's instinctual? that's involuntary
if you choose to label that feeling as a fox kintype, but the feeling was not a choice you made, it's still an involuntary feeling. you did not choose consciously to go "oh i like foxes i will be one", you looked at how you feel connected to foxes, recognized the subconscious feelings of 'im a fox' and labeled it
there is a lot of nuance but with kin-for-fun versus serious 'kin, usually the serious 'kin struggles and has to come to terms whereas the kin-for-fun will go "hehe i like (character) so i am them!!" and whether or not they have a reason for it, the kin-for-fun can usually take that costume off, they can "stop kinning". serious 'kin usually cannot, it's practically a permanent part of them.
I cant imagine that there's not overlap and grey areas between the two. Cause the question of course arises: what made the person go "oh I want to be foxkin" and is that voluntary? Reminds me of trans folk that consciously "chose" to be trans. Did they really chose that? Who "chooses" to be anything about their identity?
Or shit, maybe folks out there have a vivid experience of choice that we completely lack within our system.
for me, i'd draw the line at the choosing is if you can un-choose it
can you stop being foxkin? would you be able to drop that label and be okay with it? if you still feel connected to the label in some way even when you consciously "unchoose" the label, it might not be as voluntary as you think
but if it's for fun, if it's a temporary chosen label that you can take on and off similarly to wearing clothes, it's different than experiences of otherkin/fictionkin who don't get those choices. they deserve separate labels and the ability to differenciate. like traumagenic versus endogenic systems
doesn't make either of the experiences less real but using the label kin-for-fun is like saying things like "system for fun" or "demo system" like no, when you're creating a headmate it's an often tedious process and it's not easily undone. if it's undone easily it might not be a headmate in the same way traumagenic or endogenic systems use the term (although the experience is still real in some form)
it'd be like saying trans-for-fun. you can explore gender identity, test out labels, use silly/fun labels to describe that real experience, but calling it 'trans for fun' makes one associate being trans with a choice and it being fun and optional in-itself.
ofc there are members of the lgbt community with temporary and even "for fun" like labels but i think many people would be mad if you said you were "trans for fun" specifically. you can experience temporary gender-like states but it is not the same. you may want to consider looking into terms like gender nonconforming, genderfluid, crossdressing, etc, since those experiences have labels that fit (and still relate to the trans/queer umbrella in some form, like how otherkin and otherhearted/synpath/copinglink are all under the alterhuman umbrella)
this is long and complicated but a TLDR: kin for fun associates the word kin with a choice and an option and there are better labels to describe that experience. if you chose and can remove the label at will (and not experience any negative feelings or distress), that's a voluntary label and there are words that fit better than just using labels that imply more involuntary feelings.
(the experiences still exist either way tho no matter if u call it kin for fun or synpath or copinglink u can still experience that. that's important to remember.)
i think the experience is real but it can be better labeled. terms like genderqueer/genderfluid, transtrender (reclaimed), gender nonconforming, etc are better fitting than just calling it "trans for fun". which words you use depends on why you experience that gender-identity, how long, etc.
Where I'm at on the KFF discourse is, I have trouble telling whether my feelings are voluntary or involuntary. That uncertainty makes me afraid to id as kin because I don't want to be accused of being an invader, but I also really really need/want a space to explore my relationship to humanity and nonhumanity.
Honestly I'm pretty sure a lot of people can relate to this feeling
Like, how does anyone ever understand their feelings to be voluntary or involuntary? -Faye
Such a deep philosophical hole that could be dug by that question. And since it's not at all a settled issue, it's probably far safer to just openly accept people for their identities rather than try to gatekeep based upon how much someone "chose" to be the way they are. -Moxie
i think there's really only voluntary when you consciously make the decision.
if you go "oh, i want to be a foxkin" or whatever, or you choose to identify with foxes for some reason, that kintype would be a choice
if you feel yourself drawn to foxes, do fox behaviors unconsciously, see yourself as a fox on the inside, and it's an unconscious thing? it's instinctual? that's involuntary
if you choose to label that feeling as a fox kintype, but the feeling was not a choice you made, it's still an involuntary feeling. you did not choose consciously to go "oh i like foxes i will be one", you looked at how you feel connected to foxes, recognized the subconscious feelings of 'im a fox' and labeled it
there is a lot of nuance but with kin-for-fun versus serious 'kin, usually the serious 'kin struggles and has to come to terms whereas the kin-for-fun will go "hehe i like (character) so i am them!!" and whether or not they have a reason for it, the kin-for-fun can usually take that costume off, they can "stop kinning". serious 'kin usually cannot, it's practically a permanent part of them.
I cant imagine that there's not overlap and grey areas between the two. Cause the question of course arises: what made the person go "oh I want to be foxkin" and is that voluntary? Reminds me of trans folk that consciously "chose" to be trans. Did they really chose that? Who "chooses" to be anything about their identity?
Or shit, maybe folks out there have a vivid experience of choice that we completely lack within our system.
for me, i'd draw the line at the choosing is if you can un-choose it
can you stop being foxkin? would you be able to drop that label and be okay with it? if you still feel connected to the label in some way even when you consciously "unchoose" the label, it might not be as voluntary as you think
but if it's for fun, if it's a temporary chosen label that you can take on and off similarly to wearing clothes, it's different than experiences of otherkin/fictionkin who don't get those choices. they deserve separate labels and the ability to differenciate. like traumagenic versus endogenic systems
doesn't make either of the experiences less real but using the label kin-for-fun is like saying things like "system for fun" or "demo system" like no, when you're creating a headmate it's an often tedious process and it's not easily undone. if it's undone easily it might not be a headmate in the same way traumagenic or endogenic systems use the term (although the experience is still real in some form)
it'd be like saying trans-for-fun. you can explore gender identity, test out labels, use silly/fun labels to describe that real experience, but calling it 'trans for fun' makes one associate being trans with a choice and it being fun and optional in-itself.
ofc there are members of the lgbt community with temporary and even "for fun" like labels but i think many people would be mad if you said you were "trans for fun" specifically. you can experience temporary gender-like states but it is not the same. you may want to consider looking into terms like gender nonconforming, genderfluid, crossdressing, etc, since those experiences have labels that fit (and still relate to the trans/queer umbrella in some form, like how otherkin and otherhearted/synpath/copinglink are all under the alterhuman umbrella)
this is long and complicated but a TLDR: kin for fun associates the word kin with a choice and an option and there are better labels to describe that experience. if you chose and can remove the label at will (and not experience any negative feelings or distress), that's a voluntary label and there are words that fit better than just using labels that imply more involuntary feelings.
(the experiences still exist either way tho no matter if u call it kin for fun or synpath or copinglink u can still experience that. that's important to remember.)
Where I'm at on the KFF discourse is, I have trouble telling whether my feelings are voluntary or involuntary. That uncertainty makes me afraid to id as kin because I don't want to be accused of being an invader, but I also really really need/want a space to explore my relationship to humanity and nonhumanity.
Honestly I'm pretty sure a lot of people can relate to this feeling
Like, how does anyone ever understand their feelings to be voluntary or involuntary? -Faye
Such a deep philosophical hole that could be dug by that question. And since it's not at all a settled issue, it's probably far safer to just openly accept people for their identities rather than try to gatekeep based upon how much someone "chose" to be the way they are. -Moxie
i think there's really only voluntary when you consciously make the decision.
if you go "oh, i want to be a foxkin" or whatever, or you choose to identify with foxes for some reason, that kintype would be a choice
if you feel yourself drawn to foxes, do fox behaviors unconsciously, see yourself as a fox on the inside, and it's an unconscious thing? it's instinctual? that's involuntary
if you choose to label that feeling as a fox kintype, but the feeling was not a choice you made, it's still an involuntary feeling. you did not choose consciously to go "oh i like foxes i will be one", you looked at how you feel connected to foxes, recognized the subconscious feelings of 'im a fox' and labeled it
there is a lot of nuance but with kin-for-fun versus serious 'kin, usually the serious 'kin struggles and has to come to terms whereas the kin-for-fun will go "hehe i like (character) so i am them!!" and whether or not they have a reason for it, the kin-for-fun can usually take that costume off, they can "stop kinning". serious 'kin usually cannot, it's practically a permanent part of them.
Okay, this is apparently going to bother me until I say something about it, so, courtesy of recent events in the otherkin tag: if you are sending angry/harassing anons to someone because theyâre KFF/support âkinning for fun,â you are the one in the wrong in that scenario. Stop it.
Yâall know I dislike the KFF phenomenon as much as anyone and yâall know I have long advocated for them to use a different damn word, but look: what is worse, using a word wrong, or actively going out of your way to harass and attack someone? I hope I donât have to explain why itâs the latter.
Even looking at it from a purely pragmatic standpoint: what the hell are you hoping to accomplish, exactly? You are not going to change anyoneâs mind by yelling at them and getting angry at them, and in fact you are likely just going to make them double down harder. If you canât have that conversation politely and calmly, you shouldnât be having it at all, because you are frankly doing more harm than good no matter which way you slice it. Just block people and move on if youâre that mad about it.
Even if you can have that conversation politely and calmly, pick your fuckinâ battles, all right? It is not always the time or the place to go crusading about it. Sometimes it is the time and place to make like Elsa and let it fucking go. (You may notice I do not always correct people using âkinningâ language when I reply to their post or anon. This is why.) If you are getting so angry about this whole debate that youâre genuinely struggling to do that, go offline and go do something else for a while (whatever that might be) to remind yourself that in the grand scheme of things this really is not that big a deal. Yes, it sucks, yes, it is causing hurt and harm in this community in some places, but look, literally the only thing you have to do to get away from it is stop paying attention to it for a while. Find one or two good Discord servers where this isnât a problem - theyâre out there, Iâm in a couple - and thereâs your community connection without having to deal with it.
Calm the hell down and stop harassing people. If it seems like thereâs space to have the conversation about it calmly, sure, go for it - use your conflict resolution skills, ask genuine questions, try to make it a two-way conversation and not an argument, and all that. If it doesnât, or if the conversation starts escalating past what youâre comfortable de-escalating, just block them and leave.
I haven't wanted to say anything publicly up until this point for fear of worrying people unnecessarily, but it's been long enough that I don't think I can hold off anymore.
Sun (Mark, @sundragon, @dragotoxins, @onix, etc) has been missing online for over two months. April 14, 2022 was the last anyone heard from him. I and others have attempted contact over Discord, Tumblr, Dreamwidth, and email, to no avail. If anyone has any idea if he is okay, has heard from him more recently than that, or has another method of contact, I ask that you please let me know. I am immensely worried about him--it's not like him to disappear without a word like this.
While he absolutely has a right to drop off the face of the Internet with no warning whenever he likes, the fact that this is unusual and the length of time he has been gone is very concerning. He said nothing that would indicate a break, and before his disappearance, he seemed practically cheery, not anything that would imply that he was intending to vanish for a time.
If you know anything, please contact me. Either way, I ask that you please reblog this post and spread the word. I don't need to know what he's up to, I just want to know if he is okay or if anyone has another method to contact him. Thank you.
So in case y'all were curious- probably not. Here's my stance on the whole. Kff (kin for fun) Community vs the people who take it seriously....
I really don't give a fuck. Honestly and I think that people should be able to kin for whatever reason. Now I am very much of the mindset that kinning is not choice a person makes (especially with some of my own kins. YIKES/lh) however just because it isn't a decision it doesn't mean people can't have fun doing it.
Like. You should be able to enjoy aspects of ur identity
I'm not necessarily kff myself but I don't take it overly serious either. Basically I don't give a fuck and the only lines I feel are ones that shouldn't be overstepped when it comes to the kin community is people calling comfort characters kins (don't) or claiming to have irls when they aren't psychotic. Thank shit isn't okay. Especially the latter.
But if you just kin for fun and mind ur own damn fucking business I literally don't care.
Some of y'all take this waaaay too seriously. I understand it's part of y'alls identity. The SAME can be said for the kff community y'all realize that right??? They probably just express that in a different way.
I feel like thereâs maybe a bit of a misunderstanding as to what âkinning for funâ actually refers to here. Yes, you absolutely should be able to enjoy aspects of your identity, wholehearted agree! Having fun with your kintypes and with being otherkin is not the same as âkinning for funâ. âKinning for funâ means using âkinningâ to mean ârelating to,â comfort characters, etc. People who actually identify as their kintypes cannot, by definition, be KFF (I mean, unless theyâre also using it in the incorrect way, I suppose) - theyâre just having fun with being otherkin, not âkinningâ for the purpose of having fun.
The people who claim to âkin for fun,â at least the vast majority of them, will explicitly tell you they donât actually identify as their âkinsâ when you ask (or will volunteer that information, pretty frequently) and that itâs a thing theyâre choosing to do for fun - thatâs the entire reason people are upset about it. Maybe there are more of them using it to mean âI like to have fun with it, but I actually DO identify as it stillâ than I realize, but Iâve never actually seen someone use it that way that I can recall (though I have seen a couple people be concerned that that might be included in âkinning for funâ, to be fair).
Tl;dr the âstop claiming to be âkin-for-funââ thing is not âyouâre not allowed to have fun with being âkin,â itâs âstop calling comfort characters âkinsâ,â like you said. There certainly are people out there who get pissy about anybody actually enjoying being otherkin, but thatâs not what âKFFâ refers to.
no, actually, being otherkin is not âjust for funâ.
itâs a fundamental disidentification with humanity in some way/to some degree, for whatever a personâs reasons are (it varies by individual).
people who only âkin for funâ are misusing a term that means something elseâand has always meant something else, since its inceptionâand are most likely not actually kin. (but i will not discount the possibility that some are actually kin and havenât fully explored that yet, obviously.)
being kin is harmless. but itâs not âjust for funâ. we can have fun with it, of course, but itâs identity. and dismissing someoneâs identity as just something they do for fun is rude at best.
and as a trans nonhuman, let me give this exampleâyou can have fun with being trans, but wearing nail polish/skirts/vests/ties for fun doesnât make you trans. you can have fun with being kin, but liking or relating to a character or creature and roleplaying them/using them as your online mask for fun doesnât make you kin. those things are totally fine, and not harmful or anything, but they are still different from being trans or kin even if they may appear similar on the surface sometimes.
(and i am not equating being kin and being trans, btw; itâs just a useful example for the sake of furthering understanding. and again, i am both of those things.)
footnote: do not use the word âk***ieâ on this post. i will block you the instant i notice it no matter where you stand on this issue if you use that word.
There is this struggle I always had.
Most of my fictotypes are routed in spirituality, or to be more precice, in reincarnation but there are also some past lives that mean nothing to me. While I remember some really small bits and pieces of theses lifes and I just have this strong feeling of âYes, I used to be this person/thingâ I donât identify as this being anymore, which is why I simply refer to them as âpast livesâ.
But there are also past lifes that are really important to me, these lives are integral to my identiy in a way that I know âI wouldnât be the way I am without themâ BUT they are still not exactly kintypes or fictotypes because, despite these feelings and experiences I donât necessarily identify AS them anymore.
So far I didnât really knew how I should call them, I always struggled. I donât want to call them simply past lifes, because of how important they are to me, but I also know that they donât fit the definition of a kintype/fictotype and hearttype/sympath/kithtype also donât really fit because itâs more then just identifying WITH them. Itâs the experiences I had as them whatâs important.
I had one two anon messages about that with @aestherians and he simply proposed to just make up my own word. So thatâs what I decided to do.
Kardiatype or EmpeirĂatype
Iâm not sure which one I like more, so it would be cool to hear other peoples opinions. Both words have greek origin and mean Coretype and Experiencetype basically (even though Kardia can also mean heart (I think) which makes it a bit confusing because of hearttype, but eh)
The definition would be:
A past life which experiences had such an impact on you that it formed your core identiy and personality even to this day in such a way that it differs from your past life identity/personality therefor making you NOT identifying as the being from your past life anymore.
While this seems to mostly aply to the spiritual side of otherkin/therian/fictionkin Iâm sure it could/would also aply to our psychological friends.
What are your ideas on the concept of Kardiatype/EmpeirĂatype?
Note that this does not include fictionfolk due to being an already-used term that we cannot claim coinership for. Ficfolk we can claim, the other we cannot.
-folk (with the exception of fictionfolk) is a suffix for any alterhuman identity that is experienced as an "I am x" identity. This is not exclusive to otherkinity, fictionkinity, or therianthropy.
The context of the accidental coining, and why it matters:
The system members that run this sideblog (MĂĄni, Pandora, and them blended) have had a lot of issues with not being comfortable with using kin labels, due to feeling as if they did not belong to the community from finding no one with shared experiences as them and the lacking representation and discussion of psychological identities in alterhuman spaces, despite fitting the definition of otherkinity and fictionkinity. This caused them to be extremely uncomfortable with needing to use kin tags for visibility or having people keep suggesting that they are otherkin when they rejected the label. They are still working through that and are still very uncomfortable with being forced into a box by others.
Here, they suggested it as an alternative to kin tags, but never with the intention of it replacing kin tags or being for only otherkin people, that way they can still be included in a community with experiences similar to theirs.
What about using ficfolk as an alternative to kin tags? I was just told to stay out of them for being an endel, when kin tags are literally
This was intended as only a tag system at first based on shared traits being species or fiction. There are old posts from this blog that use it before giving up, because a term that does not catch on is pretty much dead in the water.
The context of this coming from a place of not taking the label while still living as the identity is what shapes the intention and the definition. However, no one expected it to actually catch on due to tags like #letters to canonmates and #alterkink being stagnant as well while not coined with being blog-specific.
So, why coin this now?
We were not aware of it being discussed or used by others until now, and desperately want to avoid the coiner being pushed out of their own term due to misinformation.
This kind of response is really dismissive to literal term misinformation that is being spread but is not actually being corrected by the pe
The issues with the post from the OP are already discussed in the thread. Seeing the term get taken to mean the exact thing it was created to avoid by many is a big issue, and one OP has not really taken any steps to correct, since it is clear in the notes that people without the context or intent of creation are seeing it as a replacement of kin suffixes and terminology. By it being treated as just an otherkin rebrand and not a broader community than only otherkin, it will push the person who made it out of their own term system that was made for people like them.
Other relevant links:
On their relationship with alterhumanity and otherkinity -
Been wanting to write this for some time, but it is just really hard to put it into words.
My relationship with otherkinity, therianthropy,
- Adam Liddel
Edit: Identities are under no requirement to be involuntary to use this. As long as you are an identity, you are them. No other requirements.
i've seen it everywhere but no one wants to talk about it so i'm left having no idea why and no ability to ask - what's the big drama about alterhuman/ alt+h???? i just wanna know
1. Wolf (2021) was released and everyone disliked that.
2. The folks at Alt+H researched the public's reaction to the movie and found several articles and reviews treating it as an allegory.
3. Not realizing that the articles and reviews they'd found were mostly from smaller/indie publications, and that the few in larger publications (such as The Washington Post and Polygon) weren't receiving any notable traction, Alt+H decided that some action must be taken. This was probably compounded by 1) this being the second movie in a year discussing species dysphoria, making them worry this might become a trend, and 2) the big percentage of Alt+H members who are have previously been institutionalized/been subject to medical abuse.
Where they were right: The Wolf movie is potentially harmful
Where they were wrong: That potential is small
4. Not realizing the the #WolfGetsReal project was unlikely to garner any noteworthy traction, Luteia wrote a post discouraging people from participating in the hashtag. This post was reblogged by Sun who said "With all the bestialist drama going on, it definitely isnt a good time to draw peopleâs attention [...] Thereâs time enough to do damage control later, assuming there will be much [to do] at all," Sonne who said "the movie is an obscure one & it seems counterproductive to drag more attention to it," and Rani who said "If we really want to combat any negative impact this movie might have, then maybe we should [...] make a point of talking in whatever tags are relevant about our experiences [...] That might be a more productive response than whatâs currently happening"
Where they were right: The movie was unlikely to get any attention and the hashtag was unnecessary and potentially scaremongering. It also inadvertently put the spotlight on bestialists.
Where they were wrong: The hashtag would have garnered even less attention than the movie, and claiming that it would put a spotlight on the community was scaremongering.
From here, it gets complicated.
5. Mord responded to the criticism, acknowledging that Alt+H would not be able to control who joined in on the hashtag and that their original statement was a tad overdramatic, but reiterated that something should be done in response to the movie. He ended his post with the following questions:
"[Luteia said:] âwe donât have any power we can useâ - how do we build that?"
"how do we strike a balance between motivating people in our own communities to see alterhuman awareness as a real issue without stirring up fear and panic?"
6. Pale clarified an earlier comment and responded to the first of Mord's questions: "Weâve got no leverage or power to actually change anything said about us that isnât by us, because weâre not valuable enough to consider as a community to respect when the alternative is ableism and sensationalism. The latter will win every time."
7. Noel responded (needlessly emotionally imo) that we should ignore the movie and "let it self-destruct," and that there was "an ocean of difference" between the previous information campaigns of the community (see: the Grimes debacle on twitter) and what Alt+H was attempting to do. According to Noel, the previous information campaigns had been in response to individuals, rather than amorphous entities (I disagree with this - again, see the Grimes debacle). She also argued that this would simply be free advertising for the movie, giving it the publicity it craved (again, see the Grimes debacle). Noel then compared Alt+H to the communities' previous bad publicity stunts ("What?! I think I'm an Animal" comes to mind) and accused Alt+H of being neutral in the bestiality debate that was happening on twitter at the time. She ended the post by suggesting that Alt+H try to legitimize themselves as a group before trying to raise awareness of alterhumanity, listing FurScience as an example (this I do agree with).
8. Mord responded (emotionally, no doubt riled up by Noel's aggression) to the bestiality accusation first, explaining that Alt+H has stated several times in the past that their organization does not support bestialists, but that joining twitter debates is not within the scope of their organization. He also questioned Noel's suggestion that they should bring awareness to bestiality but ignore other problems until they went away on their own. Mord then expressed frustration at Noel's and Luteia's statements that Alt+H wasn't "accessible enough," claiming that the organization has created multiple avenues for alterhumans to air their grievances, including feedback channels on discord, ask boxes on tumblr, and an anonymous email inbox on their website: "weâre constantly asking people for feedback. but they donât come to us. they come anonymously to Big Name Otherkinâs askboxes after the fact. what are we supposed to do about that?"
Mord ends the post by claiming that the otherkin community on tumblr pretends everything is safe and good, until someone speaks up and attracts negative attention to the community. He explains that the community already has negative attention, that alterhumans are already being abused for being alterhuman, and that you shouldn't deride victims/survivors for speaking out about their abuse.
9. At the same time as points 6-8, Luteia was responding to Mord in another thread. Thankfully his response was in bullet point form, making my job easier. He stated the following:
1) Alt+H still hadn't responded to the bestiality neutrality accusations,
2) Alt+H only discussed the #WolfGetsReal initiative for 2 hours before they started drafting the post, which was irresponsible,
3) They should have been aware of the Grimes debacle, which they weren't prior to this mess,
4) Asking people to write about something as exhausting as species dysphoria is not very considerate,
5) Alt+H hadn't made clear what results they expected from the #WolfGetsReal initiative,
6) Alt+H had expected people to read through interviews before writing their #WolfGetsReal posts, which is just unrealistic. Luteia ended his response by telling Alt+H to have realistic expectations and to create ways to avoid community members from getting burnt out by participating in awareness campaigns.
10. Rani responded to the posts mentioned in points 5-9 (again, written in bullet form, thank you kindly). They made the following statements:
1) Alt+H should create more avenues for support for community members,
2) One of Alt+H's main problems was that articles about Wolf were analyzing the species dysphoria as a metaphor, rather than taking it at face value. Alt+H can't do much to change this, and certainly not by working off something as mediocre as Wolf, but Rani suggested a few possible things to work on instead,
3) A response to Mord's first question: The alterhuman community does not have leverage, and there are no obvious ways to solve this problem,
4) A response to Mord's second question: We have no good reason to assume these species dysphoria movies are a trend. To assume so is catastrophizing,
5) Intracommunity issues (such as bestialists) should be prioritized over extracommunity issues (such as the Wolf movie).
Rani ends by stating that, while Noel and Luteia were not gentle with their responses, Mord did ask for the community's opinions. Being publicly upset by these responses is unprofessional.
The final fallout of all this happened in private discord servers, only 2 of which I'm part of, and only 1 of which I'm really participating in. I don't mind summarizing public debates, but what happens on discord stays on discord.
Several of the parties involved are currently taking a break from the community. A few claim to have left for good, but we've all heard that one before.
Here are the posts in as chronological an order as I can link them:
Actually I never "compared Alt+H to the communitiesâ previous bad publicity stunts," or least that was never my intention in anything I said. Important to clarify given Naia's recent fun excursion with Fox News that I never really mentioned anything like that, although I did say something about how you alterhumans as a whole rarely seem to learn anything about how happily journalism will fuck you over for a few clicks.
I also didn't touch on Grimes, for clarification for those reading-- I used the anti-physical shifter movements as an example of successful anti-misinformation campaigns done by the alterhuman communities. I don't know anything about Grimes, and don't know if it's a reasonable example to use in comparison in this summary.
I also didn't say Alt+H was neutral on bestiality and bestialists-- I pointed out quite frankly that they refused to so much as acknowledge that the bestialists were even an issue. Stated neutrality in the lines of, "we don't care," is different from disengagement and ignorance, even if they do functionally have similar consequences. I never said that Alt+H was neutral towards active zoophiles and bestialists, just that they refused to deal with them in their campaigns and spaces and that they lacked any publicly stated moral standpoint on them at all (negative, neutral, or positive), which was true at the time.
For anyone who wants to read my actual commentary, it can be found here.
~Noel (she/her)
in a few hours ill fix up this blog i swear @d14m0ndn0tl4p15 - Tumblr Blog | Tumgag
