AWKWARD ZOMBIE

I have the same view of otherkin that I have with tulpas. While I personally don't see the sense in it, it seems to make other people pop flyin', and as long as that happiness isn't being grasped at at the expense of the happiness of others, what harm is there in its existence? People call it a mental illness, sure, but if someone is pop flyin' with it then what's the issue exactly? If it were degrading to their health, then it'd be another story (and even then have its grey area) but it doesn't seem to be that way at all. If someone is pop flyin' with themselves as a dragon trapped in a human's body, and that allows them to be well structured members of society, then so be it. Now if someone is saying "I can't contribute to society because I'm a cat, and need to sleep for 18 hours of the day, and play with yarn for the other 6!" then no, that's called you being a leech on society.

But the thing is, form what I've seen most people who label themselves as 'otherkin' are NOT pop flyin'. They talk about how they're 'trapped' and they wish they could be the creature they truly are (fictional or otherwise). They spend so much time obsessing over all of the things that their 'animal' form could do that they can't and they tend to avoid people who don't share their 'otherkin' mindset because they don't want to deal with having someone question their identities (even out of genuine curiosity). And when otherkin congregate into groups, their mindset seems to get much, much worse. They tell their friends that "it's okay to want to tear someone's throat out, that's the wolf in you" and other things. It's a very unhealthy mindset and most of the time people are using it to escape from issues they would have to deal with "if they were human".

So no, I don't really think it makes people pop flyin'. It seems to cause the person more grief than anything else. It's not healthy to obsess over wanting to be something you're not; some people have even gotten suicidal about it. I think there was a post on that website posted a page or so ago that talked about an otherkin trying to kill themselves because they were struggling with depression, amongst other things. Some people seem to believe that if they kill their human body, they'll get their 'true' body back.

Then that's on par with having low self esteem to cause depression, and that is an issue in itself. Being otherkin by itself isn't much an issue, but if it causes that low self esteem, then it is an issue. Then the issue can be approached with "We don't like the fact that you're unhappy because you have such a low view of yourself" instead of "We don't like the fact that you think you're a cat trapped in a human's body." Potentially, you can preserve those feelings which could bring that person peace with themselves, and eliminate the real issue.

As far as "it's OK to rip someone's throat out" is concerned, that goes back to issue of being a cat who needs to sleep for 18 hours a day, and can't contribute to society. If you hinder on everyone else just trying to go about their own day, that's where it becomes an issue that needs to be addressed. Even then though, you can approach it more as "You need to stop thinking it's OK to rip people's throats out, seriously man!"

http://watchful-entity.tumblr.com/

everything that is wrong with otherkin

On the subject of the latest reblogs on there about people defending "fictives" and "multiple systems" with the justification "a person's headmates may not be "real" the way YOU understand it but they have feelings and thoughts and can present and that's real enough for me!"

But I roleplay, a lot, and I've cried, gotten furious, laughed by booty off, felt elated, and felt love on behalf of characters I'm in the middle of playing before. Being able to put yourself in the shoes of someone you aren't or haven't even met in order to present them in a realistic or even deeply emotional way doesn't mean that you actually are that person, or that the other person even exists. There's a big difference between genuine DID and saying you have Naruto and Fluttershy actually speaking to you for actual real in your head, independent of your own imagination and thoughts.

Seriously, look at things like some of the actually good askblogs, about both original and canon characters. If you have a good handle on someone, it can almost feel like they're "real." People who roleplay all the time sometimes express that a character "said" something or "got mad" at something, but it doesn't mean they're some kind of DID "headmate." It's a fun what-if expression. I've watched movies "in character" before just for fun by imagining how someone or other would feel about the film, just because the perspective is different.

Humans are imaginative, and we like to think about the strange and fantastic. That's normal, and okay. Daydreams, fantasies and fiction are safe, mentally stimulating ways to exercise our emotional spectrum, like how roller coasters and horror films are safe ways to experience fear and catharsis without actually being in danger. There's only a problem when someone takes the "if I don't consciously accept it/think about it/agree to it, reality can't exist in its current form for me" approach to fantasy. God knows I did as a form of extremely unhealthy escapism when I was younger. I didn't think it was real, but if tumblr had existed to tell me a bandwagon like that was rolling around, I might very well have jumped on just to continue to distance myself from my problems without actually resolving or even accepting them, especially if I could also get pity, headpats and a feeling of righteous indignity out of the deal too by tricking myself into thinking "the imaginary friends I've become very attached to totally have rights, I'm just as important and oppressed as any minority! Where's my million-entity march?!"

That GAMR GURRRRLL book that was posted in the screencaps thread the other day did have one good point-- it mentioned something like, "but a real gamer girl knows that IRL comes first-- just because she's having fun online doesn't mean her problems have gone away!" MMOs being the context, but pretending to be something you're not and diving into that furious looping ocean of redundant arguments and baseless reinforcement absolutely counts.

Fun fact: I had never even heard of the term 'otherkin' before it was mentioned in this thread.

I really don't think I'm a 'furry' or 'otherkin'; I don't wear a fursuit or walk around on all fours making animal sounds. I've never even been able to settle on a 'fursona'.

Really, I just draw pictures of pretty non-human creatures because I don't think human beings are particularly attractive (If that's how I feel I'm obviously going to spend as little of my time drawing humans as possible, aren't I?); If people want to call me a [insert label here] because of that - then that's their problem.

Yeah, I don't have much affinity or love for my own species and would rather not be associated with them - but that's doesn't make me an otherkin - that makes me a misanthropist.

I accept that I have a human body - but I don't have to accept everyone else's definition of what 'being human' means. I am an individual. I define myself. I impact upon the definition of what it means to be human - for better or worse.

I've come to the conclusion that as bad as I find otherkin, MRA dudes are far worse.

They're kind of similar in a lot of ways.

Otherkin misunderstand trans issues and try to use it to their advantage and MRA dudes misunderstand gender issues and try to use it to their advantage, and both make it more difficult for the actual groups in need to be taken seriously.

As far as I've seen, MRA guys come across the same way as extremist feminists.

Doesn't mean there isn't something valid in the general movement or room for improvement though (though I definitely don't think MRA really represents me as an individual). But, that should all be handled at once, since often issues on both sides have very similar causes that could be mended with some manner of reform.

Men's Rights Activism is kind of a joke, a lot like tumblr. You can argue that it's not fair to prioritize women above men, which is totally true and which tumblr likes to do-- and it is alarming when people like the SJWs suddenly start demanding not equality or even reparations, but active harm against the group they feel has been oppressing them-- but it's used mainly as a front for bitter men who cannot come to terms with the idea that the way things are isn't acceptable even though they themselves like and are comfortable with the status quo.

I think it has a lot to do with people confusing "there are unpleasant things related to an aspect of you that you didn't necessarily initiate or intend to perpetuate but which you may be a part of and should know about for future situations" with "you're wrong and should feel bad and we want to hurt you for no reason except that we're jealous/in a conspiracy with each other/some other bullshit." It's accurate to say that many (though not all) men unknowingly ascribe to the belief that acing the test, getting a job or merely "being nice" ought to result in them being cosmically rewarded with a female. We expect to be rewarded with what we want in return for hard work and accomplishment, and women are unconsciously perceived as a reward for success because of their associate with "having a successful life". They don't often see that "being nice" with the expectation of a direct reward in return isn't actually being nice so much as it is being strategic or even twofaced in some cases. Some see "being friendzoned," aka "only" being friends with people they're kind to, as a punishment or even a form of robbery. Obviously not all men are like that, and media-learned biases exist in girls, too, but Western society at least is arguably skewed in favor of men in various ways, and people who choose to become MRAs often feel threatened by what they see as the most basic kind of punishment-- having something they want appear to be taken away from them. The wealthy are the same way about the perception that more rights for the poor or simply a lack of special treatment they're accustomed to are "punishing" them "just because they're rich."

Not to mention that, while men can certainly have social grievances too, reverse sexism just isnt a thing, it just isnt. Can women be misandrist jerks? Sure, but they dont have an entire system working in their favor, its isolated incidents. Its a lot like reverse racism, really.

Ok. Listen. If there is two things I dislike the most it is hypocrisy and ignorance.

Mens rights activism is a joke? Fine. A lot of them are bonkers. Is it needed? Hell yes! Not all laws today are balanced for either gender. Many tip extremely in favour of women. Child support laws are a prime example.

Men aren't really suppressed, but if you are for equality you can't ignore one side of the problem. That isn't called equality. That is called oppression. Men aren't oppressed now, but if nobody actually looks out for our rights, then the rights can be infringed upon without anyone speaking up. In many ways, this is what got us in the same situation with womens rights. Nobody spoke up for them and as a result, they got the short end of the stick.

Just a few months back I heard talk about people disliking the term "feminist". It had gotten a bad connotation attached to it. Society said "feminists" are bad people. The same people who look out for womens rights. The same thing has happened to males rights activists. This seems to me to be a battle of the sexes and I extremely dislike there being one. There should not be inequality at any point and that doesn't only apply to the legal system. That applies to our social norms and values. Act like a decent human being. Treat others with respect, even if you don't always agree with them. They might have a different viewpoint than you and both your opinions are just as valid.

There are people that argue that feminism would fix the problems against men, such as the child support laws. Gender stereotypes say that women are better at taking care of children, so child care laws are in favor of them.

I would argue that. Gender roles are total bullshit.

I would argue that it should be evaluated on a case by case basis. Not a law that says "women are better. Your argument is invalid."

To be quite honest, I don't want to go into a discussion on custody issues. There are plenty more issues at hand. Some guy on Reddit posted a list. I will admit that a lot of it is stupid and irrelevant, but there are a few points there that are a bit scary.