#also the reason why i say nonhuman here instead of alterhuman is due to the fact that not all alterhumans are nonhuman

[bugpalace]

hello nonhuman ally / young uneducated nonhuman. you have a bomb strapped to your chest. to diffuse it, you must explain why alterhumans are valid without saying any of these phrases

- they still know they're human / it's not like they believe they're physically nonhuman

- well they're not delusional / mentally ill

- it's just a phase, don't bother them / let kids be kids / they're just exploring their identity

- well they're just [insert something that only describes otherpaws / furries]

you have 1 hour.

[talon-dragonbeast]

Hi! I’m having questions that I’m not sure where to find the resources about safely, I hope it is okay i sent them here instead.

What is the difference between a transspecies and physical nonhuman and a clinical lycanthrope?

I know what they all are (vaguely, at least) but i am confused where the overlap ends (i know there are overlaps still, but i am confused where it ‘seems’ to end)

I’m really sorry if this ask is rude, i did not intend it to be.

excellent question! and dont worry, not rude at all, the terms are very similar after all :D

transspecies

transspecies is an opt-in label that some nonhumans choose to use for themselves, so its definition may vary among its users. some use transspecies to describe their experiences as transgender nonhumans, some use it because they intend to transition (usually through clothing, gear, jewelry, tattoos, piercings, and other species-affirming methods), some choose to use it to spite people who try to dilute our experiences to make them more acceptable to others, some use it as a political statement, some use it because they are physical nonhumans... I could go on, but I think you get the idea.

from what ive observed, transspecies folks seem to share some common experiences, such as species dysphoria (or its positive counterpart, species euphoria), the intention to socially or physically transition to their desired species, and a certain attitude towards their nonhumanity ("cringe culture is dead", "i will not water myself down for your convenience", "i will be myself even if it makes you uncomfortable", etc).

there exists a misunderstanding among some alterhumans that the transspecies label was originally created by the radqueer community (for those who don't know, radqueer is a label for those who are radically inclusive of all identities, regardless of the potential harm they may cause, including pedophilia and zoophilia, transracial people and abusive relationships), but rest assured that this is not the case. there are records of the term transspecies since 1997, before the radqueer label was even created. some transspecies folks might also identify as radqueer, but definitely not all and this is not inherent to the label.

physical nonhumans

what it says on the tin. a physical nonhuman is a nonhuman who identifies their own physical body as that of their 'type. there are many reasons why someone may identify as a physical nonhuman, some believe their DNA is not human, some may say they use a veil or other similar abilities to hide their true form from humans, some experience delusions related to their physical body, some follow the reasoning of "i am nonhuman, this is my body, therefore this is a nonhuman body", and some are that way just because! no one reason is more valid than another, and some physical nonhumans dont even have a reason for being the way they are; they just are.

clinical lycanthropes

also called clinical zoanthropes, they are beings who believe they are experiencing or have experienced physical transformations to the body of an animal, often due to mental health conditions such as delusions or hallucinations. for example, a clinical cynanthrope may experience transformations to the body of a dog, and may or may not act accordingly to their physical body.

clinical zoanthropes are a very misunderstood part of our community, and should be treated with the care and respect they deserve. they are not crazy, they are not dangerous, and they are as much a part of the alterhuman community as "sane" folks. it is terrible that i even have to clarify this, but i have seen too many alterhumans deny that CZs are part of our community in favor of the more "acceptable" identities, so unfortunately this is necessary.

conclusion

so, to actually answer your question, while there is certainly some overlap between these three communities, they are definitely not the same.

from what ive seen, there are many transspecies folks who are also physically nonhuman, and vice versa. some clinical zoanthropes use the physical nonhuman label for themselves, but it seems that most describe themselves as simply their species. most CZs dont use the transspecies label, because they already perceive their body as nonhuman, although some do wish to socially transition. both physical nonhumans and CZs may have their origins in delusions or hallucinations (though definitely not all, especially on the p-nonhuman side), but i dont think ive seen any transspecies users claiming that their label stems from that; i could be wrong though. and finally, i think CZs maintain a certain degree of separation from the therian/otherkin communities, mainly because they dont relate to a lot of our experiences and also because of the constant attacks they tend to receive from closed-minded beings. thats a problem that definitely needs solving, as i think were stronger together than we are on our own; but thats a post for another day.

i hope my answer satisfied you anon, but feel free to ask more questions if it didnt! and for those of you reading this, feel free to correct me if i said something wrong! im not part of any of these communities, so take everything i say with a grain of salt. have a nice day! :}

[mechanical-sunchild]

What do you think about the discourse around the term alterhuman?

I think that the general issue with labelling anything to do with identity is that not everyone who exists, who technically meets the definition of that label, is going to like it for a variety of reasons. If that term is the most popular term (often because it came first and/or is the most useful) this becomes even more frustrating when you don't like it.

So, I understand and support alternative terms and why beings spoke up about why they don't like it. But it's not going anywhere, sorry. The discourse or, let's actually call it debates to sound nicer, just shouldn't be happening here. There's a lot more interesting things to talk about together than who likes what term the best.

If you don't like the term, you should just not use it. I think it's been explained to death what the word fully means, why it gets used, the range of identities it encompasses which makes it useful etc and that should at least allow you to understand why there was/is a pushback against trying to completely erase/replace it. (But I dunno, words evolve, it might change one day just naturally).

What does makes me chuckle a bit though is when beings who happily identify as therian[thropes] say they just hate that the word human is in there, despite the alter part indicating an otherness or alternative to being [just] human. Because...the 'anthrope/anthropy' part in theri/anthrope/thropy comes from the Greek ánthropos which also means human. So therian could be loosely translated to literally calling yourself an animal-human. Which yeah could be exactly what you are, but I'm guessing those who object harshly to the human part of alterhuman do so due to having no human parts.

I'm rambling now, sorry. My point is, it's a good term, but you don't have to use it. Nonhuman is fairly popular too if you happen to like that. I happen to not like that for me, but I don't gripe at anybeing using it to include everyone technically even me. Maybe do that for alterhuman and just...think of the bigger picture a bit? Maybe we spend too much time putting importance on the labels of life instead of just experiencing life. -shrugs-

[creatureheart]

Figured this was better a reblog than in replies, so apologies for deleted replies.

--

I actually responded to this on the Nonhuman National Park forum, not knowing you had also posted it here. So I'm going to share what I wrote there on this post as well.

--------

Disclaimer: there is no ill will from me, I am simply voicing my thoughts, and I can get a bit passionate and maybe a bit blunt, but the words are my own. Sorry for the ramble/rant.

--

I am not a physical therian that I know of, but I do want to say that I feel like most should keep in mind that the use of the term "phsyical" here is simply the descriptor term for the type of therianthropy that is being experienced. It falls along the same lines as words like spiritual, psychological, metaphorical, etc.

It is used because their identity involves something related to the physical body, be it how they view it themselves, how they wish to be referred to by others, because of the disconnect they may feel from it, etc.

To be more specific, it is an umbrella descriptor for multiple things, a spectrum of experiences.

Just as one being a 'psychological therian' could mean imprinting all the way to delusions, or being a 'spiritual therian' could mean thinking one is a misplaced soul all the way to it being a religious based identity. Not to mention that these things can very easily also overlap and be experienced along with the physical parts of the identity.

I personally don't understand why some feel we should have to split specifics of one of these descriptors while not also doing that to the other types of reasons as to why someone may be nonhuman. Or more specifically, why do we have to split specifics and do away with the umbrella term for these specific experiences?

Why do the psychological and spiritual umbrellas get to remain for those who wish to use them if they do not want to be specific about their origin, but the physical does not?

Because, being honest, I do see way more of a push from people of trying to find different ways to redefine, or more so completely dispose of, the physical identity when it comes to the community than I do any other type of origin. Example being the push from parts of the community that being a therian is "only ever NON-PHYSICAL!!"

Which in my experience usually also comes from those trying to shove out the more "weird" and "undesirable" parts of the community in order to make it easier for those not even in the community, mostly those who are haters or antikin, to accept us. A way to appease those who don't actually care for us by sanitizing the community, which then can very quickly lead to ableism and other discrimination towards fellow nonhumans and alterhumans because their physical identity could very well be based in delusion, or be connected to other psychological or even physical disability means — I am rather sure I have seen some physical nonhumans connect their physical identity to their actual physical disabilities because to them it is euphoric that their body works the way it does instead of how a human body is expected to work by society.

I can understand that one may not understand why a term may be used for something that doesn't neatly fit under a definition, but it's also not up to people who do not use these terms to try and change or phase out a term that has been used(for probably decades*) and is still being used by other people due to it being confusing and inaccurate in their mind. Personal identity terms are mostly for those who use them, not for other people who don't. As I've seen said, even in queer spaces with how people talk about terms there that they don't understand, it's not for you. If an individual wants to get very specific about how they physically identify as their 'type, then that should be their decision, but they also shouldn't have to.

As in one must also keep in mind that not all physically identifying nonhumans may have a disconnect from their physical body, which then isolates them if we try to get rid of the umbrella term to only focus on those who do have the disconnect.

That all being said, these two ideas for terms you have shared could be useful for some out their who wish to have specifics like these, and I think there would be interest from those who wish to use them. But to then say we should just do away with the term 'physical therian' altogether is kind of unfair to those who do identify that way who don't want to get more specific or use another term. It should be up to them what they wish to use and what feels right to them and their experience.

--

* As seen in O. Scribner's 'Otherkin Timeline', published 2010, where the mention of physical, and even ancestral identity is listed under reasons as to why someone may identify as otherkin or therian.

"With both otherkin and therians, this identification as another species will be explained in very different ways, depending on the individual’s own interpretations of his or her own nature. Depending on the person, he or she may say he or she identify as another species in a way that is spiritual, philosophical, metaphorical, experiential, behavioral, or psychological. Most rarely, a few do claim they are non-human in a physical or ancestral way."

I don’t think the term “physical therian” encompasses the experience described by those who use the term.

I think a more accurate term would be “depersonalized therianthropy” which could be shortened to “depo therian”.

Depersonalized therianthropy: when one’s animalistic identity creates a complete disconnect from their body causing them to not recognize their observable traits as their own

This encompasses the anecdotes I have heard and read from self identified “physical therians”. Whether this experience is caused by delusion, dysphoria, or rejection of humanity, this term is applicable.

This does not include those who use the term to convey that they refer to their body with animal biological terms.

I believe this should be called “bioterms”. It could be communicated similarly to pronouns.

Hypothetical Ex:

Toby (he/him) (wolf bioterms)

This conveys that he would like his hair to be called fur, nails to be called claws, hands to be called paws, mouth to be called muzzle, etc.

The use of the word “physical” in therianthropic terms is inaccurate and confusing. I am open to hearing other proposed terms but I think using the word “physical” should be phased out for clarity sake.