BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Temple >

Otherkin

  
  

Page: 1(2)34567... 10

 
 
Unconditional Love
14:02 / 04.03.06
Baited, breathe, breathe deeper.
 
 
Ganesh
14:12 / 04.03.06
Badgers aside, I'm not sure I understand entirely the point you're making in your rant, Undulating Spine - or rather, I'm not sure how you're tying it to otherkin. If you're pointing out that humanity in general has made a mess of the planet and frequently shits over itself, then fine, I'd agree with that (although the emphasis on secular humanism puzzles me slightly - I'm not sure religious humanism is any better, and I suspect the worst offender is aggressively expansionist capitalism). Are you suggesting that it's this that's causing people to identify as unicorns, etc.?
 
 
Unconditional Love
18:12 / 04.03.06
I am suggesting that currently western culture makes some people unhappy enough to want to be anything but human, because the associations with humanity just arent that healthy from a certain point of view.

I can identify to some extent with the otherkin idea because i used to be a role player, but i can see where that stops and the lifestyle identification begins.

If it is a form of escapism, and in all likley hood i see it as being that, i find it to be a sad inditement of a culture that creates enough despair/disablement/disempowerment in people for them to disassociate enough with there community to form communities of otherness.

It not only manifests as otherkin but in all sorts of ways, it suggests to me that people want out, and id suggest that some of the supporting models behind current cultural philosophies have alot to do with that reason.

From repressive view points from fundamentallists to strictly rationalist view points, they have a very detrimental effect on imagination, imo, The kind of reaction that this illicits is going to be a retreat into imaginative forms as a form of rebellion. The film Brazil comes to mind as a way of expressing my point, its the perfect example of one point of escape from a life where reality seems to become so hum drum and futile.

Another form of escape could be seen in the emulation of rap stars and hood culture, its a media form that is being emulated to provide a covering for what is there, dreary old 70s english council estates with little slim shadys running around. Because this form of emulation only involves happy slapping and drugs its acceptable, no problem. Id argue its still an escape, it might be a different flavour flav of escape, but escape it is by adoption of mediated images, music and personality.

The same could be argued is true of otherkin, people escape into differing forms of mediated culture, lord of the rings, animalism etc etc.

The point i am driving at is that anything that is other than the actual sensory reality that we are faced with can seem more desirable. Any amount of social fiction and cultural adoption rather than the sensory reality of where we are and what we are and what we are doing, seems to be the norm for modern western culture.

The self image provides the basis for reality rather than imo the reality of the self.
 
 
*
18:56 / 04.03.06
one of the real problems with figuring out if any Otherkin are legit or not is factoring in the signal-to-noise ratio on...well if any of them can actually practice magic, or if they're just fantasizing.

You're assuming that all Otherkin claim they practice magic. Not everyone has to be a magician. Otherkin is not a subset of magician/mage/shaman/thaumaturge, it's an intersecting group.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
20:06 / 04.03.06
Indeed. You might have been an elf in a previous life, or be an elf in an intersecting reality, but have no ability or desire to practice magic.

I personally do not see anything wrong with someone believing they are an elf or a woodchuck or whatever as long as they are not hurting anyone else who cares?

Very good point. Possibly one answer might be "if they are hurting themselves". I know it's a bit of an extreme case, or at least a very interesting one, but I find myself coming back to Molatar here. There's a man who clearly had some real issues about his body and his sexuality, and the way he chose to resolve them - by deciding that he was a dragon/werewolf - might well have kept him from some other form of solution that might have allowed him to be a little happier (whether dragon, werewolf or other). As it is, he seems to be a very lonely, unhappy and conflicted person whose dragon identity seems to alienate him further...
 
 
Unconditional Love
11:45 / 05.03.06
Something that crossed my mind this morning was the relationship of individual psychology to the social community, it seems theres an emphasis on the individuals behaviour to change, and alot less emphasis on the social factors that contribute to the relationships that an individual creates to relate to themselves and others.

If the social conditions remain that allow an individual to maintain a certain sense of identity, then society also has a responsibility to aid that individual should they find a certain identity self harming. If those conditions remain thou it will be easier for a person to fall back into self destructive personalities.

The question then becomes for me why does society support self destructive behaviours? I dont think it is only the individual that has to change, but the structures in society that allow the conditions to exsist to create said social identities.

It becomes the interaction or transaction between the self and society that becomes all important, the amount of truthful information and communication between the individual and the community that establishes a more valid interaction.

If society appears to lie to a person or ostracise them, then that person may react with the same behaviour towards society.

The onus is not on society or the self, but the quality of the relationship between them.
 
 
*
19:37 / 05.03.06
If the social conditions remain that allow an individual to maintain a certain sense of identity, then society also has a responsibility to aid that individual should they find a certain identity self harming. If those conditions remain thou it will be easier for a person to fall back into self destructive personalities.

While I sympathize with your argument here, I also feel it diminishes the agency of the individual. These social conditions exist for many people, and only a small number of them react by assuming a kind of identity (identity can be read here as a positioning with respect to society) that could be harmful to themselves and/or others. (Certainly not all Otherkin fall into this category.) Before assuming that it's the society which needs changing, let's first explore what it is about the interaction between the social factors and the individual psychology/philosophy which makes a maladjusted Otherkin identity more likely.

It seems to be postulated here that people who tend to self-identify as Otherkin would do better in a society which honored rather than alienated people with experience of the otherworldly. I think this might be true of my friend whom I alluded to above, although ze excels in this one. Imagining Molatar placed among Siberian saman, though, makes me shiver with pity.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
20:13 / 05.03.06
Imagining Molatar placed among Siberian saman, though, makes me shiver with pity.

That's a very good point. I get rather fed up with the way that the vague and unhelpful idea of the 'shaman' gets evoked with respect to every other person who seems at odds with society. This idea that the Aerie-wannabees would do just fine in some mythical tribal society valorises ill-concieved and shoddy beliefs whilst denigrating those societies which do have a role for the 'shaman' figure. I'd love to see some of these guys buckle down to five or six decades of study, hard work, and personal sacrifice when most of them can't seem to be bothered to read anything that isn't published by TSR.

[/rant]
 
 
Unconditional Love
11:04 / 06.03.06
My intrest is in the process, but i do think far too much emphasis is placed on the individual rather than social conditions and the interrelationship between them. The individual has become an idol and an ideal in many respects, the lone human at the centre of humanism, the height of all reason and consciousness, nothing else has that reason or consciousness is the implicit assumption.

Social/group consciousness as created by humans and the ecological consciousness is just as an important factor as individual psychology, imo.

In fact ecological disaster and humanocentric approaches to nature may well have something to do with people trying to emulate animals, also a disassociation from the basic animality of humanity may also play a part. The animal nature remains but in such a technologically overloaded environment, full of natural body image phobia (especially with regards to hairyness with some) the imagination captures the instinctual drives in the form of personified character masks.

Possibly.
 
 
Quantum
12:58 / 06.03.06
..isn't that a bit like asking a badger "what's wrong with being a human?" Haus

Only if the badger has opposable thumbs, a linguistic cortex, a firm grasp of the English language and access to the internet.

I am fighting my urge to mock weredragons and catpeople, but it's not easy...
 
 
Evil Scientist
14:16 / 06.03.06
In fact ecological disaster and humanocentric approaches to nature may well have something to do with people trying to emulate animals, also a disassociation from the basic animality of humanity may also play a part. The animal nature remains but in such a technologically overloaded environment, full of natural body image phobia (especially with regards to hairyness with some) the imagination captures the instinctual drives in the form of personified character masks.

Where do vampire otherkin fit into this theory? Identification with the nihilistic consuming parts of humanity perhaps? Humans as parasites.

I can identify to some extent with the otherkin idea because i used to be a role player, but i can see where that stops and the lifestyle identification begins.

Same here. I can see where they're coming from in wanting to be something powerful and different. But as you say, most roleplayers hang up their fictionsuits at the end of the session.

I'm interested in the thought of otherkin being, in part, about denying the less perfect aspects of human nature in preference to an ideal of perfection (be it vampiric, draconic, or badgeric).
 
 
Quantum
15:01 / 06.03.06
To disclose a bit, I've run my share of LRP events, and amongst the people who take it much too seriously is always one (or more) who seems... well, maladaptive. When a community of people who write five thousand word backgrounds for their Silver Fang Ragabash look at you askance and nervously smile and shuffle away, well, you've got to start wondering if something's wrong. That and the secondary indicators (poor self-care, low functioning, abysmal social graces etc.) have given me a dim view on shifters.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
15:10 / 06.03.06
A few days ago I stumbled across the website of a young woman who believed herself to be a 'Fae'* and which detailed, among other things, her attempts to find her way back home to Faerie. Which is fine, except that said attempts to return home consisted entirely of taking barn-sized quantities of various psychoactive substances and several very serious, if ultimately unsuccessful, suicide attempts.

This does not strike me as being a terribly healthy approach to things.



*She also seemed to be the Second Coming of Jesus. Not too sure how that works, really.
 
 
electric monk
16:17 / 06.03.06
Bit off track, but I did want to ask, Zoemancer: Would it be possible for you to share some demographic data from your research? Things like age, race, socioeconomic status, degree of involvment with traditional religion, etc. I'm just wondering how global and varied this Otherkin community is.

I am fighting my urge to mock weredragons and catpeople, but it's not easy...

I feel a little bit of that myself, but then I read MC's little find, and I have to think that this is more serious than yr. average dorky Anime Kid or the Shoggoth Set. I followed some of the links from Wikipedia's Otherkin entry and soaked up some of the community's art and poetry. I just got this sense of a longing to be beautiful in some way, at any cost.

Someone (or many someones) failed these Otherkin along the way. I'm not sure how else to feel about it.
 
 
Bard: One-Man Humaton Hoedown
16:20 / 06.03.06
Quantum- Yeah, I know that feeling quite well. 4000 word mock thesis paper to describe a character's paradigm. And there are still people who are weirder than me at game. Its like a little slice of normality.

Mordant- The Faerie Jesus? I mean, if we assume that the angels sent down from God were actually just Sidhe taking a trip 'round Bethleham on their way back from...wherever...then sure...Jesus could be fae.

But yes, on the serious side, being Otherkin definitly becomes a problem when it becomes a mask for suicidal activities and is used as an explanation for depression or other mental illness. I wonder, perhaps, if some Otherkin believe they ARE "Otherkin" as a way to explain the odd feeling they are having relating to depression or something like it. So using the Other self as an explanation for their feelings, thus being able to feel more in control, normal, or understanding of what's going on.
 
 
*
16:23 / 06.03.06
On the other hand, if you all start pulling out the "Obviously you can't really be a cat/unicorn/pigeon/whatever; you haven't got a tail/horn/wings/whatever" I may have to bite you all. In a bad way. By analogy.

If you met someone who didn't have the other characteristics which you identify as maladjusted or indicative of living wholly in a fantasy world, but who nonetheless confided that they felt strongly that they were more a badger than a human, mentally or spiritually speaking, what would you think of their claim? Let's say they had a good career and a healthy relationship with a non-otherkin type, were solid critical thinkers, perhaps even had a good grasp of actual magical theory, including thinking much of what passes for such is actually bunk.

I'm trying to get at what people think of the actual substance of the central otherkin claim— that of having spiritual/mental/other nonmaterial properties of nonhuman beings— aside from the preconceived notions we have about otherkin based on the most vocal and visible of them.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
17:43 / 06.03.06
(To be totally fair, I did come across that website whilst Googling for stuff on taking Toloache to help talk to invisible people so, y'know, not pointing any fingers or anything. It was the suicide angle that struck me as messed up, not just the Fae thing.)
 
 
Ria
23:29 / 06.03.06
MC, if this gal has so many problems I see the other 'kin as about as close to a safety net as she may have. 'cause I can't imagine any of them trying to encourage her to kill herself, rather to not do so and on each other's terms.

off-line I happen to know a couple of Otherkin (one former?) who happen to have healthy social lives and don't seem overly tied up or crippled by their belief system. so I wouldn't classify everyone with this identity as a car wreck of a person.

as for Molatar, I really think that someone created a joke suit. too many "self-revealing comments" if you know what I mean.
 
 
matthew.
03:10 / 07.03.06
Maybe that has been touched on in this thread in a different way, but... has any Otherkin self-identified as a wholly original creature that is not deriative of a movie they saw as a kid? Pardon the cynical tone. I'm trying to understand this, but I'm having problems.

Also, getting back to the "what's wrong with being human," this quote comes from here, the FAQ:
'-: Mundane :-
The term mundane is normally used to distinguish between humans and vampiress. The actual meaning of the word is "Ordinary; boring", however it is a bit of a put down. The term is basically calling humans boring and ordinary.'

Come on. That's pretty much why I have a problem with this. The human mind is capable of absolutely anything with the power of imagination. I believe that has already been said or something like it. To take an ontological/Anselm approach to this: a human is real and a vampire is notoriously difficult to prove that it exists. A human can "create" a vampire by imagination. This human must be "better" because it can "create". The human brain's ability to imagine things makes it "better" than the product of that imagination because of its ability.
Dubious logic aside, that's a muddled reason why I identify as human (aside from commonly held belief among the medical and scientific experts that we are human) and am skeptical of people who identify as otherkin.

I am loathe to assume these otherkin are middle-class, white and youngish. I think it would lazy of myself to assume such a thing.

[As a humourous aside, check this out:
"Were witches burnt at the stake in the 1500 - 1800's?
-Yes. Many were also hanged"
Wow. Hir research is impeccable.]
 
 
Quantum
09:09 / 07.03.06
On the other hand, if you all start pulling out the "Obviously you can't really be a cat/unicorn/pigeon/whatever; you haven't got a tail/horn/wings/whatever" I may have to bite you all. In a bad way. By analogy. id entity

It's the shifters who believe they *do* have tails horns and wings that I'm scornful of.

If you met someone who didn't have the other characteristics which you identify as maladjusted or indicative of living wholly in a fantasy world, but who nonetheless confided that they felt strongly that they were more a badger than a human, mentally or spiritually speaking, what would you think of their claim?

I'd be fascinated and ask them all about it- in fact I started this thread hoping for someone like that to pop up.

I'm trying to get at what people think of the actual substance of the central otherkin claim— that of having spiritual/mental/other nonmaterial properties of nonhuman beings— aside from the preconceived notions we have about otherkin based on the most vocal and visible of them.

What I think of the central claim is that it's possible, certainly in some cases, and there's loads of examples in the occult of animal spirits and changelings (in China especially transformed animals are a common legend/myth/belief). I certainly don't wish to tar all of a group with Molatar's brush, but there's a higher than usual proportion of dysfunction in the otherkin population IMHO and that's a worry. Certainly if I was a Badger (which BTW I would love, I have a soft spot for Meles Meles and have had some Badger experiences) I'd work hard to distinguish myself from Moly. Perhaps I'd work to preserve Badger habitats, fight the cull, learn everything about them, get a job as a wildlife vet, go night spotting and make friends with a sett, etc etc.
I wouldn't go and roleplay a badger and write shit poetry about how romantic badgers are. The way the whole thing is approached by the otherkin I've had contact with is just immature, and less than convincing.

'You can turn into a badger you say? Ah, but not while anyone is looking, I see. And you can turn invisible? And fly? And you're a reincarnation of Napoleon? And immortal? Oooooookaaaayy....' *sidling away*
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
18:52 / 07.03.06
I think we probably need some extra terminology here. I don't feel comfortable lumping Faerie Jesus woman (serious mental health needs), Aerie-from-BG-II clones (wishful thinking, overactive but not very original imagination) and id_entity's mate under the same umbrella term. I quite like the term 'species dysphoria' but I don't know how people with conditions involving various forms of 'dysphoria' would feel about it.
 
 
Ganesh
18:59 / 07.03.06
Also, those concerned aren't actually aspiring to be a member of another species, but a mythical, fantastic or otherwise non-existent beast...
 
 
Dead Megatron
19:30 / 07.03.06
Speaking from a psychological - as opposed to magickal - point of view, is there really any difference? After all, the chance of them succeding in becaming "a member of another species", and "a mythical, fantastic or otherwise non-existent beast" is pretty much the same: (close to) nill.

Ganesh, as a professional, tell me: is there a difference?
 
 
Ganesh
19:43 / 07.03.06
Ganesh, as a professional, tell me: is there a difference?

I would say it does make a difference, on the grounds that individuals with other specific types of 'dysphoria' are, to an extent, able to say, "I'm not X, I'm Y" because a) they've always felt unhappy being X but also b) they've been in close proximity to Y and are able to identify strongly. For example, in the case of gender dysphoria, one can say, "I'm not a man, I'm a woman", having likely had experience of men and women. Presumably in 'species dysphoria', one could say, "I'm not a man, I'm a dog" with, arguably, some degree of validity, because one had some experience of canine behaviour and therefore intuited psychology. I'd still quibble with the self-diagnosis, but it's certainly more valid than saying, "I'm not a man, I'm a dragon", because the non-existence of dragons means one cannot evidence one's assertion with reference to experience of dragons.
 
 
Ganesh
19:54 / 07.03.06
In other words, the impossibility of 'treatment' is not what invalidates the diagnosis, for me. What invalidates the diagnosis is the impossibility of saying, "I'm Y" when one has never even encountered Y, and never will.
 
 
*
23:07 / 07.03.06
Perhaps one could have encountered dragons astrally? Although how one would distinguish an encounter with an astral dragon and one with a dragon which is being very very skillfully roleplayed by an astral LARPer is a bit unclear to me.

I think many Otherkin come to identify as Otherkin when they spend time associating with Otherkin. So in a sense, some of them may be identifying as a person who identifies as a dragon/faerie/displacer beast/zenith moon warper.

My mate, by the way, last I talked to hir about the topic, would have been equally uncomfortable with being grouped as Otherkin. Ze preferred "therianthrope"— mostly because ze thought the Otherkin were all around the twist.

The dysphorias I'm thinking of tend in two directions, body dysphoria and social/role dysphoria. I think a certain amount of body dysphoria is at play in some people's extra-species identification— My friend fell trying to use four legs instead of two, and some Otherkin "reflexively" avoid thwacking things with wings or a tail they sense they have but which isn't physically apparent to anyone else. Obviously there are lots of different possible reasons for this. Speaking from a partly psychological and partly magical perspective (I don't know, Ganesh; if I were you I'd get pretty irritated with this, so I apologize in advance) it could be that they playacted as children so vividly that they warped their subtle bodies into an incompatible shape.

But I'm not sure how anyone could possibly have role dysphoria regarding wanting to be treated like a dragon. Like a dog, yes— there's a pretty clear idea of a dog's place in human society. Perhaps people identify with notions of guarding, running around on all fours, playing, being obedient, and being taken care of in a way which seems inconsistent with a human role. (Now it sounds like I'm talking about a certain subset of fetish culture as well.) But a dragon doesn't have any role in human society. In fantasy human societies, its role might be to cause terror or to be worshipped, and it seems like a particularly pathological person who would identify with that role to the exclusion of a human role in real human society.
 
 
Ganesh
23:14 / 07.03.06
Perhaps one could have encountered dragons astrally?

I was asked my opinion as a profession and, professionally, I have serious difficulties believing in astral dragons. I certainly don't believe they've been encountered in a way remotely comparable with the identification object in anything I'd recognise as a dysphoria in the clinical sense.

Likewise the physical stuff. In the absence of flesh-and-blood encounters with yer actual object of identification, I don't really think clumsiness imaginatively reconfigured as not-enough-legs (or whatever) really cuts it. Not in terms of clinical validity, anyway. Feeling uncomfortable in one's skin is, as previously suggested, profoundly human - as is creative imagining.

Yeah, I guess I'm finding the whole concept irritating, when posited as 'dysphoria'.
 
 
Woodsurfer
00:24 / 08.03.06
Omigoddess, I must truly lead a sheltered life. But somehow, I'm not surprised by this new twist in reality(tm). Some observations:


"What I find more worrisome is that the Otherkin community has many of the unattractive traits of a cult. They are self-supporting, and often do not interrogate popular belief systems that percolate among the groups. They crave acceptance. If anyone questions their opinions they usually react in a defensive and angry fashion. I've seen ridiculous examples of this. I know of a great sting operation where a person pretended to be an Otherkin and made a lot of outlandish suggestions, and got full support from the Otherkin he met."

This connects wonderfully with something I heard on National Public Radio (US) today. In that instance, however, they were talking about pockets of "Social Conservatives" who cling fiercely to the utterances from the White House no matter how bizarre.

And . . . We are starting to manifest more and more characteristics of the Age of Aquarius (no, I'm not talking about "mystic crystal revelations and the mind's true liberation", thank you). As it has been explained to me by someone I trust in these matters, we will be seeing more and more fragmentation in society; more groups pulling away from the "norm" and doing their own thing until the "norm" no longer exists. In addition, the boundary between objective reality and the planes of existence near ours (i.e., various levels of the astral plane) will begin to blur. Much of what we regard as "consensual reality" is already quite arbitrary, depending on what cultural waters we swim in.

So, I look forward to meeting my first Otherkin cousins! I bet it'll be at the big Pagan Spirit Gathering we're attending in June.

-- Woody
 
 
*
00:51 / 08.03.06
I appreciate and respect your professional opinion, Ganesh, as you know. I'd be happy to leave out the word "dysphoria" in the future, if you think it's an inaccurate description. My post was in the nature of exploration— I wasn't, as I hope is clear, positing a stance to which I'm attached.
 
 
*
00:57 / 08.03.06
I think a certain amount of body dysphoria is at play in some people's extra-species identification

Although to be fair I did say this, and yeah, that's my opinion. But people experience body dysphoria for all kinds of different reasons, and I don't think it's unreasonable to postulate that sometimes, given other factors, that body dysphoria might be explained to oneself as "really being a X in a human body." Could we suggest that body dysphoria, in addition to, perhaps, depression, isolation, and a rich imaginal world, would be something to look for if we were clinicians trying to help a particular Otherkin-type who had problems with it (like the suicidal faerie jesus)?
 
 
Ganesh
06:51 / 08.03.06
Not meaning to get at you particularly, Entity. I always get a little bit irritated by (what I perceive to be) the appropriation of clinical labels to describe looser, vaguer, less 'severe' sensations. I feel the same when someone says claims to be 'manic-depressive' because yesterday they were happy but now they've opened their credit card bill, they're 'depressed', etc. Or seriously attempts to frame something they like a lot in terms of 'addiction'. The pathologisation of normal variants of human behaviour is something of a bugbear of mine.

One of my problems with the idea of 'body dysphoria' is that I can't see how, phenomenologically, it would differ from simply being unhappy with one's body, 'not feeling right' because I'm too skinny-with-a-gut, etc. I could frame this as me being a mesomorph trapped in a pot-bellied ectomorph's body, but how would this be different from me simply being dissatisfied in my own skin, as so many humans are? What about if I said I were an HG Wells martian trapped in a human body? A triffid?

It's old wine in new bottles, a new way of describing an old, old sensation of 'not fitting' - and I'm suspicious of the context in which it's occurring ie. groups of people with no flesh-and-blood/non-astral identification object actively encouraging each other to describe their 'not fitting' in terms of bad fantasy fiction. It may make sense to those individuals in that context, but I'm unconvinced that 'not fitting' necessarily amounts to 'body dysmorphia' any more than my own bodily insecurities amount to 'body dysphoria'. As such, I'm resistant to using illness descriptors. There may be overlaps with established psychiatric illness (as with the "suicidal faerie") however.
 
 
Quantum
09:30 / 08.03.06
Feeling uncomfortable in one's skin is, as previously suggested, profoundly human - as is creative imagining.

Well put Ms Ganesha. I am extremely reluctant to use phrases like Dysphoria or anything that equates Otherkin with trans or gender morphing people, because it's not the same. Otherwise, you would be able to get NHS Badger reassignment surgery (after the proper consultations and cooling off period etc) or testicular implants to match your body image with Teh Draconian Form and silicon wings.

Like id-entity's friend I think they're round the twist. I am fully prepared to embrace and accept any psychological issues Otherkin may have and they get my sympathy, but as Gypsy posted waay upthread- where's the magic? More Mad- than -jishun I think.
 
 
Gypsy Lantern
09:43 / 08.03.06
I'm reminded of something Illmatic was on about at some point recently - concerning Reich's ideas and how people often project their physical tensions and 'body armouring' as external beings and spirits. When all that is actually going on is internal process. You can't deal with your chronic tensions, so you project them outwards. I can see how "Otherkin" could be seen as a classic example of this process. Chronic mental/physical/emotional armouring, in the Reichian sense, being expressed through elaborate fantasies of being a dragon or a vampire.

Now you can extend that to a lot of what I might personally consider "good magic". Dealings with Spirits and a magical narrative can provide a platform for engaging with personal issues, complexes or problematic behaviours that would otherwise be difficult to even look at, let alone try and resolve.

In my own practice, I've found resolution to various internal problems through exploring the Mysteries under which that particular complex resides. I tend not to view these processes in purely internal or psychological terms. It's not that a Spirit or Deity is "really" a part of my unconscious or subconscious brain communicating with me. But more that I am dealing directly and literally with the Mysteries of "War" or "Love" or "Sorrow" or "Passion", and my dealings and interaction with those principles naturally have a knock-on effect on how these things intersect with my life.

The re-writing of personal myths happens when you are looking in the other direction. Developing a close relationship with a God of War tends to effect how you deal with conflict in your life. A relationship with a Goddess of Love will impact on your ability to enjoy pleasure and sensuality. Speaking to Death Gods will increase your awareness of the fragility of life and the importance of living every moment. There is a complexity to the interplay between your dealings with objectively considered external deities and how those processes impact on your internal issues, behaviour, armouring, and so forth.

You can relate this sort of thing to the way otherkin might be framing their body discomfort and emotional armouring in terms of being a dragon or a unicorn. However, I think the problem I have with this stuff is that it doesn't seem to be a living process of engagement with the mysteries of being alive, so much as it is a static identification with physical armouring and body discomfort. It seems to reinforce problems, rather than provide a toolkit for looking at them and sorting them out. When you identify as Otherkin it gives you a comfort zone and safe space in which its OK to be vastly unhappy with your body and its processes - which to my mind looks like a significant obstacle to even so much as looking at those personal issues ever again, let alone coming to terms with them. I can't see how that could be a positive thing.
 
 
*
17:26 / 08.03.06
I've had people challenge me on my— er, disdain is slightly too strong a word— skepticism of otherkin on the grounds that it's the same as my trans issues. I've also had people challenge my trans issues on the grounds that it's the same as otherkin (although they didn't usually use that word). All I was ever able to come up with was a knee-jerk "no it's not!" which was, to my mind, insufficient. Since my objection was insufficient, that comparison had been nagging at the back of my mind, waiting to be more thoroughly examined, and I'm glad that folks here were better able to do that than I.
 
 
Ganesh
10:04 / 11.03.06
I am extremely reluctant to use phrases like Dysphoria or anything that equates Otherkin with trans or gender morphing people, because it's not the same. Otherwise, you would be able to get NHS Badger reassignment surgery (after the proper consultations and cooling off period etc) or testicular implants to match your body image with Teh Draconian Form and silicon wings.

Well... I'm slightly loathe to use this particular argument because, logically, it feels a little like saying, "we don't offer treatment for X therefore X cannot validly exist as a disorder". If medical technology were sufficiently advanced to offer wing grafts or whatever, would it then be reasonable to suppose that 'otherkin dysphoria (dragon)' has validity as a diagnostic entity?

I say no because, for me, a dysphoric disorder (as opposed to the more generalised use of 'dysphoria' simply to denote unhappiness) involves a degree of identification with someone as well as unhappiness with one's own physical self - moving to as well as moving from - and, as I've said, I don't consider it reasonable or valid to identify with something that doesn't exist. Not to the degree that the NHS ought to offer surgery, anyway. I'd feel the same way in the hypothetical case of a gender dysphoric female who identified as male but had never met a male outside imaginative fiction.

Perhaps it'd be worth starting a thread somewhere on dysphoria and body modification? Once, years ago, I tried to initiate this sort of discussion, taking in gender surgery, apotemnophilia and those individuals who get surgery to transform their bodies into tigers or lizards or whatever. Since then, I've become aware of other manifestations of 'dysphoria ---> surgery', like the neutrois and the silicon addicts (women and men who have huge amounts of silicone injected into breasts, testicles, penises, etc.). I'm sure there are others. Head Shop thread, maybe?
 
  

Page: 1(2)34567... 10

 
  
Add Your Reply