@magickal-kitsune screencapping the front page of google is definitely not a reliable source. that’s not even close to research
find writings by otherkin from within the community over the last 30 yrs talking about how kin is strictly spiritual, that’s what a reliable source is. not the little info tab google gives you
That’s actually a snippet from Wikipedia, but you’re so quick to judge.
Yeah, and google totally doesn’t know what asexual means.
that’s kind of my point tho, a lot of ace people disagree with that definition/the wording of it. to get an actual practical meaning of what asexual means, you have to ask an asexual etc
also wikipedia isn’t a reliable source either, teachers in college and etc directly tell you not to use it because it can be edited by anyone and many articles are created just because “hey we need an article on this”, so they’re poorly researched
again look for sources from actual otherkin people if not you’re just blowing hot air
and like someone else said the wiki you brought up doesnt actually prove your point
Oh, please do tell me the meaning of asexual.
Also where are your sources?
i don’t really feel like getting into the intricacies of my sexuality with you so uh…
“Fictionkin are people who identify as fictional characters or species. Fictionkin can be from any sort of media material, including books, TV shows, plays, comics and movies. They may see their identity as spiritual (such as reincarnation related) or psychological.”
“One can identify as otherkin on different levels: Psychological Spiritual Historical Physical.”
It sees we have reached a cross roads here. In this respect we are both right. But as it is stated it is hard to find a label everyone can agree on.
are you missing the part where it says “inherited the soul/spirit/COMPLETE MENTALITY of the character”? it’s still leaving room for psychological fictionkin. every source i can find will leave room for psychological fictionkin, because they’ve been an existing thing for years
it’s not about “not everyone can agree with a label”, it’s that people couldn’t agree with the source of their kin, because some are spiritual and some aren’t, so the fictionkin label encompasses every source. the example you just showed me is doing exactly that?? encompassing every possible source/belief/lack of belief? because there are both spiritual and psychological kin
Listen, if you don’t like this oh well but it is not leaving room for IDs because they are IDs. Which is another part of kin. Not kin, but a part of it.
Also, how can you inherit a soul and or spirit if you don’t believe in past lives?
how is ID a part of kin when it’s an extremely recent addition and tons of people were, and still are, perfectly happy calling their psychological kin, just kin? btw i dont care if people use ID instead or how they use it but that doesn’t mean fictionkin now means something different
also like i pointed out, it also says “the complete mentality of a character”. you can inherit psychological traits from people and things in a variety of ways that aren’t spiritual, and that part of the explanation is eluding to that. every source that explains kin will have a mention like that or just outright say “psychological kin” somewhere.
you can also have both psychological kin and spiritual kin, so you can believe some kin are from previous lives, and others are purely mental
I am the person who wrote this definition and it is meant to include psychological kin.
Discussion ¬