Spike Rapner/Sa-Sobek Manangya ([info]spike_rapner) wrote,
@ 2006-07-01 00:34:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend  Next Entry
Current mood: tired
Current music:Camel - Supertwister

It's past midnight and I'm trying to get my sleep schedule back on track after going to sleep past 2:00 for the past couple of nights and waking up past noon (I'm a morning person, so that kind of pattern makes me really disoriented). But I'm still suffering from the aftertaste of a bad pinot noir that tasted like water from overcooked artichokes (for those who don't know already, I am indeed an oenophile; look up that word if you don't know what it means).

But it comes to my attention that a lot of furs and a good chunk of the fandom is just too damn shallow for my liking. Either it's "I'm a fur. I look like an animal...and that's about it" or "I'm a fur. I look like an animal and I behave in a manner stereotypical to that animal" and I can't really decide which I dislike more. I dunno, is there not a subset of furs who want to "go deeper" into the identity of their furry selves, try to connect to their animal selves more? I mean, that's why I'm a naturist (note, I didn't say naturalist, although I am indeed a naturalist also) outdoors type. And I know what you might say to yourself: being a naturist outdoors type doesn't necessarily make me much more animalistic than it does make me a naturist outdoors human, but I do plan to continue delving even deeper as time goes on. Still though, are there no furs who see past the superficial "I look like an animal" part?

Yes, there are the otherkins. But I've found that otherkins have superficialities and pretensions all their own, from the I-hate-humans to the pseudodeep to the pagans. No, don't get in a tiff about the last one; I have nothing against actual pagans whatsoever. I just have a thing against how a good chunk of those who call themselves pagans are just people using the term as a catchall for anybody who wants to be alternative.

I've long since started calling myself on the fringe of both groups. I call myself a fringe fur because I simply happen to like anthro art and I call myself a fringe otherkin because I simply happen to have a close connection with reptiles. I couldn't stay within any group because of the flaws in each group that I simply couldn't ignore any longer. I've long since stopped trying to ask anything from either groups, but I simply can't find my place anywhere (yeah, I know, join the club--shutup).

Still though, are there really no furs out there who try to live the animal life? And by animal life, I don't mean the stupid superficial things like eating meat raw or walking digitigrade (I indeed know people who use these traits as proof of their animal-ness). I mean actual animalistic traits, whatever they may be.




(2 comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]eldrikke
2006-07-01 04:52 pm UTC (link)
"hi my naeme is [insert real long "dragon name" here] and i hvae jus recently awkened, can ne1 plz give me advice on how to deal wit this thxall"

I remember reading this sorta stuff all of the time on Tysha's dragon forums (which was for otherkin dragons and other otherkin-y people, but I'm very sure you know this ^_^). Personally nowadays I think all the otherkin crap is crap, at least a good 80% of it, and I just, well, don't deal with that anymore. Sorry if I sound blunt, but I guess I'm also sorta out of the "furry" and "otherkin" groups, too. Sorta, I think.

My main belief between the furry/otherkin thing is that these creatures and such are symbolic. What this means is that we can experience "t3h furreh" or "otherkin stuff" symbolically either on a normal level or a spiritual level. I think this approach is like psychodrama, which ask questions like, "So what does this symbol remind you of?" and "When in your life does this symbol come up?" And, of course, there's metaspaces, archetypes, and all that stuff when you examine such symbols, but I'll just STFU and not say anymore of the obvious. ^_^

I think the symbolic approach is excellent because it doesn't say who is right or wrong in their beliefs, but rather dispassionately examines the experience of that belief, and the effects that experience can have. I think experiences and enjoying them is what it's all about.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]spike_rapner
2006-07-01 06:35 pm UTC (link)
After reading my post all over again, I think I have to make the conclusion that I was drunk off the bad pinot. Nevertheless, I do agree with you, but I guess what I was trying to go for is the fact that some kinds of attitudes go hand in hand like how furries and otherkin are indeed somewhat linked together, as much as either would hate to admit it. But it surprises me that furries/otherkin don't really seem to be linked to animalistic/primitivists as I am, well as I am to an extent anyway (don't say anything about how I'm a primitivist who uses a computer; I know). I just wanted to know whether there are any other furries/otherkins who are linked to animalistic/primitivists or if it's all just a subset of sci-fi geeks and my overarching view is that there's definately more of the latter.

BTW, nice to know you're out of the furry stuff and are just in it for the yiff. ^_^

(Reply to this) (Parent)


(2 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…