Areloch said:
Hm, an interesting point. Though relying on brain patterns to decide the, I don't know, 'validity' of acquiescing to someone's request of using non-standard pronouns seems weak to me. It also is something that's impossible to verify, for whatever that's worth.
After all, maybe that person does share lots of behavioral traits that cats do. Does it become more valid at that point? I have no idea. That's part of my problem with this sort of topic. It rapidly turns into one gigantic gray area with no way to define boundaries.
Well, to be honest, I don't think trying to use biology as the sole deciding factor is much better. Biology screws up all the time. Personally, I tend to draw the line at otherkin, but that's mostly because I find it hard to believe that someone can be a dragon stuck in a human's body. As has been previously mentioned, if someone truly felt they
were a cat or dog or bear or wolf or fox or dragon, they would probably take larger steps to actually act like it, if that makes sense (also I don't think it's a coincidence that most people tend to say they're animals that are typically deemed "cool" or "majestic", etc.). I'm not going to be disrespectful right to their face, but unless it's definitively proven to actually be a thing, I'm going to remain skeptical. If it is proven to be a thing, then sure, I'll accept whatever they want.
Really, at the end of the day, I elect for trying to be respectful of a person's wishes regardless of my personal opinions. To make another imperfect comparison, if I were to tell somebody my name and they responded with, "I'm going to call you Peter," I'd be pretty affronted. They're explicitly making the decision to deny giving me a basic amount of human decency.