I don't understand the term trans

[Silvanus]

Embrace away, but you're hugging an adder.

Well, only the ones who identify as Adders.


...I'll see myself out.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

-I didn't compare Otherkin to Nazis. I compared decreeing language that had been against one group, "Bad", and therefore bad to use against any other group. Any comments? I still think it's crazy to say "They called us monsters, so don't call them monsters!" Ok, but what if they're monsters? People think that trans people are perverts or "making a choice" or weird, and they're wrong and unfair in that. Those same things however, do actually apply very well (perverted being debatable) to Otherkin. The hurtful and wrong use of language in one application is not a strike against the language itself. Are we on the same page with this? Did you not understand what I wrote, or did you prefer not to actually respond to it directly?

You used Neo-Nazis as a stand in for Otherkin, meaning you put them in the same category, that looks like a pretty direct comparison to me. Still I'll let that slide, because apparently you didn't mean to compare the two groups.

Still one group calling another group monsters is shit flinging, that second group responding by only calling the first group monsters too is also shit flinging. Language works a lot in context. If one group calls another a name, the other group responding by doing the exact same thing isn't an improvment, it's sinking to their level. For instance if I just call Mike Huckabee a pervert because he said all trans folk are perverts, that's not making a point, that's just throwing the same insult back. On the other hand saying that the way Mike Huckabee framed his position, by saying what pervert things he'd do if he were allowed to say he felt like a woman, then calling the trans community perverts allows me to say something like this: "What he said applies to him, not the trans community, all he did was prove that he's a pervert who'd misuse rules designed to protect a marginalized minority for his own personal perversions." That's different than just saying he's a pervert in retaliation.

-So what if they don't do it themselves? Rachel Dolezal didn't try to use herself to undermine black folks, and yet predictably she did. Selfish, obsessive behavior without regards for consequences is WRONG. Otherkin, by framing "The shit they like to do" as a spiritual or medical issue, ARE drawing that comparison whether they mean to or not. Embrace away, but you're hugging an adder.

-Rachel Dozelzal knew for a fact that she was born to a white family, no matter what justification she weakly threw up, she still took a minority deal even though she's white. Nothing she did can be defended as "she didn't mean to", because she still appropriated black culture and misused a program for the underprivileged, and she did it all by lying out her ass. That goes far beyond "identifying" with black folk.

-In my experience the ones that use otherkin as a direct analogue to trans folk, bigots. The ones who latch on in obsession are teenagers who latched on to something because they feel like out casts, then they go make tumblr blogs to get validation. We all did stupid shit and had stupid obsessions when we were teenagers and some never grow out of that. I'm not embracing them, but not embracing them doesn't mean I have to turn around and vilify the entire community for a few idiots either. Dressing in fur suits and gathering with those of like minds is not selfish, obsessive behavior with no regards to others. Neither is having a fursona, or drawing furry art. That's the majority of the community right there it's people who do their thing, some for sexual reasons, others for non-sexual reasons, but who aren't trying to make it their daily lives.

-So what we have here is a loud minority of a group saying probably stupid things, that's not justification to vilify a whole community. Here are a pair of direct comparisons: This is the same idea as taking crossdressers who crossdress for sexual pleasure and using them as the example of what the entire trans community is. The loud minority of spiritual/medical issue otherkin are very much like trans folk who say you can only be trans if you have had, or plan to have sexual reassignment surgery, then spew bile at trans folk who don't want to, or can't transition. More bluntly it's like using Zoey Tur as a good example of a trans person, who is basically analogous to what an uncle tom is to the black community.

-Demonize? I'm not demonizing them.

-You did basically just classify them all as having a dangerous obsession. You also did basically set the standard as; either you call them awful things, or you're embracing them. That might not be what you meant, but it's what it looks like.

-Interests or obsession? There's a difference.

-How about hobby? Since that's what it is for the majority of their community. We don't say people who spend extraordinary amounts of time indulging in building model towns for train sets, playing video games, or making hand made costumes have an obsession. Yet that's what model train buffs, gamers, and cosplayers do.

-They stopped trying to "do their own thing" when they got political.

-Again that's the loud minority. Also a lot of the ones who get political are also the ones who get called things like "sick freaks" on a regular basis. That is the political bullshit came to them not the other way at all.

-That's a special way of framing it, that I don't agree with at all.

-I'm not sure what the take away from that is...

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

Embrace away, but you're hugging an adder.

Well, only the ones who identify as Adders.


...I'll see myself out.

I wonder how many "reptile-kin" there are? Most "otherkin" seem to be mammals, mostly foxes, dogs, wolves, tigers, and other sight/scent-oriented predators. I get that joke though, good, I just wonder if there is any room for "Furry" without the "fur".

There are actually plenty such folk, reptiles are popular in the furry community, not as much as foxes, felines, canines, horses and rabbits, but they're still popular enough. That's regardless of weather or not you count the dragon-kin types in the community too.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

-I didn't compare Otherkin to Nazis. I compared decreeing language that had been against one group, "Bad", and therefore bad to use against any other group. Any comments? I still think it's crazy to say "They called us monsters, so don't call them monsters!" Ok, but what if they're monsters? People think that trans people are perverts or "making a choice" or weird, and they're wrong and unfair in that. Those same things however, do actually apply very well (perverted being debatable) to Otherkin. The hurtful and wrong use of language in one application is not a strike against the language itself. Are we on the same page with this? Did you not understand what I wrote, or did you prefer not to actually respond to it directly?

You used Neo-Nazis as a stand in for Otherkin,]

No, I didn't. If you don't understand how a comparison works, and what the subject of a comparison is (the language, not the group) then you're hopeless. If this is your version of rhetoric, I'm already bored.

Well considering the first thing that came up, when I mentioned the rhetoric being used was overly harsh, was this:

What the fuck? So what? People call trans folks sacks of shit, but guess what, I can still call Neo Nazis sacks of shit.

That point falls flat as far as I can see, because the first thing that came up in relation to the subject were Neo-Nazis.

That's beside the fact, because I specifically said I'd take your word for it that you didn't mean to directly compare the two. It's still the first thing you used to make your point in calling one group something unfairly, doesn't mean it can be applied fairly to another group. That is a comparison because you substituted Neo-Nazis for Otherkin to make a point. Also if the rhetoric you're gonna use is snipping the very start of a post to strawman the entire post, well then I agree. I think we're done here.