I think you explained this idea pretty well @LycanTheory
. I'm not a wolf, not therian, and certainly not a mainstreamer (whatever that is). I just am. I identify with therians but not otherkin. It's not because of species but because of these differences you've explained.
When I first joined TG I said I have DID and a wolf alter who needed help. (I don't think this is true anymore since I'm more integrated now.) And then I claimed to be a wolf. I was immediately uncomfortable with the "identify as" thing and even felt a bit creeped out by it. The idea of being called out and identified seems unsafe to me. If one is truly a wild animal in a human body, I don't think one would want to broadcast this information.
Maybe more importantly, I explained my discomfort with identity because "I am alone." The definition of the word identity means there is a subject and an object, but my experience was purely subjective. There was a wolf in my psyche 20 years before this aspect ever connected to the brain functions of conscious self-awareness, language, etc. and declared, "I am a wolf." (Also, I'm dead, I'm a ghost, a shadow, etc.) My use of "identifying as" something is mainly for personal reference to label and describe things I've experienced or observed in my mind. Sometimes it's to communicate experiences/observations to others who might understand or relate.
I've seen discussions here about experiences and identity, but little discussion about symbolism. Symbolic language is very important to me, it's relevant to the development if DID and might be important in some spiritual practices too. If you understand the symbolic meaning of a dead/ghost wolf, then you understand my feelings.
(2021-02-06 21:12)DustWolf Wrote: For example, as a wolf therian I don't experience my wolf therianthropy making me aggressive or powerful or any of the ways in which humans see wolves. I experience it as the timid and shy nature that is actually characteristic of wolves! I know this because I'm one of them and I feel the way they feel. I mean obviously none of us really knows what an other person, much less an animal, is thinking, but: I understand wolves from the inside out. When scientists discover something new about wolves, it usually confirms how I always felt.
Wolves seem timid when observed by humans, but what if they're in the natural habitat? I doubt wolves are timid/shy when defending their territory or taking down prey. Also consider that "Highly Sensitive People" might be perceived as being timid/shy. In fact it's because their more sensitive nervous systems are processing more information than other people, which takes more time, and they're also more prone to getting overstimulated which they want to avoid. So it's a matter of judgement/interpretation. Maybe you're not "timid," but your "sensory/empathetic volume control" setting is more sensitive than most humans which would make you feel timid and out of place.
Quote:As an AI developer, I can tell you that in the next few years when people start tackling the idea of actually creating human-like AI: Those bots will be very emotional, they will actually appear affectionate, like how we see domestic pets. Because the capacity for attachment is a necessary step towards intelligence. And after all, machines have chemical batteries that behave kind of like we do, they are slow when cold and active when warm, electronics characteristics change depending on environmental factors -- they "feel better" when they are comfortable.
If someone was in a sense a machine therian, they would know these things. They wouldn't feel like what Hollywood inaccurately portrays machines as, which is almost universal in machine-kin otherkin.
I'm skeptical that attachment is necessary step towards intelligence because there are highly intelligent people with antisocial/psychopath traits who are "successful" by worldly standards that define success as the acquisition of wealth and power. I speculate AI could be either very emotional or not at all depending on their development, adaptation, etc.
But we are meat machines, right? I think "machine kin" are using this label to convey their particular experience of feeling non-human. I sometimes feel machine-like just with the way I have observed and described the workings of the mind in a way that's sometimes unsettling to others because I'm less concerned with ideas like "soul," lol. I don't distinguish so much between the physical and the spiritual like many people do.