(2017-02-14 7:43)Neema Wrote: (2017-02-14 2:17)Alliana Wrote: But yeah, that's the definition I was given on Werelist, which was Otherkin = culture/sentience, Therianthropy = beastly in nature.
Pardon the intrusion, but I just checked Werelist and found this post which states the terms and definitions of the therian community.
"Therianthrope: A person who is, feels, or believes he/she is in part or whole (non-physically) one or more non-human animals on an integral, personal level."
I'm not sure where you were looking on the site, but yeah. It's also worth mentioning that this ^^^ is the generally accepted definition by the community as a whole, across just about every therianthropy forum and group on sites. The only thing it leaves out is that therianthropy is limited to earthly animals (animals that exist or have at some point on this earth).
Not that I will stop you from calling yourself what you prefer, but I just thought I should let you know 
The term theriomythic was used way back when, and some still use it, so I see no reason not to if that's what you like.
And if it interests you at all, here's a link to an older member of the community discussing the evolution of our definitions and how "therianthropy" came to mean what it does.
I wish I had the thread but it was sometime back on the site and yeah, I think I'll stick to theriomythic since that's what I am. I don't believe myself to be otherkin and I think they threw out the whole term of limiting it to just earthly animals, since Otherkin can also be Earthly animals (again, from my experience on Werelist).
Yeah, I know on how unsubstantiated claim that it is, I wish I could bring up the thread but I honestly forgot where it was or else I would. I am pretty old for a member in the therian community, having been from one forum (Awereness forums, Werelist) to this forum so I am not exactly new, but I definitely appreciate the link though, I'll check it out when I am done with this post.
Edit: I do have to say that was an interesting read and it seems like the guy supports my claim about Therianthropy for those who are on the feral side (like me):
Quote: Most people interpreting it just saying animal to mean Earth animals obviously but with a few people who identified as mythical beasts who felt feral enough to use it to also (more or less) be accepted as well at least by some portion of the community. However, I’m sure that many therians long before the late 2000s intended to only include animals known to be native to Earth when they thought of the concept and meaning of therianthropy, but the community as a general whole didn’t start cracking on the occasional inclusion (self-included or otherwise) of more mythical beasts until the late 2000s with that addition to the definition more and more.
So, it seems that mythical beings can ALSO be considered therians or at the very least theriomythic. But yeah, that's why I called myself a therian, mainly because I feel like I am on the feral side of things. Very interesting read though! *bookmarks it* Thank you!
Did I get it wrong? I probably read it wrong but that's what it came off as, was feral mythics can be considered therian.
Ishvala Wrote:I wanted to point this out in my reply but I thought it would be considered harassment if I went further in explaining my original point. Good to know you've got my back. 
Hmm? It wouldn't be harassment, I probably came off a little on the sore side and everything in which I apologize. But yeah, I'll just use theriomythic since that seems to fit me best.
![[-]](images/collapse.gif)
