Using your asexuality example there, I think the idea you're proposing in the OP is the same as if you gave each of those different experiences of asexuality their own name. Ultimately, what is shared by all those people is the lack of sexual attraction, and the reason we define at that level is because that's what's most important at the broader level for categorization (as people within that category will self-select into their own groups IF desired).

"I don't think that grouping oneself under a term and acknowledging that you have a unique perspective are mutually exclusive ideas." I agree, however, taking the proposed idea to the logical extreme as an example, while everyone grows up differently, and you might describe yourself as having had an easy childhood or a traumatic one, a cushy one or a rough one, there's no need to create a term for any one of those experiences. Like, for example, if you said a "blorut" (random word I made up just now) is "someone who experiences a relatively easy childhood overall and stable family situation, but who experienced one notable moment of trauma that causes them harm to this day that they're still working through." That's functionally what a microlabel is, and while it can have personal value to someone (and perhaps their immediate circle of people), it has no value outside of that context.

Coming up with a term to avoid having to re-explain your feelings every time a topic comes up only delays the inevitable, because you will still have to explain it. Or, just copy/paste something you wrote up ahead of time haha. You will never be able to convey the full human (and nonhuman haha) experience through labels alone, and I think it's a good thing that we still have to talk about and explain our experiences and feelings, while having labels that can shortcut some of the heavy lifting (and make it easier to find others like us). Plus, in the process of explaining ourselves, we open up the possibility for questions and greater understanding, and a more intimate connection with another individual (makes us more "real" in someone else's head), whereas with labels, you immediately run up against the possibility that someone already has a negative idea in their head of what that label means (mental illnesses run up against this often). If they haven't heard of the term, then we return back to "then you have to explain it anyway."

I don't think you're anti-explanation/discussion by any means, trust me, and that's not the impression I am under from your proposal. I just have strong feelings about microlabeling and how I feel it affects communication. People in general, younger people in specific, like feeling like they're a part of something, and taking on labels is a very accessible way to do that, so it doesn't surprise me to see microlabels used predominantly by younger people. But they are a mile wide and an inch deep, and I think to see this proposed idea in practice means going from seeing people talk about their experiences, to seeing them talk about them while also giving them a label; there's just no need to involve the label.

"Creating and using terms to define different reasons for therianthropy sends the message that "there is no one right cause for being a therian, but here is a subgroup who have similar reasoning to you"." For me, learning that "psychological therians" existed (you get me haha) when I was 17 was enough for my brain to sort out the rest of why I felt I was a therian. While I know there are others who have a similar explanation to mine, I don't think them having a more specific label would have helped me. Rather, I think I would have felt frustrated trying to conform my feelings to the label, wrestling with where to "lie" to myself or others where it didn't fit, because of the awkwardness of partially straddling a label. For a similar situation, I can compare it to when I was calling myself a gay man, despite my partial, but very personally insignificant, attraction to women. Eventually you just have to accept that you will never 100% fit every qualification of a human-made category and say "fuck it, we ball" and just use what works best haha.

@Thorn

I am aware that it is impossible for everyone to have the same experience, but I don't think that means classifying our specific experiences is bad. Take asexuality, for instance. This term describes the experience of feeling little or no sexual attraction. Some people say that they are ace because they consider anything sexual to be a source of disgust. Some say they're ace because their desires are not based around the person they're with, but rather the actions themselves. Some people say they're asexual because they only experience sexual attraction once in a blue moon. But all of these people can say asexual to communicate their shared experience of "little or no sexual attraction" while also having their own unique experience. I don't think that grouping oneself under a term and acknowledging that you have a unique perspective are mutually exclusive ideas.

As for the concept of a lack of a need for a theory: consider the idea that maybe you in particular do not feel a need to explain why you are a therian. That is completely valid, but that doesn't mean that being able to concisely describe why one believes they are a therian is useless to everyone. Sure, you don't need a theory for why you are a therian, but others may feel that a term that communicates, say, "I am a therian because I imprinted on animals at a young age, which led to me having nonvoluntary inhuman experiences" is useful when they want to easily express that experience without having to repeat the above definition every single time they want to express that.

Apologies if this paragraph sounds overly emotionally charged. When I hear the phrase "I understand its fun to create them to get a sense of recognition", I feel like I am being talked down to. I did not bring up fun or a desire to be recognized for a contribution. I am not proposing this idea because I think it's cool, but because I think it could be useful. Maybe this wasn't your intention, but the fact that it seems like it was assumed that I was bringing up this conversation because " I want to make new terms for the hell of it" is condescending to me. I understand that as a pup user, my age may affect my biases, but that doesn't automatically mean that what I say is based in a desire to gain social validation, and it makes me feel like I'm viewed as "lesser than" an adult member solely based on my age.

The thing is that there's no use. As a community where an identity and experience is shared, we come together to talk about our differences and similarities.

The terms suntherian and contherian are generally already seen as a bit outdated, because we saw the negative effects it had: it caused unnecessary division, and a lot of gatekeeping about what which term meant what. In truth, therianthropy is a spectrum of different factors, including levels of integration. The people who coined the terms suntherian and contherian simply slapped a label on their specific point on the spectrum, but it's nearly impossible for other therians to have that exact same placement as well.

There are some different common theories as to why one identifies as a therian, but slapping labels on them can cause the same confusions, separations, and/or giving new members in the community the feeling that these are the only options to choose from, or that you need to have a theory in the first place.

Because that's also the thing: Therians don't need a theory, they are just as valid if they just let the experience be. And where someone believes their therianthropy comes from doesn't really tell anything about a person in the end. Sometimes people make a distinction between spiritual and psychological therians, sure, but in the end we all experience one same thing and that's therianthropy. I'd much rather hear about people's personal theories and how they word it than to be met with a label that generalizes a vast variety of theories.

I, too, was once a fan of labels back when I first joined the community. I understand it's fun to create them to get a sense of recognition. But time has shown that for the greater community it does more harm than good. I'm all for people hoarding microlabels to find a sense of identity, for example, but labels only serve a community-level purpose when it actually means something or makes communication clearer. I don't personally believe that generalizing personal theories with labels achieves that.

So, I've been thinking on what causes therianthropy, and how to come up with an explanation of it that encapsulates the different root causes. And then I realized that is a near impossible task. And I was thinking, and then I realized that we have terms for how we experience therianthropy (Contherian, Suntherian, etc.) but not for where our therianthropy comes from. So, I have a proposal:

We should coin more specific terms that define the reasons why people believe they are therians. I am aware that we have terms that vaguely describe this (Psychological Therian and Spiritual Therian), but those two terms are very vague. Instead of only using these terms, why don't we use these existing terms as umbrella terms and create new ones that describe different root causes? That way, we have more specific terms to use when we want to specify "people who experience therianthropy as a result of ____".

One of the issues I can see with this is that it could cause division in the community. Therians may use this as a way to say "you need to fit into one of these camps or you aren't a real therian". It's also probable that people could start isolating themselves to only therians who have the exact same experiences that they do, thus creating a bunch of echo chambers. It may also give rise to the " faunalune" issue, which is basically making terms that are so hyper specific that nobody knows what they mean, therefore making them useless.

But I think terms to describe root causes could be useful, too. It would make discussion of the causes of therianthropy easier when you can pinpoint exactly what cause you're talking about. It would also resolve the question of "what causes therianthropy?" There's no one right answer, so instead of trying to generalize the entire community into one description, why don't we just embrace that among ourselves, our reasons differ? Creating and using terms to define different reasons for therianthropy sends the message that "there is no one right cause for being a therian, but here is a subgroup who have similar reasoning to you".

And finally, to wrap this up: this does not mean "anyone can be a therian". For the purposes of this discussion, I am going to define what I mean when I say "therian":

An individual that identifies as a non-human animal and does so because of nonvoluntary experiences.

So, what do we think? Is this a good idea? Can this be realistically executed? Are there any consequences that I didn't think of, positive or negative?

Me from Chinese therian community:

(2026-03-20 0:08)Baumarius Wrote:  A lot of young people in China, for example, think that "therian" is a fandom they can join. Younger folks globally should know that becoming more aware of the happenings in their consciousness is the point - not joining a fandom or getting likes on TikTok.

(2026-03-20 8:26)Baumarius Wrote:  In countries like China, it's becoming a fandom.

Not exactly. In the early time when Chinese just started to get in touch with therianthropy in a large scale (in the early 2025), it is true that therianthropy is seen as cool quadrobics and masks, and seem like a fandom. However, as the community develops, most members now hold the correct definition, and gradually form a consensus.

(2026-03-20 19:28)Baumarius Wrote:  You can't translate therianthropy directly into Chinese - it means "orcification." Therian means "orcs." The closest version of it means "animalhuman," which is hilarious to them. As I continue to work on my translations, "therianthropy" feels more and more like what "pineapple" did to "ananas."

At first, the translation of therianthropy is indeed "lf animal half person"; however, we now have a more precise translation, and is being widely used. More and more members are using 兽自识 as therianthropy, 有兽识者 as therian. Actually, this translation works has been done in the last year's November.

(2026-03-21 9:18)KeweyTanuki Wrote:  BTW I've seen a proposed Chinese word for "therianthropy" which glosses back to English as "beast self-awareness", therian is "have beast-self person". I believe that's coming from Chinese speakers themselves too.

The words themselves.

Exactly like this.

(2026-03-21 1:23)Baumarius Wrote:  

(2026-03-20 20:44)Nachtfox Wrote:  @Baumarius A bit off topic, but I'm actually curious as to how therians in China view themselves/the community, and how they're defining it :0

1. They keep "therian" untranslated, avoiding using Chinese characters for it, and often use "poorly translated" (in their own words) definitions from sites like TG.
2. Many of them think it's a roleplay/quadrobics-based fandom, like furries but feral. There are actual therians there, but from what they have described to me, it is disproportionately skewed toward the former.

1.As I said, we already translated.
2.These misunderstanding are consistently and gradually being corrected. From my point, more members are using "actually" definition.

兽自识（therianthropy）is already a word refers to inner non-human experience, so as therianthropy itself, while 有兽识者（therian）is an identity. I can't tell the subtle differences between English words, so I don't have enough argument to say if I support this new word. However, from the Chinese characters perspective, I thinks a new word is not necessary, and will confuse members in return.

Also what I want to point out is, Chinese therian community have the ability to development by itself, and our communities might be much more similar than you thought. I understand you want to promote global therian community development, but no matter if you realized you are actually implying this, but we are not dependent on help to being "correct". I'm not criticizing, and I don't want to argue; it's just a reminder.

Firefly here!

We definitely agree this may be a cause for some being’s therianthrope or nonhumanity in general. We’re constantly stressed by the human world and wish we could just disappear into the forest and never come back. Everything is too bright but it feels better when your something other than human and to not be a part of all that annoying human stuff. Some of us in the system enjoy being in human society but I don’t.

But our body is still human and family and friends hold us back from doing this. We care just as much about them as our nonhumanity and we’d be in mental pain in both scenarios. Plus I know that some of our system members are perfectly fine in human society and I won’t take them away from that. :>

(2026-03-20 20:44)Nachtfox Wrote:  @Baumarius A bit off topic, but I'm actually curious as to how therians in China view themselves/the community, and how they're defining it :0

I have a lot to say about this topic. First of all, in China one of Chinese words for “therian” is “半兽人”, the literal meaning of “半兽人” is “half-animal human”. Personally this is the worst translation I’ve ever seen. It just sounds like insisting “you're human through and through” and denying therianthropy. The worst news is that this translation has spread extremely widely, further increasing the misunderstanding of therianthropy among other people.
（PS: I know Therianthropy is therion + anthropos, Chinese tends to place important, main content at the end of phrases and sentences,which, as far as I know, is the opposite of English. Secondly, “半兽人” actually is orc/ork , and “兽人” often means Furry. So, all in all, that's why I'm so dissatisfied with this translation — I can't think of a worse one.）

How we view ourselves, just like how therians here view themselves.

When information about therianthropy first began circulating on the Chinese internet, it attracted a large number of young students just like what happened on tiktok — many of them quite young. They would “join” therian and made up experiences for themselves. Later, after some therians pointed out that this kind of “joining” behavior was inappropriate, some of these individuals started identifying as otherlinks instead (I honestly find this utterly ridiculous). These people who “join” otherlink looks just playing RP... I see no genuine sense of identity.

Although the online environment for Chinese Therians is not good, many Therians are still working hard to improve it, trying to give us a more private space to discuss, exchange ideas and help new members. Some of us publish content so that the public can reduce discrimination, misunderstanding, and stigmatization of Therians.[/b]

I'm going to go against the grain and say I would not worry in detail if or if not you are truly a therian, if or if not you fall into an other label. I think therian groups fall into a bad habit of trying to break the vast, inexplicable, spectrum of experience into neat clear cut boxes.

Being both transgender and a therian, I find the concepts of choice, innate being, voluntary, and involuntary identity brought up often and difficult to grapple with. And I think at the end of the day if someone chooses an identity it doesn't make that identity less valid. If my husband, for example, tells me tomorrow he's choosing to be a cat, then who am I to tell him no? To tell him his choice is pointless? To tell him that he can't do it like that? I think a lot of therians want to call it involuntary and innate because it seems more legitimate that way, "I'm not playing pretend this is just who I am".

But another reason I don't like this rhetoric is because, well, as an autistic person prone to self doubt and feeling like an imposter, it is really hard to know how to distinguish between something I choose versus something I am. In regards to being trans, I don't think there is anything I could do differently to change how I feel, but I Can choose How I interpret those feelings, how I act upon them. Is that count as a choice? Does it matter to the transphobes if I chose it or not? They already think I do and I don't want the only reason someone treats me like a man to be because they think I had no choice, that I was afflicted with ungracious malignancy. Re therianthropy, where there is even less open discussion and set social paths for people to follow who feel like or want to be an animal, it can be even harder to discern those feelings.

My biggest advice is to not rush into figuring it out, don't try to force labels. Don't try to nail it down right now. I've felt like a deer for a lot longer than I even knew about but when I had been worrying over figuring out the label (as I had months ago and years before that) I felt too scared to embrace a part of myself because it felt like I was just choosing it when in actuality I was just choosing to act on those feelings. Months later, after I stopped trying to figure it out perfectly, after I stopped trying to see it exactly, what I was became so clear.

Good luck

(2026-05-18 16:37)LucySK Wrote:  I like reading different points of view on this topic. I believe in past lives too and I do think me having past life can overlap with my current one. As if I know im human, but sometimes the animal traits take over as if those memories or traits are still connected to me and are triggerred by things that have been part of that past life too. I am bad at explaining things but I tried to be very simple.

ya, that makes sense. :3 that is a cool belief!

I like reading different points of view on this topic. I believe in past lives too and I do think me having past life can overlap with my current one. As if I know im human, but sometimes the animal traits take over as if those memories or traits are still connected to me and are triggerred by things that have been part of that past life too. I am bad at explaining things but I tried to be very simple.