Maybe the community is scaring off potential newcomers...

By introducing itself in the wrong way. "We believe we are the souls of unicorns and faeries and other creatures of myth!" However true this may be, it is, I think, the wrong definition for us. Otherkin has become a paradigm, just like any other religion, meta-religion, belief, or "knowledge".

So I made a new definition to reflect a more accurate depiction of what we are:

>>People who feel incongruent with human society, many of whom identify some internal part of themselves as being inhuman, who may or may not label themselves as "Otherkin" according to a belief in souls or reincarnation. Otherkin may or may not have a specific label for what they "think they are" or for what their incongruent experiences suggest.<<

This definition allows for those of logical mind to accept their "otherness" from a purely psychological or scientific standpoint, since that is usually what they are most comfortable with. And I feel this would be a very good thing, since "outsiders" currently hold the torch against us as being a bunch of fluff-fruitcakes with our heads up our psycho-emotional, "mystical" rear ends.

Having a larger number of the logical-minded among our numbers would eventually mute this argument.

I'm sorry but, where did you see that introduction?
I honestly don't see that anywhere.

Freetha Wrote:I'm sorry but, where did you see that introduction?
I honestly don't see that anywhere.

Most forums I browse, as well as many websites, generally have some sort of upfront definition of otherkin, along the lines of "We define ourselves as people who hold a common belief of being inhuman, but yet there is also no commonly held beliefs! We label ourselves otherkin yet we have no common label." It just seems like that is the main reason for a lot of confusion among newcomers, or just curious people who heard the word somewhere. Was not saying this site has such a definition as an introduction, but what do you guys think?

Believing oneself to be in some way or another something other than human doesn't imply a belief in unicorns and faeries, so I don't see how that sort of intro would imply the first posted intro.

True, but people might mistake that for our beliefs. One of my ex-friends seems to think I'm an elf and a furry, just because I identify as Otherkin. Nothing can set her brain straight about it, either.

Perhaps the simplest approach is for every one to agree on a simple, and not too wordy, defenition of "otherkin" that which is yet specific enough not to be mistaken for something else.

Freetha Wrote:Perhaps the simplest approach is for every one to agree on a simple, and not too wordy, defenition of "otherkin" that which is yet specific enough not to be mistaken for something else.

Exactly. That's why I came up with one, and then asked for opinions. <!-- s --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_e_smile.gif" alt=":)" title="Smile" /><!-- s -->

Spanky Wrote:

Freetha Wrote:Perhaps the simplest approach is for every one to agree on a simple, and not too wordy, defenition of "otherkin" that which is yet specific enough not to be mistaken for something else.

Exactly. That's why I came up with one, and then asked for opinions. <!-- s --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_e_smile.gif" alt=":)" title="Smile" /><!-- s -->

I don't know, it just seems a little off to me.
For one, many otherkin do feel "incongruent" with human society, but quite a few do not. Besides, incongruent is one of these few words I have to look up in a dictionary before I'm sure I know what they mean, and while my english is quite good inspite being my second language in this lifetime this would be a clear indication that other non-native-english-speakers could have problems with the word.
Mentioning souls and reincarnation does seem pointless in defining otherkin if the implication of unicorn souls annoys you at all. If anything, the mention of these things in the defenition will make people quicker to associate the word "otherkin" with such beliefs. What you bring up in the same scentence is associated.
Not everyone has incongruent experiences either and to imply otherwize would open up the door to a new defenition or rather assumption. The one that would take that incongruence and adding it up to otherkin. Instead of "fluffy believers in unicorn souls" you'd end up with ideas such as "people who want to be different" or "people who were unpopular in school so they made up an awesome alternate ego and roleplay together with their other unpopular friends" or something along those lines.

My personal preference in defining otherkin is simple.
Human beings who believe themselves to be, in one way or another, for one reason or another, something other than entirely human.

I've found that every time people start trying to define it further, you end up with misunderstandings or sometimes worse. I know how much people want to be specific in their defenitions, but this is a wide concept that I do not believe can be effectively narrowed down any more than to the bare bones basic of the common belief or you would sacrifice the accuracy of the defenition.

a simply definition ?
hmm otherkin -> beliving/knowing that you are not human in mind and/or soul.

Hmm..I don't like the word "believe" because it implies a religious sort of thought process. Besides, a lot of us don't technically "believe" we are X in Y way...I've seen quite a few people say they weren't sure what to believe, and were constantly in doubt about what's 'real" and what isn't. "Belief" implies that one is sure of oneself.

And yeah, "incongruent" is probably an obscure word...I learned it in 2nd grade math and held onto it because I like math. It meant a shape that didn't look exactly like the shape next to it (being bigger, smaller, different number of sides, or was rotated or reflected)