Amechania
Daimona of the Helpless
I disagree. There is a social contract that stipulates that what you believe should violate no law which we all hold in common, but beyond that to be intolerant of what is alien to us may actually be criminal.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I am Seriously at a Lost about a New Religion!
- Thread starter CynthiaCypher
- Start date
I disagree. There is a social contract that stipulates that what you believe should violate no law which we all hold in common, but beyond that to be intolerant of what is alien to us may actually be criminal.
CynthiaCypher
Well-Known Member
But acceptance does not mean "you to your way, and me to mine", it means "to approve of or to favorably receive". I don't approve of or favorably receive war and I don't approve of or favorably receive Neo-Nazis.
Dear gods, Cynthia, the point of that post wasn't to argue semantics. The term "accept" has multiple definitions and connotations, which is why people (like myself or Brickjectivity) might not understand what exactly you were getting at. Gods forbid we practice active listening and attempt to understand where you're coming from instead of assuming you're using the same meaning of "acceptance" that we are.
To be fair, anything (religious beliefs or otherwise) that one doesn't personally identify or connect with can seem "odd". I just see them as a group of people who have found that one thing that connects them together. It doesn't interest me, but there is nothing inherently wrong with it.
Also A.) I don't think Otherkin is really a "religious belief/affiliation" and B.) Encyclopedia Dramatica probably isn't the best source. Just sayin'.
CynthiaCypher
Well-Known Member
I was just trying to be clear, I wasn't trying nit-pick. Sorry.
CynthiaCypher
Well-Known Member
More than a few sociologists and others studying the Otherkin view them as a quasi-religious movement.
I don't know if there is nothing wrong with it. I don't view all religious impulses as being healthy or beneficial. And when I look at the Otherkin I see people who are escapist, who have immersed themselves completely into fantasy, who are stunted and are afraid to enter the adult world. I just don't see any health in it.
Gjallarhorn
N'yog-Sothep
In other words, a subculture.
Let me play Devil's advocate.
Let's say that it is escapism (and yes, to a degree, it is), as long as one "lives in the real world", but also adheres to a certain fantasy/subculture/interest, then what does it really matter? Most people I know (including myself) who have interests like this (be it the furry fandom, Otherkin, anime, video games, cosplay, etc.) do live in reality. They pay bills, have jobs and contribute to society. They just so happen to like to ,on occasion, escape reality by means of their particular interest. To be honest, I can understand why. Reality sucks in many ways, and most people (whether they admit it or not) have forms of escapism that they adhere to.
It's all about balance. Live and let live, but don't let it be your only means of existence. Otherwise, do what you will.
My 2 cents anyway.
CynthiaCypher
Well-Known Member
Do all subcultures have similarities to religions? Do all subcultures make use of religious language? Do all subcultures make use of religious rituals? Do all subcultures have a spiritual or religious ontology?
It's not just a subculture. It is a quasi-religious movement because it bears similarities to other religions.
Gjallarhorn
N'yog-Sothep
Ever been around football fans?
Based on that, can one argue that religion in general is form of escapism?
CynthiaCypher
Well-Known Member
No. I am not into low brow entertainment.
Gjallarhorn
N'yog-Sothep
Cavemen with barbaric rituals are just sufficiently unadvanced "quasi-religious" individuals.
CynthiaCypher
Well-Known Member
Not if the religion promotes the healthy growth of the individual and healthy integration into the community. Initiation rituals of many religions are just about that, transitioning a child into an adult.
Escapism, in moderation, seems to be harmless enough. I can even believe it would be conducive to mental health -- if it doesn't get out of hand.
Who are the professors and researchers in sociology (or a different related discipline) studying otherkin? I wasn't aware that the movement was even on their radar, much less studied. What scholars should I be keeping an eye out for? I like to keep up on these things, and I'll admit I haven't scoped around for a couple years or so to see what new developments have arisen.
CynthiaCypher
Well-Known Member
They're studying Jediism too. Try looking up Joseph P. Laycock and Danielle Kirby, I am trying to canoodle someone into getting Laylock's paper on the Otherkin for me, right now.
I think I found the article you're talking about on Web of Science:
It shouldn't be hard to snag with a trip to a university library. I just downloaded it myself and will breeze through it when I have the time (working for the university again has its privileges
). Based on my own interactions with people identifying as otherkin, I have mixed feelings about identifying them as religious as opposed to an orientation. My experience with otherkin has been almost entirely within the framework of Neopaganism or its related movements, and although I agree that the ontologies of these new religious movements can support the notion of otherkin, I never heard any of them calling it their religion. Rather, they identified as a Wiccan, Druid, LHPer, whatever... and happened to also be otherkin. I'm not sure the article is attempting to argue that otherkin is a religion or a religious identity, though; from the abstract it sounds like they're more in agreement with my own observations.
CynthiaCypher
Well-Known Member
I think I found the article you're talking about on Web of Science:
It shouldn't be hard to snag with a trip to a university library. I just downloaded it myself and will breeze through it when I have the time (working for the university again has its privileges
Based on my own interactions with people identifying as otherkin, I have mixed feelings about identifying them as religious as opposed to an orientation. My experience with otherkin has been almost entirely within the framework of Neopaganism or its related movements, and although I agree that the ontologies of these new religious movements can support the notion of otherkin, I never heard any of them calling it their religion. Rather, they identified as a Wiccan, Druid, LHPer, whatever... and happened to also be otherkin. I'm not sure the article is attempting to argue that otherkin is a religion or a religious identity, though; from the abstract it sounds like they're more in agreement with my own observations.
I don't think Laylock is calling the movement a religion, but is saying it does have some of the hallmarks of religion. Anyways, I think it should be a really good read. I really do want to read what he as to say about the movement.
Many otherkin like to engage in swordfights using large dull swords made of foam and duct tape. The winners are happy, but the losers endure great shame. (I saw it on the Discovery channel.)