Talk:Clinical lycanthropy

message: removed the link to furry fandom as it has almost absolutely nothing to do with this.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.194.152.68 (talk) 23:27, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not true.  "Furry" is a label that some individuals use who feel they are non-human emotionally, spiritually, and/or physically (believe they can physically change into another species).  Some of these individuals would meet the definition of someone with lycanthropy, would they not?  Perhaps "furry" should be referenced with the stipulation that not all furries would be considered as having lycanthropy.  The term "furry fandom" suggests the definition includes only those who are fans of non-humans, but do not feel they are non-human themselves.  This is a common misunderstanding for those who aren't very familiar with the definition of "furry" and the wide range of individuals it encompasses. Swiftpaw (talk) 17:07, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: i think you are confusing therianthropy with furry https://therian.fandom.com/wiki/Furry_Fandom Pigeonbloodblues (talk) 04:01, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Has nothing to do with furry

message: The first sentence of this article can be read/understood to imply that the clinician is the one having the delusion that a patient can turn into an animal, not that the patient has the delusion!  Somebody please rephrase it so it does not read so ambiguously.  Thank you.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 35.13.5.25 (talk) 18:36, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: The opening statement is poorly written

message: I'm adding this note to attribute the bulk of the material I just added to the article to User:Vaughan, who wrote it up for a Kuro5hin article and gave me permission to copy into here. I did some editing in the process of pasting, but didn't add much work of my own. Bryan 20:28, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I have never heard of that, and Google only finds obvious cases of misspelling when I do a search for it. Do you have any references? Bryan 00:12, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

text: Clinical lycanthropy is not closely related to furry fandom. Most of furry fandom isn't even particularly shapeshifting-oriented from what I've seen of it. Bryan 00:12, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

text: many members of the fandom believe to be in fact an animal in a human body (from what i have seen of it, of course i could be mistaking); therefore i would say that the two are quite related, and connecting the articles will help any reader trying to understand both phenomenons.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.53.101.69 (talk) 18:58, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: What you appear to be describing would fall under Therianthropy as a primarily spiritual subculture.  Depending on the (non-human) inner species identity, Otherkin might be more appropriate too.  As I understand it, this article speaks of those who believe their physical form to be non-human, which is not what you are describing.  --Tathar (talk) 17:49, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Old discussion

message: I know that the solar symbols do take part in the werewolf cycle as well as animals and female humans'... but I have to note you that a more expierenced werewolf/Lycanthropes do not only come out(transform) on full moons but are capable of doing it any night by will, but choose full mooned nights mostly because it makes them stronger...that is when the feed and are suppose to be very aggressive then as well. Please reply today!
Isebella Wolf (talk) 18:26, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: To Bryan

message: This is a derogatory article which talks about humans as if they aren't animals, and which calls anyone delusional who feels they are emotionally non-human so much so that they identify as such. Sure, obviously those saying they can p-shift most likely are, since doing that has yet to be seen or recorded by anyone, but not those who identify as non-human.  This entire article needs an overhaul to make it less biased. Swiftpaw (talk) 14:33, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I've rectified this by changing most of the occurrences of "animal" to "non-human".  This article also suggests that there is something wrong with someone who feels and sees themselves as being physically non-human.  There are some of us out here who would very much enjoy such a luxury. Swiftpaw (talk) 15:22, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

text: This article talks about an expert view. If your personal beliefs are different from that expert view and you are offended that we discuss that expert view, there's not much we can do for you. Wikipedia is not here to avoid offending people who are upset that their fringe beliefs are not endorsed. DreamGuy (talk) 16:19, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Let me be more specific about my past critiques on this, I know it was too aggressive and lacked specific justifications.  Encyclopedias should document things, including theories by psychologists and others who attempt to explain how the world works.  As an example, the page on homosexuality is not called "Clinical Homosexuality".  That is because "clinical" usually suggests "clinical mental disorder".  This entire Wikipedia page is presenting it as a disorder, claiming that lycanthropy is a problem and those who have it, "patients", need to be cured.  It reads just like articles on homosexuality would read from many years ago, but don't today.  What is the difference between someone being different, and someone having a "medical condition"?  The difference is one is okay or maybe even desirable, and the other usually refers to a difference that is not desirable.  In order to be fair and balanced, this article should examine the potential negative, as well as the positive, effects of those feeling they are non-human emotionally/spiritually or physically.  This is necessary because not everyone thinks this condition is a bad thing, so that fact needs mentioning here just as the condition of homosexuality needs it.  Swiftpaw (talk) 13:13, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

text: What, you actually turn into a wolf every full moon? Or do you just like to think of yourself as a wolf? Totnesmartin (talk) 13:48, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Very insulting

message: Since this article only deals with delusional people, and not with actual lycans, the refrence to Ranma should be removed.  Ranma  could be considered to be "clinically delusional" in the way this argument presents it, since no main character in the series believes that were-people do not exist.                     ~Rayvn  11:54, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Ranma Reference

message: In Chile, arround 1992, a real case was made public. Corina Lemunao is a woman that born with a mental desease in 1953, in Lonquimai. She was forced by her family (illiterate peasants, according to my memory) to live most of her life in a poultry house. When she was rescued, she belive she was another chicken, living naked and eating corn. The case was known as the "mujer gallina" (chicken woman). She later had two children, that were given in adoption. One of them later studied medicine in the US.    —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.90.225.57 (talk) 19:54, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Chilean case

message: I'm testing the waters to see if anyone is going to object to changing the article to reflect the origins of the term "lycanthropy" as given by a credible source. As I stated previously on this page: The Online Eymology Dictionary says this about it: "Originally a form of madness (described by ancient writers) in which the afflicted thought he was a wolf; applied to actual transformations of persons (esp. witches) into wolves since 1830." 
I'd simply "be bold" and do it, but last time, to my surprise, someone objected, and I don't want to look like I'm trying to force my way onto this when there's been previous discussion. However, time has passed and I now see no reason for one person to hold up the statement of what is apparently well-established fact simply because he doesn't like my source, despite that source being considered reliable elsewhere on Wikipedia, on dictionary.com (also a reliable source), etc. So, if you are to object, you should go about it in a reasonable fashion. I don't plan on settling for a so-called "neutral" position again if possible, which was "neutral" only in the sense that it got passed the singular editor who was objecting to the proposed change, not in the NPOV sense. (This is hardly a political hot potato or similarly controversial subject!) -- Glynth (talk) 04:34, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origins of the term, redux 

message: I may have this condition, ever since I was at a young age, I have had a special connection with cats even though most of my family is allergic to them. As I grew, I have started to act like a cat, and I am a therian too. I believe that i'm really the soul of a cat just in a human soul. I even feel like I was a cat in my past life. I have even attacked people before too, and have autism and ADHD Little Kitty Cat2 (talk) 01:38, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd recommend talking to some people on the r/therian discord if you're not there, they're equipped more or less to help you with this.  Pigeonbloodblues (talk) 04:12, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  I feel like I have this.. 

message: the case examples section reeks of tabloid style pop science, perhaps it should be restructured? i didn't want to make a drastic change without saying anything, i'll check on this periodically for a few weeks and if nobody responds ill just do it. Pigeonbloodblues (talk) 04:07, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Case examples 

message: I don’t believe there is any relevance to the topic to include “(also see Dissociative Identity Disorder)” under the Signs and Symptoms, and propose that note be removed. It is entirely unrelated to the topic at hand, and including that when discussing species identity disorder and species dysphoria is a gross mischaracterization of what DID is. Mystic Melodia (talk) 02:22, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dissociative Identity Disorder is Unrelated