The behavioral traits of a particular individual are not always in tune with population-median neurotypical traits seen in that individual's species. In a symbolic or relational manner, we identify these persons or beings with the traits that best illustrate their actual, functional mindset and internal experience of the world, rather than going only by the results of observation of the external body shape or genetic profile. This is what I believe was being described, rather than a physical "our bodies are different" claim. Such explanations are better for helping cope with someone who is neurodiverse in this way.
As an example, I myself *cope* with a primate brain, but I also react and experience in ways that may suggest a connection (real or imagined) with other species. I experience occasional shifts into other mindsets, including the experience of my body being both physically the same as usual while simultaneously experiencing the feeling of having even more parts and senses (such as a tail and claws, or wider field of vision than usual).
The whole point of saying "otherkin" is to designate ourselves as members of a group that does not identify entirely as human. I'm sure there are primate otherkin, but perhaps the fact that humans are primates may mask the experience, much like using white paint on a white canvas - it would be hard to tell the difference without close examination or familiarity. (This painting technique may be used to add texture or to make a hidden image within the work.)
A related term to otherkin is "alter-human", which I've encountered only within the past few years, and which seems to be an attempt to broaden the community of otherkin experiences to include those who feel human but experience themselves to be different in some way from their baseline physical human body.
In any case, I'd rather go with personal experience and relational understanding to classify someone as otherkin, simply because it's not a well-studied experience with lots of science regarding physical structure, brain function, and genetic profiling of those who identify in this way. But I don't doubt there are differences, as has been proven with transgendered people.
Re: Thank you!
As an example, I myself *cope* with a primate brain, but I also react and experience in ways that may suggest a connection (real or imagined) with other species. I experience occasional shifts into other mindsets, including the experience of my body being both physically the same as usual while simultaneously experiencing the feeling of having even more parts and senses (such as a tail and claws, or wider field of vision than usual).
The whole point of saying "otherkin" is to designate ourselves as members of a group that does not identify entirely as human. I'm sure there are primate otherkin, but perhaps the fact that humans are primates may mask the experience, much like using white paint on a white canvas - it would be hard to tell the difference without close examination or familiarity. (This painting technique may be used to add texture or to make a hidden image within the work.)
A related term to otherkin is "alter-human", which I've encountered only within the past few years, and which seems to be an attempt to broaden the community of otherkin experiences to include those who feel human but experience themselves to be different in some way from their baseline physical human body.
In any case, I'd rather go with personal experience and relational understanding to classify someone as otherkin, simply because it's not a well-studied experience with lots of science regarding physical structure, brain function, and genetic profiling of those who identify in this way. But I don't doubt there are differences, as has been proven with transgendered people.