My main concern is that if I set things up solely in the manner of identity, of something impossible to disprove, many individuals will not accept it--to them, impossible to disprove often seems to equal disproven.
This is my attitude to a lot in life so, grain of salt, but my stance is pretty much that that's their fucking problem. You can't change what something is just to make it more palatable or easy to discuss for another group of people. I mean, sure, you can rephrase or whatever in informal discussion, but changing it in a formal FAQ is not only misleading but has the potential to cause problems. Yay for the first person to say "But how are you a therian, you don't have urges and/or behaviours?"
(After writing, I realise that sounds like there's harshness directed at you. Not intended, at all. Not sure how to rephrase to fix it though.)
If saying that therians *often* experience behaviours and urges isn't enough for them then I'm not sure what else can be done without being inaccurate.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2012-11-09 05:31 pm (UTC)This is my attitude to a lot in life so, grain of salt, but my stance is pretty much that that's their fucking problem. You can't change what something is just to make it more palatable or easy to discuss for another group of people. I mean, sure, you can rephrase or whatever in informal discussion, but changing it in a formal FAQ is not only misleading but has the potential to cause problems. Yay for the first person to say "But how are you a therian, you don't have urges and/or behaviours?"
(After writing, I realise that sounds like there's harshness directed at you. Not intended, at all. Not sure how to rephrase to fix it though.)
If saying that therians *often* experience behaviours and urges isn't enough for them then I'm not sure what else can be done without being inaccurate.