#facthearted

Every factkin

Every fictionkin

Every otherlink

Every therian

Every objectkin

This is kinmisia!

My name is Calico! I'm an adult and I use she/they/it/any pronouns except for he/him along with you/your and thou/thee second person pronouns. And this blog is for anything kinmisic or anything that is bigoted or against alterhuman, nonhuman, therian, otherkin, copinglink, otherheart, godshards, vampires, and such.

I don't have a dni and anybody can send an ask. I'm also friendly towards factfolk, divinefolk, conceptfolk, aifolk, and fictionfolk. This is also a delusion and IRL safe spot.

Why Kinnie Is A Slur

Kinny vs Kinnie

"What is kinning?" Anon Asks

"What's wrong with 'I kin X'."

The Dragon heart Collective's Testimony on the KFF Phenomenon

Misgendering & It's Harm

Links Discussing the Clanker Discourse

How Can You Be Plant/Objectkin

This-is-[blank] blogs NOT to follow

Anons: 🦋🚬🥀, 🦗, 🗝️, 🐆⛱️🧀, 💚☢️, 🖐️💤

This blog does not have a DNI! This is a blog about sharing kinmisic experiences, not a personal blog! Anybody can experience this and I will not bar somebody from sharing their experiences even if we share differing beliefs!

Other "This Is" Blogs ↓

So, you know how fictionfolk often get upset by things posted in fandom spaces about their source, and they're essentially given a "you have to acknowledge it's not about you the person it's about the character so you need to get over it" as a response? And that's the general community sentiment. It's only seen as ok to be upset at all if someone's being an ass to your face directly about you, and if not then you have to separate from your source to "get over it because it's not about you". Sometimes even if someone is being weird about your source to your face, you get mixed responses and people telling you it's "not that deep".

But.. with animalfolk (and otherkin who aren't generally seen as fictionkind). I think from what we've seen it's more normalised if a fox therian sees someone saying foxes are stupid and gets upset. It's more okay for a dragonkin to get pissy when people say all dragons are xyz. And if someone brings animal-based stereotypes to an animalfolk like "dragons are all stuck up" to dragonkin, they're 9.9/10 times going to be backed up fully by the community around them. This is ignoring when animalfolk are making comments like "these animals in these cute videos are being mistreated" and correcting misinformation--because that's a separate thing of them informing and reducing harm as opposed to a personal vent. I'm only talking about the community-wide "valid" responses to criticism of your source and emotions around that.

Fictionfolk who are also animalistic or things like fictherians aren't exempt from the treatment of fictionfolk mentioned above, either, so it feels less about animality (and less about what's "physically real" due to non-animal otherkin/mythkin) and more about the identity being fictional in general.

Now I know animals are "real" (and in the case of dragons/other mythkin who aren't earth animals, well-established in the alterhuman community) and fandom should be allowed to exist as fandom, I'm not advocating for fictionfolk shutting fandom up or anything. This is about the allowance of emotion people feel. I'm not talking about what animalfolk or fictionfolk do in response to these situations, just simply the way others react when they simply express discomfort. Animalfolk from what we've seen aren't told to separate from their identity "just a little more" so they're less upset when people call cats stupid or ugly, they're usually supported. Fictionfolk on the other hand are much less likely to be supported and more likely to be told that for their own health, they should separate from their source. It feels so vastly different in how these things are handled.

And of course, nothing against animals or animalfolk--it's just a longstanding thing that fictionfolk are left behind a fair in the community bit so animalfolk are the baseline of how people should be treated by their community in my opinion.

On a similar vein of thinking, factfolk (including nonhuman factfolk) are often dragged through the mud even moreso than fictionfolk, in very similar ways. You have to be careful with what you say as a factive or someone will accuse you of... Anything under the sun, really. Especially if you talk about your source and your feelings about them. Factfolk are expected to be largely separated from their source in general, not just when they dare to have emotions about it. Which... Isn't great!

Maybe this post is an ice cold take but the "you need to step back from your identity" idea is really normalised and--yeah, in a lot of cases it's healthier to step back, but.. Why is that the response given to people venting? Why do we expect fictionfolk and factfolk to readily sever their close-knit connection to their source whenever others think it's too unhealthy for them? To change who they personally are whenever they vent their frustrations? Why are fictionbased and factbased identities treated as less of an irremovable part of you and something you should bend and remove yourself at least partially from? The more I think about it, the more it feels incredibly unfair that it's so normalised.

celebrity factfolk and non-celebrity factfolk

celebrity factfolk - a flag for factfolk (link) whose facttype are celebrities, such as a factive of an actress or factlink of a famous animal (such as laika the dog).

non-celebrity factfolk - a flag for factfolk whose facttype are not celebrities. intentionally broad.

PT: Factfolk/Fact-Id Flag /End PT

ID: A 9 striped flag, with every other stripe going from thick to thin. The thin stripes are about half the size of the thick stripes. From top to bottom the colors are medium warm purple, dark purple, light desaturated purple, blue gray, white, blue gray, cerulean blue, dark blue, medium blue. In the middle of the white stripe is two combined white diamonds that poke out from the stripe going into the light desaturated purple and cerulean blue stripes. In the center of the diamonds is the symbol for factfolk, an outline of a simple camera with an outline of the earth as its lens. The symbol is blue gray.

A flag for anyone under the factual identity umbrella. A factual identity in simple terms is best defined as one that has roots and connections to something or someone that currently is existing or has existed in this world (though exceptions may exist in cases such as Exofactive, again this is a simplified definition). In many cases this is a human, but it doesn't have to be. This includes, but is not limited to:

Fact- folk

Fait- / Fuck- folk

Fog- folk

-tives

-kins

-therians

-hearteds

-linkers

-chainers

-vaugers

-karditypes

-stels

Endels, IRLs, DAs, and other folks whose identity is based in, caused by, or influenced by delusions or psychosis in general

Exofactives

Pre Factives

Post Factives

Those with factual hearthomes

Those who just "are" their identity and do not label it further

People who cannot, or do not want to, label their factual identity

[To be clear, prefixes are meant to be mixed and matched]

Again, this is meant to be an inclusive but not exhaustive list. Meaning it is a list to give an idea of who is included by default, but it is by no means limited to only these folks. It is simply a baseline idea for better understanding.

Symbol:

ID: Two symbols, both the same except the first is in black, the second is in white. The outline of a simple small rectangle hand held camera. Where the lens would normally be is an outline of the earth focused over the atlantic ocean.

We wanna talk about the symbol for a minute. The flag itself doesn't have too much meaning besides the color scheme is just one we noticed being used a lot for factual identity flags, so we decided to stick to it, and thought it looked pretty. The symbol on the other hand does have meaning and importance behind it.

The first is the camera. There was a discussion some time ago about a potential fact-id symbol in a server we are in, and an option someone threw out was a camera, to parallel fict-id's common use of a book. It's stuck with us ever since. Something about the symbolism of being able to (in theory) take a picture with two of the same guys. However at some point it also struck us another side of it. A common misconception used against factfolk is they're stealing someones identity, and claiming to be the 'real' [x]. While obviously we cannot say this never happens, that is not the experience for the majority of the community. Instead a better understand is the person you are in a photograph from 10+ years ago, while you, isn't who you are now. Factfolk are in many cases, again no experience is a monolith and we do not claim to speak for the community as a whole, a version of their source. Snippets of them reproduced, but not 1:1 copies. Like how even two photos taken close together won't be exactly the same.

The second part is the earth. This part is a lot more self explanatory. It in itself represents how in majority of cases ones source is from this world. It being where the lens of the camera would be is representative of the focus of that part of the identity. How sharing a world with ones source can impact things.

Hello! Welcome to This Is Anti-Fiction/Factkin! My name is Mod Icarus, I use he/they/any pronouns(I have some preferred neopronouns as well, feel free to ask) and I am a fictionkin and questioning factkin.

This blog is for sharing experiences of bigotry against fictionkin or factkin, though all are welcome here, I have no DNI.