Werewolf vs Wolfwere, preferred primary form.

[Amarok]

You got a point there.

[Vuldari]

Depends. If we're talking about werewolves who generally stay in half form, then they should have half form babies. But if they are normally in human form, they should have human form babies and so on.

I still feel that Werewolves are best seen as 'Humans with Lycanthropy', and therefore, any children they have will be "Humans with Lycanthropy" as well...emphasis on the 'Human'.

I don't see how the form they choose to spend more time in would have any effect on how thier children will come out. Would pumping iron and working out all day long every day make the child be born 'ripped'?...

...the physical activity of the mother (including extraordinary activity like shifting) does not have that kind of effect on an unborn child, IMHO and to the best of my knowlage.


Of course...the less you care about realistic biology, and the more you apply dramatic effect, the event of a person who was formerly human giving birth to puppies could have a unique and significant psychological impact within werewolf fiction.


So...'human no matter what' feels more realistic to me (and is my personal preference at the moment), but 'whatever form the mother is' is far more evolutionarily convinient, (...Evolution is rarely that kind though...), for the Mother and for the continued survival and low key existance of the werewolf liniage/species...as well as adding potentially desirable effects to a werewolf story.

[Rhuen]

I forget that rejected and proven wrong form of evolution, M, something or another. Where they showed that physical activity and experience does not directly influence the baby, as in streching its neck did not cause the Giraff to evolve over time.

But the werewolf is not a mere physical strain, its a genetic overhaul, what affect would this have on the reproductive cells?

As I said before I am for the human is born human wolf born wolf ect... not meaning the state it is in while pregnant but its original state.

[Syzygy]

I'm for a birth in full human form - since I slightly prefer a delay (and by delay I mean several years) in actual shifting after birth. (I.e. It remains dormant until a certain age.) It wouldn't make sense considering the need to be camoflauged. It also makes more sense to have babies in the same form as their mother.

I am not dismissing other forms though - they would still make for interesting concepts/stories - and I can't see why it would be physically impossible.

[Another way of looking at this would be to consider the mother's form upon conception.]

[Vuldari]

As I said before I am for the human is born human wolf born wolf ect... not meaning the state it is in while pregnant but its original state.

I still feels to me like the concept of werewolves that are WOLVES that have the ability to transform into Humans, instead of the other way around, is too uncommon to really consider as one of the general standards.

Then werewolves would be more like the wolves in "Wolf's Rain", where they are wild animals merely hiding out in human civilizations in disguise.

Outside of such scenarios, I just doesn't make much sense to me for anything but HUMAN being the primary form of a Human turned into a werewolf.

So, from my perspective, the main form would allways be human, even if the werewolf was able to, and choose to remain in wolf form most of the time.


...although, you clearly don't agree that it is so clear, cut and dry. Would you care to share some of your insight and inspiration for feeling that werewolves might actually be more WOLF than MAN? ...something I may have missed?

[Rhuen]

Not so much wolf to man,
But sentient wolves descended from their gods who in order to live amongst humans have had to use magic to assume human like forms.
Is the premise behind the idea.
Got the idea from the Pacific Americans story of the wolf tribe descended from the wolf god turning human to live amongst the other tribes.

[Vuldari]

Not so much wolf to man,
But sentient wolves descended from their gods who in order to live amongst humans have had to use magic to assume human like forms.
Is the premise behind the idea.
Got the idea from the Pacific Americans story of the wolf tribe descended from the wolf god turning human to live amongst the other tribes.

...woah...

That's pretty 'out there'...

How are sentient Wolves able to take on human form, instead of Ferral Wolves with the same ability not "Wolf to Man"?

...werewolves are wolf demi-gods hunh? ...interesting concept...

[Rhuen]

Not so much wolf to man,
But sentient wolves descended from their gods who in order to live amongst humans have had to use magic to assume human like forms.
Is the premise behind the idea.
Got the idea from the Pacific Americans story of the wolf tribe descended from the wolf god turning human to live amongst the other tribes.

...woah...

That's pretty 'out there'...

How are sentient Wolves able to take on human form, instead of Ferral Wolves with the same ability not "Wolf to Man"?

...werewolves are wolf demi-gods hunh? ...interesting concept...

For the wolf to human breeds yes. But more like partial gods, like using a more common example. If Hercules had kids (who lived) and they had kids and so forth, a thousand generations down the line.
a little godly power but not enough to be worth while, just enough to be different from everything else.

This type of werewolf (or wolf were) I would see as being the mortal descendents of these demi-god wolves who after interbreeding with natural wolves and/or humans have become something inbetween and able to shift thanks to the limited godly aspect between both.
Which actually does go back to the original idea of which they would consider their primary form. After all gods are able to assume anyform they want, and simply chose wolves as the form of their children, so the descendents of these demi-gods would have
Diety,
Wolf,
and Human in them. But if wolf is the primary form then I would think they would be born in it and stuck in it while pregant. Which while an inconvience to the tribe is unavoidable, innate traits seldom care about your situation in life.

[neoritter]

I don't think you should start a poll then give your own answer based on an idea for a story you just made up. We should be talking in general and not in a sense a made up reality invented by you Rhuen. If its a story you are creating it can really be whatever you want it to be. Why, ask a question like this? Since, we should be looking for a general statement. We can't interpose extraneous ideas such as wolf gods, etc. So, in general a werewolf is portrayed as a human who has acquired the ability (voluntary or not) to turn into a wolf, or in a more modern sense half-human half-wolf hybrids. The base form is then human. Anything else, goes against a common norm and against the psychological aspects of the werewolf myth.

Now, if we're talking about pregnancy issues here. I say stuck in one form until birth, yes all 9 months if its a hybrid or human or what 4-weeks (someone check that plz...) for a wolf. Personally, since human is the base form, nine months of being stuck in a pure human state.

Also, Wolf's Rain wolves are wolves the whole time. Normal people just don't see them as being wolves, but as human representations of the wolf. There really are no human forms for them.

[Rhuen]

and Neoritter you missed the point of my response. I am not FORCING anyone to follow my response. Also the whole wolf tribe thing isn't something I made up, i only expanded on the idea.

I am simply stateing something I thought up on the idea on the opposite direction of what is normally expected and answeing Vuldari's question.

When it comes to an imaginary creature, the concept of "norm" and "general" does not exist. Everyone has their own views and opinions which is something that should be incouraged. so that people will come up with new ideas of their own.
If we only stayed with the traditional versions of monsters we would have very boreing discussions and very boreing movies and such.

If you HATE the idea of NEW ideas being introduced into the werewolf then why do you even bother doing anything but reading the old german legends?
It really does come across that you HATE anything that even slightly strays away from the germanic view of the werewolf legend. Which would mean you should hate every last single werewolf movie, comic book, video game, and literature of all kinds that has come out about the werewolf since the turn of the previous century.

all on this one sentence of yours:
(Since, we should be looking for a general statement):
I can't disagree more. In fact this way of thinking goes completly against my very nature. It defeats the purpose of discussing these ideas. This Poll really doesn't relate to the movie Freeborn as in it they use Werewolves. This poll serves the purpose of expanding on the werewolf and its counterpart the wolfwere (which has very few apperances) and seeing how different people respond to their own preferences and how they INDIVIDUALLY view the idea of wolf to man or man to wolf transforming beings.

[Morkulv]

No offence, but its a stupid question. Ofcourse they would be human. Not only does it make more sence, but it also wares down the fantasy/sci-fi element some more.

[MoonKit]

Depends. If we're talking about werewolves who generally stay in half form, then they should have half form babies. But if they are normally in human form, they should have human form babies and so on.

I don't see how the form they choose to spend more time in would have any effect on how thier children will come out. Would pumping iron and working out all day long every day make the child be born 'ripped'?...

...the physical activity of the mother (including extraordinary activity like shifting) does not have that kind of effect on an unborn child, IMHO and to the best of my knowlage.

I didnt nessecarily mean what form they spent most time it. What I meant was their true form. If we're talking about werewolves who are basically humans who can turn into wolves, then I assume the child would be born a human. If we are talking about more of a fantasy world where the werewolf's true form is in half form and they can turn into human or wolf, then I suspect they would have half form babies. It depends on how you envision werewolves.

But if we're talking about werewolves who live in todays society, the children are born in human form as a disguise. And then of course this brings us back to the question of when werewolves first develop shifting abilities...but thats another thread...

[Rhuen]

No offence, but its a stupid question. Ofcourse they would be human. Not only does it make more sence, but it also wares down the fantasy/sci-fi element some more.

This is a very good point. (although worded in bad way: )
The Werewolf as we think of it has always been a "horror" monster and Horror movies and related media tend to have a strict limit on the fantasy elements.
"why you rarely see Zeus in a horror movie. "

A wolfwere, in which ever way one wants to portray it tends to loose those horror elements, and would be hard to make out as a horror monster. After all its not a cursed human, and cursing a wolf to be human would likely end up comical in someway.

If we want to have a horror or thriller type creature the werewolf is the way to go.
If we want more magic and fantasy the wolfwere could be acceptable, or something in between.

[Vuldari]

Rhuen and Moonkit are posting questions and giving answers as if they thinks that everyone else has been imagining the same kinds of "demi-god decendants", "Fantasy Wolf-Were" off the wall stories that they have...(..even though most of us haven't...)

...and so those ideas seem absolutely outragious untill they are fully explained...

neoritter still seems to think that of all the legends and stories around the world, only ONE set of them are valid, and everything else is *&$#...

...and I'm just trying by best to learn how to be accepting and accomidating to and of all of these conflicting opinions equally.

This is all very frustrating and confusing.


In the future...when talking about legends that most of us have never heard of before, especially when it's something one has completely made up themselves, it would be advisable for them to be a little more clear on where they are comming from and explain thier opinions sooner than later.


Since the stories and origins that most of us are most familar with agree on the point that werewolves are transformed humans, this poll did seem to not make much sense at first.


The question asked what form they should be born in, but was only later clarified as,

... not meaning the state it is in while pregnant but its original state.

...which is a completely different question entirely.

Do you prefer Werewolves that are:

* Humans with the ability to transform into wolves/wolf-creatrues?

*Unique hybrid creatures which can appear as Humans or Wolves, (but are niether)?

*...or Some kind of Sentient wolves with the ability to disguise themselves as humans?

In other words...What is their NATURAL, 'Starting' form?

[NOTE: Anything but the First option would be suggesting "Non-Traditional" werewolves. ...which are fine, but are not usually widely accepted. In neoritters defense, I think almost everyone else was assuming the question meant, as applied to "Traditional" werewolves...not the shapeshifting grandchildren of the Wolf Gods. Most of us would never even Consider something like that as an option unless one suggested it specificly. ...which Rhuen did not, untill later in the discussion.]

That seems to be closer to what was really being asked, based on Rhuens later responses.

Making the poll about birthing state instead just made the whole question very confusing.


I think, on the most part, everyones answers were very appropriate for what it sounded like the question was asking, to them.

[MoonKit]

Rhuen and Moonkit are posting questions and giving answers as if they thinks that everyone else has been imagining the same kinds of "demi-god decendants", "Fantasy Wolf-Were" off the wall stories that they have...(..even though most of us haven't...)

I was just stating my opinion. I think we've already proved that everyone here has a different definition of werewolves, even if MOST agree on almost everything. I have seen games and species that people have made up where half form is their true form. No one ever said that we couldnt include fantasy werewolves and only had to refer to the traditional ones. Because honestly the traditional ones dont even have to worry about this because traditionally, people are bitten, not born. So be nice.

[Vuldari]

Rhuen and Moonkit are posting questions and giving answers as if they thinks that everyone else has been imagining the same kinds of "demi-god decendants", "Fantasy Wolf-Were" off the wall stories that they have...(..even though most of us haven't...)

I was just stating my opinion. I think we've already proved that everyone here has a different definition of werewolves, even if MOST agree on almost everything. I have seen games and species that people have made up where half form is their true form. No one ever said that we couldnt include fantasy werewolves and only had to refer to the traditional ones. Because honestly the traditional ones dont even have to worry about this because traditionally, people are bitten, not born. So be nice.

I'm not being mean... ...at least I'm not trying to be...

...I just find it odd that you don't seem to realise how confusing it is when you start talking about Non-Traditional Werewolves without clarifying that first.

I have no problem with "Alternative" ideas. I think they are alot of fun.

...but if everyone else is talking about traditional Werewolves, and then someone cuts into the middle making suggestions that would only apply to magical Wolfweres...it just seems incredibly odd if they never mention that they are talking about completely different creatures.

It's hard to have a discussion when you are not talking about the same thing.

What makes sense for a Wolfwere, would not make sense for a Werewolf.

The two creatures require two different trains of thought, and perhaps two entirely different conversations.



*Person 1* "I think Werewolves fur should turn grey when the person get's older"

*Person 2* (thinking about Immortal Shapeshifting Wolf Gods, but does not say so.) "Because they can live forever, I think they would stay forever young and would allways retain their lumanecent gold aura and never turn grey"

*Person 1* "...? ? ?..."

[Rhuen]

I always assumed when one said, born a werewolf or is something other than the traditional form others assumed they meant some other fanatsy creation as those others are not present in the horror form.
when I stated the phrase:
Which form do you like best if it is born a werewolf, to imply its natural state of being rather than being bitten or cursed or otherwise transformed into a werewolf. A question I hadn't noticed may inherently exclude the traditional form (which was not my intention either) Simply meant which is prefered as its natural state of being.

Also My wording of the poll was a little off...I did write it while tired, and as it continued was confused when people thought I meant born as depending on state of the mother's form while pregnant, which caught me way off base.
I can see how that may have been assumed.

What I did mean was, do you prefer the traditional, wolf, or hybrid versions of the human/wolf cross-over type of character.

In fact for "Natural Wolf" one I thought could have thought either a wolf that becomes human because of a spell, demi-god fantasy deal, sentient wolf that turns human, or even a Wolf's Rain type of deal where its an illussion.

I hadn't thought the idea of "its always human first" would be so deeply ingrained as to cloud the question in one's mind.

[neoritter]

I'm gonna do this one person at a time. So bare with me.

and Neoritter you missed the point of my response. I am not FORCING anyone to follow my response. Also the whole wolf tribe thing isn't something I made up, i only expanded on the idea.

I never said you were forcing anyone with anything. Now, your idea was made up. Because the story you refer to is a creation story and is outside the werewolf myth. Some religions say humans were created from mud, are we to assume based on that, these humans can transform into mud? Another example, being likenesses of god. Are to assume again that the people in this myth have weak godlike powers? The answer for both is no if your wondering.

When it comes to an imaginary creature, the concept of "norm" and "general" does not exist.

A common norm must exist otherwise every randomly made story can constitute itself as being a werwolf myth. The norm with reference to the topic here is Man to wolf. The word "wer" means "human" and quite obviously wolf means wolf. Hence, human-wolf. A good example of what can be considered "made up" is Christianity. There are numerous denominations and minor cults. But they all require a common norm in order to be considered a Christianity or a Christian religion. Whenever you put a word to something, the definition needs to have some form of consistency. Imaginary or real.

If you HATE the idea of NEW ideas being introduced into the werewolf then why do you even bother doing anything but reading the old german legends?
It really does come across that you HATE anything that even slightly strays away from the germanic view of the werewolf legend. Which would mean you should hate every last single werewolf movie, comic book, video game, and literature of all kinds that has come out about the werewolf since the turn of the previous century.

Right off, and I'm sorry Vuldari for doing this but; why are you being such a douche about this. I didn't insert an insult anywhere in my last post. Why the hostility? Don't answer that, its not required. Now, I've had people with far more experience try to pin what my beliefs are. The last one was a pysche major, so don't try. That all aside. I don't quote:"HATE" anything about the subject on werewolves. New stories are very welcome. But in a sense they are just stories where as old myths are supposed sightings, etc. Thats getting off track though. On track now, what I reference is not purely "germanic legend". I got stories from France, Portugal, Spain, Greece, Babylon, Rome that have similar mythical details. Not to mention other regions. I don't even get where you can get off mentioning that I would hate anything to do with werewolves and would biasedly ignore a story, no matter how recently created. One can't arrive at a conclusion by only sampling one group. As for werewolf movies I hate, there is really only one I can honestly say I hate (others I hate based on costume creation, etc), that movie is Underworld. I don't like the werewolves in that movie, nor the vampires that much. And you know what thats my opinion so you can $$$$$$ off commenting on that.

all on this one sentence of yours:
(Since, we should be looking for a general statement):
I can't disagree more. In fact this way of thinking goes completly against my very nature. It defeats the purpose of discussing these ideas. This Poll really doesn't relate to the movie Freeborn as in it they use Werewolves. This poll serves the purpose of expanding on the werewolf and its counterpart the wolfwere (which has very few apperances) and seeing how different people respond to their own preferences and how they INDIVIDUALLY view the idea of wolf to man or man to wolf transforming beings.

If we look at each and every single myth, word for word, detail for detail. We'd have a billion answers, that would really bear little relevance to the topic at hand.

"why you rarely see Zeus in a horror movie. "

Thats because the Zeus figure has been transposed onto the Christian god. Ever ponder at the similarities? I mean, God strikes down sinners with thunderbolts, what does Zeus use?
The fact of the matter is God just ain't scary to modern movie goers. No one really fears God, and I mean fear not in awe of.

neoritter still seems to think that of all the legends and stories around the world, only ONE set of them are valid, and everything else is *&$#...

You really want to still say that even after the PMs we had? Wow.
There all valid in their own little way. They are stories after all. Besides, werewolf myths are not a world spanning story, so lay off that red-herring.

...but if everyone else is talking about traditional Werewolves, and then someone cuts into the middle making suggestions that would only apply to magical Wolfweres...it just seems incredibly odd if they never mention that they are talking about completely different creatures.

Which is why I stick to a more common norm when talking about werewolves. Would you have any idea as to what the heck I am talking about if I was only referencing phantom werewolves/lycanthropy?

Last, you people make no sense. I got Vuldari and another member PMing me saying I need to be more "nice" when I post, yet Vuldari himself puts a hostile line into his post and Rhuen's first post I reference is obviously hostile. Make up you minds people. You want me targeting the poster more than I target the facts presented, I will. And this can get very ugly. A small example is what I wrote after the third quotation I wrote to. Don't target me and I won't get into targeting you.

[MoonKit]

Rhuen and Moonkit are posting questions and giving answers as if they thinks that everyone else has been imagining the same kinds of "demi-god decendants", "Fantasy Wolf-Were" off the wall stories that they have...(..even though most of us haven't...)

I was just stating my opinion. I think we've already proved that everyone here has a different definition of werewolves, even if MOST agree on almost everything. I have seen games and species that people have made up where half form is their true form. No one ever said that we couldnt include fantasy werewolves and only had to refer to the traditional ones. Because honestly the traditional ones dont even have to worry about this because traditionally, people are bitten, not born. So be nice.

I'm not being mean... ...at least I'm not trying to be...

OK. Then Im not offended.

[Vuldari]

If you HATE the idea of NEW ideas being introduced into the werewolf then why do you even bother doing anything but reading the old german legends?
It really does come across that you HATE anything that even slightly strays away from the germanic view of the werewolf legend. Which would mean you should hate every last single werewolf movie, comic book, video game, and literature of all kinds that has come out about the werewolf since the turn of the previous century.

Right off, and I'm sorry Vuldari for doing this but; why are you being such a douche about this. I didn't insert an insult anywhere in my last post. Why the hostility? Don't answer that, its not required. Now, I've had people with far more experience try to pin what my beliefs are. The last one was a pysche major, so don't try. That all aside. I don't quote:"HATE" anything about the subject on werewolves. New stories are very welcome. But in a sense they are just stories where as old myths are supposed sightings, etc. Thats getting off track though. On track now, what I reference is not purely "germanic legend". I got stories from France, Portugal, Spain, Greece, Babylon, Rome that have similar mythical details. Not to mention other regions. I don't even get where you can get off mentioning that I would hate anything to do with werewolves and would biasedly ignore a story, no matter how recently created. One can't arrive at a conclusion by only sampling one group. As for werewolf movies I hate, there is really only one I can honestly say I hate (others I hate based on costume creation, etc), that movie is Underworld. I don't like the werewolves in that movie, nor the vampires that much. And you know what thats my opinion so you can $$$$$$ off commenting on that.

If one wishes for people to stop accusing them of hating "Everything", it would be advisable to not base very many of thier responses about the different ways they think someone elses ideas may be wrong, or bad, and instead focus more on explaining why they think thier own ideas are Right and Good.

...it is a nasty habit to discredit others opinions as ones most used method of making thier own preferences appear better in comparison. Most people don't appreciate that.

Just try to focus more on pointing out the strengths in your own ideas and those from your myths of choice, and mostly avoid pointing out all of the flaws you see in everyone elses ideas.

We hate when people do that just as much as you hate hearing me talk about this again and again and again...

...and if you slip up (which we all do on frequent occasion. We are all human after all), be considerate and apologize.

We all say things we shouldn't have from time to time...
(I may even be doing it right now)
...and a good apology is usually the best recourse when we do.


(That goes for everyone...especially myself. I've noticed myself acting painfully concieted lately, and I don't like it.

I'm sorry neoritter, I'm sorry Rhuen and I'm sorry MoonKit for any hurtful things I may have said in this thread so far.)

...There all valid in their own little way. They are stories after all.

That's the Spirit!

Last, you people make no sense. I got Vuldari and another member PMing me saying I need to be more "nice" when I post, yet Vuldari himself puts a hostile line into his post and Rhuen's first post I reference is obviously hostile. Make up you minds people. You want me targeting the poster more than I target the facts presented, I will. And this can get very ugly. A small example is what I wrote after the third quotation I wrote to. Don't target me and I won't get into targeting you.

Hostile? You really think so?

I just want to see everyone begin to get along better. I saw confusion, misunderstandings and intolerance and thought maybe I should point out where it appeared to me the conversation might be heading off track.

I'm sorry if I have been causing, or projecting ill-will because of this. That was not my intention.

------------------------------------------------------

I always assumed when one said, born a werewolf or is something other than the traditional form others assumed they meant some other fanatsy creation as those others are not present in the horror form.
when I stated the phrase:
Which form do you like best if it is born a werewolf, to imply its natural state of being rather than being bitten or cursed or otherwise transformed into a werewolf. A question I hadn't noticed may inherently exclude the traditional form (which was not my intention either) Simply meant which is prefered as its natural state of being.

Also My wording of the poll was a little off...I did write it while tired, and as it continued was confused when people thought I meant born as depending on state of the mother's form while pregnant, which caught me way off base.
I can see how that may have been assumed.

What I did mean was, do you prefer the traditional, wolf, or hybrid versions of the human/wolf cross-over type of character.

In fact for "Natural Wolf" one I thought could have thought either a wolf that becomes human because of a spell, demi-god fantasy deal, sentient wolf that turns human, or even a Wolf's Rain type of deal where its an illussion.

I hadn't thought the idea of "its always human first" would be so deeply ingrained as to cloud the question in one's mind.

See...we all learned something here. Our thoughts are not nearly as syncrhonised as we may sometimes think.

When I hear the phrase "Born a Werewolf", the first thing that comes to mind is the result of someone who was bitten, (or Cursed, or whatever), and made a werewolf having a child, and that child inheriting lycanthropy that way, from the moment of conception ...or the grandchild or later decendant of the same such occurance.

A "Traditional" werewolf...only BORN that way because their parents allready were.


The idea of Werewolves not actually being humans at all, but some different species entirely is an idea that I just can't wrap my head around easily. I have to struggle to open my mind wider than usual for such ideas to make sense to me.


"Werewolves are Humans first" IS concretely chiseled into my brain.

If you were to ask me to define "Lycanthropy", I would describe it as a condition of a Human with both fictional and non-fictional manifestations.

...but even if I made a list of 32 different versions of Lycanthropy, I would describe every one as a Human "Condition".

"Lycanthope" as a Species just does not exist in my mind. Once I start thinking of them as a unique species (not Human), I stop thinking of them as "Wewolves" and start thinking of them as "Anthropomorphic" wolves, or some strange other kind of shapeshifting Wolves, like Lupine equivilants to 'Kitsunes'.



But that is what is so FUN about this place...

...hearing all the kinds of ideas that I myself would NEVER have thought of before. Some that I LOVE...and even some that I may not like very much.

It's all in good fun.

[neoritter]

The idea of Werewolves not actually being humans at all, but some different species entirely is an idea that I just can't wrap my head around easily. I have to struggle to open my mind wider than usual for such ideas to make sense to me.


"Werewolves are Humans first" IS concretely chiseled into my brain.

If you were to ask me to define "Lycanthropy", I would describe it as a condition of a Human with both fictional and non-fictional manifestations.

...but even if I made a list of 32 different versions of Lycanthropy, I would describe every one as a Human "Condition".

"Lycanthope" as a Species just does not exist in my mind. Once I start thinking of them as a unique species (not Human), I stop thinking of them as "Wewolves" and start thinking of them as "Anthropomorphic" wolves, or some strange other kind of shapeshifting Wolves, like Lupine equivilants to 'Kitsunes'.



But that is what is so FUN about this place...

...hearing all the kinds of ideas that I myself would NEVER have thought of before. Some that I LOVE...and even some that I may not like very much.

And thats one of the things I was trying to point out in my last and the one before that post. The common idea that is really indisputable about what a werewolf is; is that they are humans transforming into wolves. Base human secondary wolf. Like you say Vuldari, when you take away that element they aren't werewolves anymore. One could say that a werewolf species developed as an offshoot of humans, because that does not stop them from being of the same genus or stop the common idea of human to wolf. Another common thing that shouldn't be disputed is transformation. If its a half-human half-wolf (sorta "furry") type character its not a werewolf because it lacks the transformation element. Again two common idea are human to wolf, and the ability to transform.

[Rhuen]

To end my part on the misunderstanding:
Neoritter: Vuldari is right, it is your habit in many posts I have read by you to others here where you state how their ideas are wrong rather than just giving your own that has given me the impression that you "hate" anything outside the "European" norm for the werewolf.

Vuldari: on the topic at hand: you have a point, in fact rarely does one find the term "werewolf" used for animal wolf shapeshifters, divine beings, or other myth of fanatsy wolves that can assume a human form. In fact I don't either come to think of it. Never thought about it, but it seems the association with the name meaning a human who becomes a wolf is ingrained in my mind too.

[Vuldari]

The idea of Werewolves not actually being humans at all, but some different species entirely is an idea that I just can't wrap my head around easily. I have to struggle to open my mind wider than usual for such ideas to make sense to me.

"Werewolves are Humans first" IS concretely chiseled into my brain.

If you were to ask me to define "Lycanthropy", I would describe it as a condition of a Human with both fictional and non-fictional manifestations.

...but even if I made a list of 32 different versions of Lycanthropy, I would describe every one as a Human "Condition".

"Lycanthope" as a Species just does not exist in my mind. Once I start thinking of them as a unique species (not Human), I stop thinking of them as "Wewolves" and start thinking of them as "Anthropomorphic" wolves, or some strange other kind of shapeshifting Wolves, like Lupine equivilants to 'Kitsunes'.

But that is what is so FUN about this place...

...hearing all the kinds of ideas that I myself would NEVER have thought of before. Some that I LOVE...and even some that I may not like very much.

And thats one of the things I was trying to point out in my last and the one before that post. The common idea that is really indisputable about what a werewolf is; is that they are humans transforming into wolves. Base human secondary wolf. Like you say Vuldari, when you take away that element they aren't werewolves anymore. One could say that a werewolf species developed as an offshoot of humans, because that does not stop them from being of the same genus or stop the common idea of human to wolf. Another common thing that shouldn't be disputed is transformation. If its a half-human half-wolf (sorta "furry") type character its not a werewolf because it lacks the transformation element. Again two common idea are human to wolf, and the ability to transform.

Hey now...don't twist my words to mean more than I was saying.


All of that is how I Think about werewolves, because that is how I came to know of and enjoy them.

...what I "Think"...not what "IS"...

I am NOT saying that Missing-Link and 'Reverse' werewolves are not applicable to the fictional term "Werewolf".

I was merely saying that it is not natural for ME to normally include those creatures in the "Werewolf" Category.


However, because both Rhuen and MoonKit incorrectly assumed otherwise of me, and much of the rest of the pack, a great deal of confusion ensued.


That is all I was saying.

[Vuldari]

To end my part on the misunderstanding:
Neoritter: Vuldari is right, it is your habit in many posts I have read by you to others here where you state how their ideas are wrong rather than just giving your own that has given me the impression that you "hate" anything outside the "European" norm for the werewolf.

Allright, I started this, so I really need to be the one to end it.

Let's all stop beating up on neoritter. I call fault on MYSELF here.

Telling him that it is bad to point out the faults in other peoples opinions by pointing out the faults in his attitudes is Hypocritical Bull$***...

...I screwed up again. I'm Sorry. ...again...


Let's just all just shake hands (symbolicly speaking) put these frustrations behind us and move forward. Shall We?...

[JoshuaMadoc]

Culture clash.

And i thought i was making a mistake trying to "protect" him (seeing as how ritter has always been that way).

Ouy vey. *also signs peace treaty*