ALT Accounts -Different Sex?

When a creature becomes a vampire they are turned and they become undead. It is not a disease because diseases only affect the living. Vampirism is what affects them (rather than being infected) and so we call them vampires.

Were-creatures (which can include many different types of creature, even were-ferrets) are infected or turned by the disease called Lycanthropy and hence they are all called Lycans. Lycanthropy only infects the living.

If I only occasionally turn into a human, does that make me a Were-human?

Only if you have Lycanthropy

lycanthropy from the greek, lykoi (wolf), and anthropos (man)...

Mona is properly anthropomorphic (man-shpaed)... well, human-shaped anyway.

Lycanthropy is indeed from the greek and means what you say but it is also a name applied to a disease (talking about the mythical disease and not the real disease of lycanthropy which derives it's name from similarities with the mythical one) and it this context has a specific meaning. You really do have to have contracted Lycanthropy to be considered a lycan. There are no myths I am aware of that have lycans who have not been infected or been born of infected ancestors somewhere down the line.

In the latin, there is the word Versipellis which means literally "turned skin" and translates generally to shape-shifter, also a good word to describe a lycan.

I smell.. I smell... I detected the scent of Bad Etymology Man as soon as I came aboard.

Were-wolf is based on the church-latin pronunciation of "vir", man, plus wolf... "man-wolf" or "wolf-man". So etymologically, were-ferret, were-donkey, were-marmoset makes perfect sense.

Lycanthrope means the same thing, except in greek to make it fancy. "Lykos" for wolf, and "anthropos" for man. But when you split off the first part you're keeping the "wolf", so a "ferret lycan" is still etymologically part wolf.

There are no myths involving the word "lycan" at all.

No grounding in any tradition, either. It's almost certainly something out of a board game or pulp horror series no earlier than the '80s.

Mythologically, there are many kinds of werewolves (or other part-human part-animal creatures). Some are a distinct species (you get bitten by a werewolf and you get redness around the bite from bacterial infection), some are the result of magic or the curses of gods, and some act like a disease. Sometimes the magician turns himself to a wolf (as in Anthony Boucher's "The Compleat Werewolf" where everyone is a potential were-something, if they only know the magic word to turn them), sometimes he turns other people. Lately, the magician has often been a scientist using anything from crude surgery to nanotechnology.

Make that the 30's, at the very least...

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=kdUJAQAAIAAJ&dq=inauthor:Phillpotts+intitle:Lycanthrope&lr=

Lycanthrope is an old term, possibly Victorian... they were big on coining new words from classical roots. "Lycan" is a nauseating neologism.

Oops, sorry, I thought you were referring to Lycanthrope as an 80's term.

I agree, "Lycan" is truly annoying - even more so when some write it as "Lykan".

[edit] although using a K instead of a C is the more normal way of Romanising Greek *shrugs* can't win.

I have an alt who is male. I only made him to take pictures with though. I never actually used him for anything else. It would just feel funny to me trying to be a guy.

I don't see anything there that contradicts anything I said. Anything you smell is just your own odour

What I did say is that to be a lycan you have to have been bitten and infected with lycanthropy.

Sure there are, the word is just used in its lycanthrope form and I was using the word to describe one that suffers from lycanthropy, I shortened it in that specific case.

Not sure what "it's" here is referring to. There are definitely uses of the word lycanthrope long before this century, it is not a stretch that it might have been used in a shortened form as lycan at any time. Beside again, it was my usage of the word to describe something meaning a sufferer of lycanthropy.

Creatures that are turned into animals by magic are generally something else. There is a hazy line between them that occurs when a curse (or magic) is used to change a person into a creature by the light of the moon and then they change back by daylight. Often the "first" werewolf in a chain is a cursed person, so in that you are correct but the result is an infection which is the lycanthropy which makes them a lycanthrope and therefore a lycan, regardless of when each of the terms were first expressed. If this were not so then they would not be able to pass it on by biting another.

People have been shortening words unofficially for all time, you cannot say that people would not have shortened Lycanthrope to Lycan before the 80s. You just cannot back that up. Even if you were right over it, it would just be a modern shortening of a traditional word, so what does that change? Nothing.

"lycanthrope" is a legitimate word. "lycan" is a back-formation from "lycanthrope" and makes no etymological sense.

I've never seen that before the '80s. I have, however, seen the use of other greek and latin roots attached to anthrope (therianthrope, or beast-man, for the general case. Felanthrope for cat-people, and so on).

Mythologically there is no distinction between these different kinds of transformations. The werewolf myth is all about love of violence, or sometimes the dangers of suppressing violent urges, and in some cases just being a violent person is enough to change you into an animal.

In most werewolf myths you don't change because you're bitten by a werewolf. You normally put on a wolf-skin cloak or a belt, or ate certain herbs, or slept under a full moon. The idea that the bite of a werewolf always turns you into a werewolf really only became dominant in the 20th century... it's a very "Hollywood" idea.

Has anyone every told you, that you are a bit of a nit-picker? So what, people don't make sense all the time but they do shorten words, it is done all the time and all through time - it is not inconceivable and anyway you are still missing my point that "I" used the word instead of the longer word in equivalence. So again, exactly what does it change?

I smell BS, I say that there is a difference. We don't consider all person to animal transformations to be of the lycanthrope variety or even say they are all were-animals.

Wrong again, there are definitely far earlier precedents, the bite is most often the source of the infection. Hollywood just popularised that and added garnish such as a purity and love being a defense against such creatures. Even the silver bullet idea has some root in time earlier than hollywood, not actually being a bullet but the use of silver itself.

And because you haven't seen it, it cannot possibly exist at all? Is that it? Pfft!

I'm sorry, we seem to be talking at cross purposes. I was primarily responding to this:
I thought that your reference to myths and "the real disease" meant you were referring to the historical record. See, I've been interested in the history and mythology of werewolves for some decades now and historically and traditionally that's not how werewolves have been depicted and interpreted. The aversion to silver and the infectious nature of the werewolf's bite is recent, and underlying myths are incredibly diverse.

Also, the idea that werewolf legends are related to hereditary or infectious diseases (eg, lupus, porphyria, Downs syndrome, or rabies) is another recent phenomenon. The typical signs of werewolves in human form rarely match any real disease. There are exceptions, but no more than you would expect by chance, and these exceptions don't match up well from place to place.

Fair enough, I am probably guilty here of contradicting myself and confusing the heck out of everyone too, it is late and I don't know werewolf myths as well as I do vampires.

i only find it annoying when they spell it "lichen".


(though i suppose that that Swamp Thing could be considered a lichenthrope...)

Or when they spell it "Linden"... cuz Lindens are something different. Kinda like gremlins, they break everything they touch

/me sighs, gets a room, hands a key to Argent and a key to Gabriele.

The same things are important to you both, I'm sure you can work it out!

/me bites Nika VV

Actually I think Argent needs both keys

Ferrets don't need... keys.

If I ever started making clothes for guys, I guess I'd have to make a male alt to size them on. But I just don't see myself doing it.

I just can't relate to a male avatar - I didn't even like playing games like the various Mario things back when I was young. I always wanted to play the princess, or some kind of critter...

I have several alts... a female vampire, a gothic guy, a princess from India, an hippie chic, my bank guy, a soldier, my RL-wife-avie... and so on... what can I say? some of my alts got a second life too and they need alts too

/me cries at the rampant appropriation and rewriting of historical and cultural belief and literature.

it'd be less shameful, but rather than being original and claiming modern roots, it always attempts to overwrite the past.... as if it's age of claim was better than the thing we learned yesterday, or any more or less valid today ...