In a free society, adults may believe they are wolves. They may also believe they are dragons, demons, angels, elves, foxes, or spiritually misunderstood woodland creatures. They may wear ears, write poetry about their theriotype, and explain at dinner parties that their inner self is not, strictly speaking, human. That is their business.
My interest begins when a registered psychology clinic takes those beliefs, wraps them in therapeutic authority, and offers the result to consumers as “affirming, scientifically-informed clinical support.”
That is the actual wording on the Adult Gender & Sexology Clinic page of
in Sydney. The service is offered to people who identify as otherkin or therians, and to the parents and partners of those with “non-human feelings or identities.” The phrase doing the heavy lifting is scientifically-informed.
https://kingstreetpsychologyclinic.com.au/adult-gender-and-sexology-clinic#othersupport
Informed by what science?
There is no diagnostic category for otherkin identity in DSM-5-TR or ICD-11. There are no peer-reviewed trials demonstrating that affirming someone’s non-human identity improves outcomes. There are no clinical guidelines. There is no evidence that telling a man identifying as a wolf he is valid is safer than asking why he feels unable to live as a human.
“Scientifically-informed” is doing what it usually does in these settings: gesturing at a body of evidence the consumer is invited to assume exists somewhere behind the curtain.
The modern identity marketplace has discovered a marvellous recipe. Take a self-concept. Add authenticity. Add disclosure. Add community belonging. Add non-pathologising. Add affirming. Place it on a professional website. Sprinkle with scientifically-informed. Wait for the vulnerable consumer to infer the science.
Woman to man. Man to woman. Man to non-binary. Man to wolf. Man to dragon.
The category changes. The therapeutic language is oddly portable.
Once identity becomes the thing to be affirmed rather than the thing to be assessed, the model can travel almost anywhere. A person says, “I feel I am not what my body says I am.” The clinician says, “How brave.” The website says, “Scientifically-informed.” The parent says, “Is this evidence-based?” The invoice says, “Thank you for your payment.”
Insert distress. Select identity. Receive affirmation. Science pending.
Clinic intake form Question 1: Do you identify as human? ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ It is harmful to ask
The point is not that people with unusual identities should be mocked. Many are likely vulnerable. Some are experimenting. Some are coping with loneliness, autism, dissociation, trauma, or developmental distress. Some are immersed in online subcultures that have given them their first language for suffering. Some are eccentric adults with unusual spiritual beliefs who would benefit from ordinary counselling and a safe place to talk.
You cannot know which until you assess.
That is the problem with public promises to be affirming and non-pathologising before the person has walked through the door. The conclusion has been written before the assessment begins. And once that happens, the service starts to look less like psychology and more like a vending machine with a clinical logo.
Vulnerable people deserve clinicians who can sit with complexity, not baptise every self-concept as authentic. They deserve careful differential thinking, not a service menu that places gender identity, sexual identity, and non-human identity along the same affirming conveyor belt.
And consumers deserve truthful advertising.
If King Street Psychology Clinic wants to offer general counselling to people experiencing unusual identity beliefs, it can say so. If it wants to support families dealing with distress, secrecy, neurodivergence, or subculture conflict, it can say so. But if it wants to advertise affirming, scientifically-informed clinical support for people who identify as wolves, demons, dragons, or angels, the public is entitled to ask a very boring, very Australian question.
Where is the science?
Because “scientifically-informed” is not a magic spell.
And even dragons should not be sold ‘evidence-based’ snake oil.
Article born of WTF irritation whilst doing the private gender clinic audits - see
WTF indeed!
Astounding!