Chirp! Bark! Hey!

Fictoform is a Good Word

Written by Machina on July 17th, 2025.

So there's a very useful word that was coined earlier this year - March 30th, 2025 - by Sunchild (mechanical-sunchild) on Tumblr: theriform. The definition from the coining post goes as follows:

A theriform animal is one which was born into a body that is typical/expected of its species and observable as such by everyone, with species-typical levels of sapience/intelligence and whose behaviour etc is unaltered by being born into a human body/raised in a form perceived as human*. All components must be present to count.

It is not the 'opposite' of therian despite similar etymology but is instead to be viewed as a complimentary term to therian, nonhuman, alterhuman, otherkin etc as it exists to specify certain details of a species whilst not invalidating the identities of those who are not theriform. It is made to replace potentially invalidating phrases like 'bio(logical) animal' or 'real animal'.

It is not an identity label and therefore has no flag or symbol and does not need one. Do not create these things please, or use the term to describe yourself on a personal level.

Alternative versions for non-animals could include: floraform, nat(ur)form, technoform, fictoform*, feyform, voidform, starform, divineform etc

We really like this word! It fills a gap in the language that the nonhuman community has had trouble with before - we need a way to clearly differentiate between a dog therianthrope and a pet dog living in their home. These are both dogs, yes, but only one of them can type written language on a computer and have a conversation with other dogs across the world who also type on a computer using written words.

It's an important term for conversation, because there are things that therianthrope dogs can do that theriform dogs CAN'T safely do (e.g. eat chocolate, grapes, onions and garlic). There are things that adult therianthrope dogs do that adult theriform dogs CAN'T safely do (e.g. work jobs for money that they understand how to spend, take recreational drugs, have sex with a human).

These distinctions are important, and it's useful to have a word to discuss them, lest we speak imprecisely while trying to affirm therian identity and muddle our words - therians are animals, yes, but not everything that applies to a therian applies equally to their theriform animal counterpart, especially not on a moral level.

Similarly, we're very happy to have the word fictoform in that same coining post, because it helps to have a word to distinguish between a fictional person (someone who's fictionkind) and a fictional character.

In our system, we often write about fictional versions of ourselves in terrible fictional situations. We happily write about atrocities happening to them, knowing "this is Fictional Me that I'm putting into the spin cycle for Joy And Catharsis!" We also see other people's fandom interpretations of characters we know as people. We see those characters getting written into horrifying situations and behaving in ways we don't recognize as our loved ones, and we see people hating those characters and loving those characters and playing around with them like dolls. All of this is completely okay, and completely morally neutral, because it's all happening to fictoform characters, not to our loved ones as people.

A fictoform character is different from your "source" as a fictional identity, because it includes more than just the media you recognize yourself from. A fictoform character is any character that is a morally neutral fictional prop to play with - which includes every possible fandom and canon interpretation, any fictional character that is NOT fictionkind, and therefore NOT someone who can be hurt in this world.

The term theriform is a useful term for understandable conversation in the therian community, because therians need to be able to talk about the unique challenges that theriform animals face, without being imprecise and accidentally saying, "therians are just like their theriotypes in every way, so everything that applies to therians applies to other animals too!"

Similarly, we think fictoform is a useful word for conversation in the fictionkind community, because fictionkind need to be able to talk about the ways in which they're different from their fictoform counterparts. The key difference here is that fictionkind are sentient beings - we can sense the world around us, we can suffer, just like any other living thing from a bedbug to a redwood tree.

Fictoform characters, on the other hand, are not sentient - we can throw our fictoform selves into a wretched cannibal AU and write them having terrible murder-sex and killing each other, and none of us are morally tainted by that. We're not actually having terrible murder-sex and killing each other - it's playing, it's pretend, it's a story we made up for fun and catharsis. That's what fandom does with fictoform characters, and that's what we do with our own fictoform selves. It doesn't hurt us as people, because the fictional characters can't be hurt in the same way that we can be.

You might recognize this attitude from the phrase "fiction =/= reality," and it is basically the same gist that we're trying to get at. The problem is that, obviously, the dichotomy between fiction and reality gets dicey when you start talking to fictionfolk, whether you're talking to fictionkind or soulbonders, so talking about fictoform characters instead of fictional vs. real people seems like it could be a very useful distinction!

Just like there's a clear boundary between acts that are appropriate with a theriform animal vs. a therianthrope, there's a clear boundary between acts that are appropriate with a fictoform character and a fictionkind person. Treat fictionkind with respect, because we're alive here and now and our lives matter - and fellow fictionkind, let's play with fictoform characters like dolls for fun and catharsis. It doesn't hurt anyone.