@Raptorshy
But just because something has been done for a while doesnt make it correct really.
I mean, look at your gender/gender pairings (Though I did not realize thats how we were doing it, good to know), that is a much better level of description that does not marginalize the transgender community.
That being said, transgenderism is an example that we can look at very recent history in which we did not have terms for said things, but terms were needed, and not including them was a form of denying that they existed.
By using Avian and Scalie for ‘fictional species’ but leaving nonmammilian fictional species as mammals, we are otherising them, saying that sergals are ‘real’ mammals but say argonians are not ‘real’ reptiles. I’m fine with merging them in, or creating the supertags that @DoesNotExist suggested and just leaving them under the supertags, but it certainly feels weird to have Sergals and Zorgoias as ‘mammals’ but argonians, kobolds, and scaled dragons as not reptiles.
All I’m asking for is consistency here, instead of raising one group on a pedestal above others.
Its really a consistent problem within the furry community. Avians are often left out, or just represented by just one creature. We get ‘that’s a fox, or a dog, or a cat’ and yet when you look at birds, most of the time its just ‘that’s a bird’ :V
Like I fully get that it might be reasonable to separate out based on real animals from completely original species for the sake of classification, but it is speciesism to only apply that to one class of original species.