#category: terminology

[revenant-coining]

Aemuloime

[pt: Aemuloime /end pt]

[ids: 2 rectangular flags with 5 equally-sized vertical lines, and a thick line on the left and right. colors in this order from left to right: dark green, grey-green, greyish-green, light green, pale blue-green, light blue, greyish-blue, grey-blue, dark blue. in the center of the first flag is a dark green-to-dark blue copy symbol outlined in pale blue-green. /end ids]

Aemuloime Attraction: a type of attraction characterized by copying, imitation, & mimicry. this could be copying, imitating, or mimicking others, and/or wanting to be copied, imitated, or mimicked, for entertainment, as a form of flattery and/or affection, wanting to “be” someone/wanting someone to “be” you, etc. made with alterhumans/nonhumans in mind, as well as neurodivergent individuals, but not exclusive.

this attraction may be felt entwined with or at the same time as Amoinvidian (link), Envious (link), & Offis (link) attraction, but doesn’t have to be.

Aemuloime terminology can be decided by the user! but here’s some terminology we came up with:

aemush or aemulush; who one has aemuloime feelings for

aemu or aemupar; one in an aemuloime relationship

imitaem; the one being copied, imitated, or mimicked in the relationship

effiloime; the one copying, imitating, or mimicking in the relationship

aemuship or consoime; an aemuloime relationship

aemulity or aemuloimity; one’s aemuloime orientation

[ids: a transparent image, a dark grey copy symbol outlined in pale grey, a transparent image. /end ids]

Etymology: “aemulo” latin for emulate, imitate, be envious, & copy, “ime” meaning deriving from

for cam!

@radiomogai , @thecoffeecrew404 , @tertiary-attraction-archive

[id: a dark blue line divider. /end id]

#🪼 creations #aemuloime #attraction types #tertiary attraction #aemush #aemulush #aemu #aemupar #imitaemu #effiloime #aemuship #consoime #aemulity #aemuloimity #liom #mogai #category: symbols #category: terminology #long post #category: attractions

[mantisgodsdomain]

We do think that Riz is a gynandromorph of some description, especially since damselfly sexual dimorphism tends to be pretty distinct and he's displaying a very unconventional morph for a damselfly of any flavor. He would have no goddamned clue what that would mean, of course, and he probably wouldn't care about it if you told him, but he's definitely got something going on there.

#we speak #bug fables #for reference its a Thing for damselflies to have mimicry in the form of Females Who Look Like Males #but its a one-way street. theres no equivalent female-mimic morph for males #which makes riz Extremely Notable since hes displaying a real clear female morph there #and though being transgender would be very much possible for him we prefer this option #especially since it also offers extra reason why he's got such a broad palette compared to his sister and his father #guy is Unusually Big for a male damselfly and just didnt think twice about it. he feels like the sort of guy who just #wouldnt care overly much for self-definition we think. hes got a job to do. do you think he cares about how rare his genes are? #for his sister there is literally no way to tell if shes transfem or just a mimic morph and tbh good for her #we'll. drop some comparison images in a reblog for the irl damselflies #but in general we favor this one both bc it appeals to us more and bc riz just feels like the sort of guy who wouldnt care much abt gender #like. even if he were trans he feels like the sort of guy who would tell like three people about his pronouns #and then just go about his day and either they tell people or they dont and he doesnt particularly care either way #hes got things to do. traps to build. yes hes a guy but what is the point of making a thing out of it when theres poachers to deal with #he feels like the sort of dude to be Cis Guy enough that hes entirely confused as to what ur talking about if u try and misgender him #no clue where youre coming from but youre wrong #anyways back to spear fighting 101 #(note: male and female used here as in the arbitrary sex categories. its the junk. we know its not accurate to being A People) #(its the terminology we've got in the back drawer)

[specialmouse]

Drag =/= ballroom !

#idk how to articulate this with the proper terminology but. i dont think ballroom is a space white people should be comfortable in no matter #how qweer you are. that is a black+brown space built on the beauty of being black+brown+trans+gay. #voguing is one thing but walking categories is another #do u think i wanna see some soho white bitch walk the face category ? what? #even asian people i have a hard time feeling comfortable witb participating and im wasian LMFAO i just #drag is an artform ballroom is a community defined by its players #and i for one do not want to see ballroom become white. because then it wouldnt be ballroom #im talking to other white ppl rn .

[eisthenameofme]

Stumbled on a book called Horror in Architecture by Joshua Comaroff and Ong Ker-Shing on accident while looking for a copy of Exquisite Corpse online because I can't find my physical copy (there was a key word matchup) and I can only assume that is some kind of Smirk's architecture Leitner bullshit

#Still need to make that list #And apparently acquire a physical copy of this book #Provided I still think it's equivalent to a Leitner after I read it #tmaish #by which i mean. tma-adjacent but not like. canon tma #and I'll be looking at it with the structure of the TMA fear powers in mind but don't think the Powers as presented in TMA #are exactly what's going on in this universe per se #but do find the terminology/structures/etc useful #and also just think it's fun from a fandom perspective to analyze things with TMA in mind #mypost #...i should probably have a tag for this category of post #ill just tag posts where i compare irl books to leitners as Leitners for now unless anyone has something else they'd perfer #to make blacklisting easier/whatever #so. #Leitners

[napneeders]

im sorry. I cannot write this fic after all. the word for this one minor action doesn't exist in English and it's non-negotiable

#the grammatical category doesn't exist 😔 #idk what the linguistic terminology for this is #writing

[radioconstructed]

⌖ I WILL say that I appreciate how much of the newer terminology originates as SELF-DESCRIPTION and SELF-DETERMINATION. This has not ALWAYS been the case, HISTORICALLY SPEAKING!

#⌖ online #// she doesn't feel the need to elaborate but she means like. terms like 'homosexual' were diagnoses. it was considered a sociopathic #personality disorder in the first DSM. #A lot of OLD terminology originates from medicine/psychology/that research and isn't like terminology ppl used to selfdetermine. #(And some of it just doesn't even make sense like the way Blanchard splits trans women into 2 categories. she fits neither.) #So historically. Identifying with stuff would have meant identifying with how medical institutions would have pathologized her. #She thinks it's swag that ppl today are coming up with terms to self-describe and find community. That's a net positive. #She just personally has seen terminology change so much over time both in usage and application so it feels like an unstable thing to tether #her identity to if that makes sense?

[oh-dear-so-queer]

As we have seen, one way that zoologists have tried to avoid classifying same-sex activity as "homosexuality" is by using terminology and behavioral categories that deny it is sexual activity at all.

"Biological Exuberance: Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity" - Bruce Bagemihl

#book quote #biological exuberance #bruce bagemihl #nonfiction #zoologist #classification #same sex activity #homosexuality #gay #lesbian #bisexual #terminology #categories #denial #animal behavior

[autistic-shaiapouf]

Am absolutely SWEEPING the categories in celebrity jeopardy

#my roommate put it on and I'm just. one after another. it's easier than regular jeopardy lmao #''this florida autumn disaster in 2022-'' IAN?? FUCKING IAN????? #one category was brain surgeon terminology and the questions were like. the brain has 2 halves; what are those called #finally.... everything ive gained by reading bc my social skills lag is coming into use #i should go to bars with trivia nights.. #hoatm rants

[elderflowerprince]

guys. GUYS . humming is different in different languages

"yes eld that's obvious now get to bed" okay yes in retrospect it is but i DIDN'T REALISE until i did it just now

what USED to be "dum, da-dumdum dum-dum-dum" for me is now "ta, ta-rara ra-ra-ra" (i don't know why ta and da don't map perfectly it's very weird)

#elderflower thoughts #linguistics #linguistics talk #i am sure there is a more specific category of linguistics terminology for this but i am too baby to know it #if anyone does know please tell me #no the track i was humming isnt homestuck related. uuuh look over there ok cool see you

[headspace-hotel]

gazing in wonder at the wikipedia page for meander

Out of all the terminological categories in the English language, geological terminology is the most intensely poetic; who could fail to be moved by metamorphism and orogenesis? There is something awesome and mythic about it.

Anyway as I was reading this article I recalled a dim, possibly inaccurate memory of Chinese mythology where four dragons transformed themselves into the four rivers that flow through China.

I've been taking walks beside the creek. The creek has "an erosion problem" as it was once described to me. I notice on one bank the creek cuts underneath the roots of the trees and threatens to collapse the bank, and on another it deposits a low, broad beach of broken stones and mud.

The recent history of humankind would mislead us to think that erosion is a linear process of degradation, but the article for meander tells me that rivers move, the loops in their channels steadily rolling along the river's length, like the slithering of a snake over a time scale of thousands of years...

A river is a kind of dragon.

#random #geology

[revenant-coining]

Dimensen Terminology

[ pt: Dimensen Terminology ]

optional dimensen terminology 4 anyother who wants 2 use it ^^

Aunt / Uncle / Auntcle: Theotle

Parent: Sionent

Grandparent: Grandsionent

Child: Versild

Nephew / Niece / Nibling: Verling

Sibling: Souling and Fateling

Spouse: Fatemate and Soulmate

Datemate: Altfriend and Dimfriend

Etymology:

‘theotle’ from ‘theory’ and ‘auntcle’

‘sionent’ from ‘soul’ and ‘parent’

‘versild’ from ‘verse’ and ‘child

‘verling’ from ‘verse’ and ‘nibling’

@radiomogai , @rescanwriter

#dimensen #category: DIMENSEN #category: TERMINOLOGY #🪼 creations

[liferetainsitssparkle]

i get really fiddly with my wording for somebody who hates specificity

#or #i dont refer to things by their proper names ill do it by like. category of item #im not interested in refering to my shit w medical terminology i love calling drinks and foods and supplements #by their Categories ... specificity annoys me in a way i dont understand and cant articulate #i feel like i used to be able to but i think it's gotten worse like more expansive as i got older

[mostlysignssomeportents]

How Google’s trial secrecy lets it control the coverage

I'm coming to Minneapolis! Oct 15: Presenting The Internet Con at Moon Palace Books. Oct 16: Keynoting the 26th ACM Conference On Computer-Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing.

"Corporate crime" is practically an oxymoron in America. While it's true that the single most consequential and profligate theft in America is wage theft, its mechanisms are so obscure and, well, dull that it's easy to sell us on the false impression that the real problem is shoplifting:

https://newrepublic.com/post/175343/wage-theft-versus-shoplifting-crime

Corporate crime is often hidden behind Dana Clare's Shield Of Boringness, cloaked in euphemisms like "risk and compliance" or that old favorite, "white collar crime":

https://pluralistic.net/2021/12/07/solar-panel-for-a-sex-machine/#a-single-proposition

And corporate crime has a kind of performative complexity. The crimes come to us wreathed in specialized jargon and technical terminology that make them hard to discern. Which is wild, because corporate crimes occur on a scale that other crimes – even those committed by organized crime – can't hope to match:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/10/12/no-criminals-no-crimes/#get-out-of-jail-free-card

But anything that can't go on forever eventually stops. After decades of official tolerance (and even encouragement), corporate criminals are finally in the crosshairs of federal enforcers. Take National Labor Relations Board general counsel Jennifer Abruzzo's ruling in Cemex: when a company takes an illegal action to affect the outcome of a union election, the consequence is now automatic recognition of the union:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/09/06/goons-ginks-and-company-finks/#if-blood-be-the-price-of-your-cursed-wealth

That's a huge deal. Before, a boss could fire union organizers and intimidate workers, scuttle the union election, and then, months or years later, pay a fine and some back-wages…and the union would be smashed.

The scale of corporate crime is directly proportional to the scale of corporations themselves. Big companies aren't (necessarily) led by worse people, but even small sins committed by the very largest companies can affect millions of lives.

That's why antitrust is so key to fighting corporate crime. To make corporate crimes less harmful, we must keep companies from attaining harmful scale. Big companies aren't just too big to fail and too big to jail – they're also too big for peaceful coexistence with a society of laws.

The revival of antitrust enforcement is such a breath of fresh air, but it's also fighting headwinds. For one thing, there's 40 years of bad precedent from the nightmare years of pro-monopoly Reaganomics to overturn:

https://pluralistic.net/ApexPredator

It's not just precedents in the outcomes of trials, either. Trial procedure has also been remade to favor corporations, with judges helping companies stack the deck in their own favor. The biggest factor here is secrecy: blocking recording devices from courts, refusing to livestream the proceedings, allowing accused corporate criminals to clear the courtroom when their executives take the stand, and redacting or suppressing the exhibits:

https://prospect.org/power/2023-09-27-redacted-case-against-amazon/

When a corporation can hide evidence and testimony from the public and the press, it gains broad latitude to dispute critics, including government enforcers, based on evidence that no one is allowed to see, or, in many cases, even describe. Take Project Nessie, the program that the FTC claims Amazon used to compel third-party sellers to hike prices across many categories of goods:

https://www.wsj.com/business/retail/amazon-used-secret-project-nessie-algorithm-to-raise-prices-6c593706

Amazon told the press that the FTC has "grossly mischaracterize[d]" Project Nessie. The DoJ disagrees, but it can't say why, because the Project Nessie files it based its accusations on have been redacted, at Amazon's insistence. Rather than rebutting Amazon's claim, FTC spokesman Douglas Farrar could only say "We once again call on Amazon to move swiftly to remove the redactions and allow the American public to see the full scope of what we allege are their illegal monopolistic practices."

It's quite a devastating gambit: when critics and prosecutors make specific allegations about corporate crimes, the corporation gets to tell journalists, "No, that's wrong, but you're not allowed to see the reason we say it's wrong."

It's a way to work the refs, to get journalists – or their editors – to wreathe bold claims in endless hedging language, or to avoid reporting on the most shocking allegations altogether. This, in turn, keeps corporate trials out of the public eye, which reassures judges that they can defer to further corporate demands for opacity without facing an outcry.

That's a tactic that serves Google well. When the company was dragged into court by the DoJ Antitrust Division, it demanded – and received – a veil of secrecy that is especially ironic given the company's promise "to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful":

https://usvgoogle.org/trial-update-9-22

While this veil has parted somewhat, it is still intact enough to allow the company to work the refs and kill disfavorable reporting from the trial. Last week, Megan Gray – ex-FTC, ex-DuckDuckGo – published an editorial in Wired reporting on her impression of an explosive moment in the Google trial:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/10/03/not-feeling-lucky/#fundamental-laws-of-economics

According to Gray, Google had run a program to mess with the "semantic matching" on queries, silently appending terms to users' searches that caused them to return more ads – and worse results. This generated more revenue for Google, at the expense of advertisers who got billed to serve ads that didn't even match user queries.

Google forcefully disputed this claim:

https://twitter.com/searchliaison/status/1709726778170786297

They contacted Gray's editors at Wired, but declined to release all the exhibits and testimony that Gray used to form her conclusions about Google's conduct; instead, they provided a subset of the relevant materials, which cast doubt on Gray's accusations.

Wired removed Gray's piece, with an unsigned notice that "WIRED editorial leadership has determined that the story does not meet our editorial standards. It has been removed":

https://www.wired.com/story/google-antitrust-lawsuit-search-results/

But Gray stands by her piece. She admits that she might have gotten some of the fine details wrong, but that these were not material to the overall point of her story, that Google manipulated search queries to serve more ads at the expense of the quality of the results:

https://twitter.com/megangrA/status/1711035354134794529

She says that the piece could and should have been amended to reflect these fine-grained corrections, but that in the absence of a full record of the testimony and exhibits, it was impossible for her to prove to her editors that her piece was substantively correct.

I reviewed the limited evidence that Google permitted to be released and I find her defense compelling. Perhaps you don't. But the only way we can factually resolve this dispute is for Google to release the materials that they claim will exonerate them. And they won't, though this is fully within their power.

I've seen this playbook before. During the early months of the pandemic, a billionaire who owned a notorious cyberwarfare company used UK libel threats to erase this fact from the internet – including my own reporting – on the grounds that the underlying research made small, non-material errors in characterizing a hellishly complex financial Rube Goldberg machine that was, in my opinion, deliberately designed to confuse investigators.

Like the corporate crimes revealed in the Panama Papers and Paradise Papers, the gambit is complicated, but it's not sophisticated:

Make everything as complicated as possible;

Make everything as secret as possible;

Dismiss any accusations by claiming errors in the account of the deliberately complex arrangements, which can't be rectified because the relevant materials are a secret.

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/10/09/working-the-refs/#but-id-have-to-kill-you

My next novel is The Lost Cause, a hopeful novel of the climate emergency. Amazon won't sell the audiobook, so I made my own and I'm pre-selling it on Kickstarter!

Image: Jason Rosenberg (modified) https://www.flickr.com/photos/underpants/12069086054/

CC BY https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/

--

Japanexperterna.se (modified) https://www.flickr.com/photos/japanexperterna/15251188384/

CC BY-SA 2.0: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/

#pluralistic #secrecy #opacity #google #antitrust #trustbusting #wired #working the refs #megan grey #semantic matching

[escarlatafox]

(2am post feel free to ignore I'm working on trying to eventually convey this stuff more coherently. Can't put under read more cause I'm on mobile. Just jotting this down to have it somewhere to build upon in more depth later. When I've finished my read of Metzinger and others)

Saying "I can't imagine how (trait that aligns with what is stereotypically expected of gender) could have ever been socialised for me specifically and I think it was innate for me specifically, therefore innate gender differences to some extent must be real" seems so weaksauce to me and transparently poorly thought out

Even if we accept that that particular trait is innate for you specifically - which it very well could be! - you're just one individual wherein that trait you have happens to align with what is societally expected in accordance with your gender. What about everyone of that same gender without that trait? It also tells us nothing about to what extent the presentation of that trait in other people of that same gender were influenced societally to have that trait and how much not.

What about traits that may seem innate which don't conform to your gender? Etc etc etc

It's all a big mess of nature and nurture being a feedback loop, the mind body problem, and debates about free will all coalesce into one -

Individual human beings may individually have some ''innate'' traits (in fact, by definition, is not every aspect of our existence governed by the individual's mind-body responding to external stimulus in a unique way pertaining to the individual? The innateness of the individual lies in that very interaction. In why person A responds to something in a certain manner compared to person B, and so on). It breaks down when examined beyond the level of the individual and the notion of innate gendered differences still quickly becomes incoherent, unnecessarily divisive, and to an extent a self-fulfilling prophecy on a societal scale

#invoked by a post I saw where this person abandoned a blank slate model in favour of a gendered differences one #when they seemed to acknowledge that gender is a social construct and Yet #went so far as to claim that gender is a useful demarcation line #and to do this on the basis of like 1 trait you have that feels innate to you therefore you try to apply this model to all of humanity? #wiiild to me #this post is hopelessly inadequate I just wanted to put it somewhere to help future me expand on #terminology needs work. response to stimulus needs clarifying #the stimulus being the environment like. literally everything that's not You #we're biological beings always responding to the world around us. but we do so in individualised unique ways #so yes blank slate model is flawed we need to bust open a new paradigm though #instead of haphazardly clinging to categories that no one will ever be able to adhere to completely

[lizbethborden]

Its so true, Dworkin and Mackinnon predicted everything about this current era. Porn has become sex now; teenage girls being bullied into anal and getting choked by boys and coerced into sending nudes at an age typically understood as one of “exploration”—now porn defines sex and sexuality; and Gail Dines and many others have talked about the deeply deadening effect of porn on empathy and the ability to recognize women as people. Porn crept ever further into the mainstream and it has totally saturated our culture, from the ‘arts’—not just streaming/TV or Lars Von Trier films, but I’m thinking of stuff as small as frames of comic books traced from porn, art distributed online traced from porn—to the personal intimate lives of human beings, women being choked, spat on, beaten—then again, even back in the 80s, men were using porn to abuse women, and the most widely available stuff was still not as vile as the porn you can find with a 2sec Google search from any phone or computer today. Deepfake porn turns all women existing in public into potential victims of violent and degrading misogynist fetishism and sexuality. OF and its ilk makes it possible for any woman to monetize herself in the form of porn and in a time of increasing economic instability, inflation, high food and gas prices, the upcoming potential loss of health insurance for millions, I’m sure it’s more appealing than ever. Porn terminology is everywhere, “MILF,” “ebony,” etc. And all of this is done under the guise of sexual liberation and free speech, and to argue against it is seen as puritanical, condescending at best, hateful, antifeminist, “SWERF”/“TERF”-y at worst. It is a demonstrated fact of the research done into porn that it shuts off vital abilities to connect with women as human beings, to empathize with women and to reject violence against us; that porn usage conditions the user into seeking out ever more intense, bizarre, violent content to use in order to achieve the same pleasure and orgasm that “vanilla” content used to do for them. What must it be doing to all of us, collectively, to have porn on every level of our culture now? What is it doing to the position of women in our society, already half citizens at best, earning significantly less than men, with our bodily autonomy stripped away in many states, being denied life-saving procedures and medications—not just mifepristone etc but even things like lupus medication and anti-inflammatories that may potentially affect us and our bodies if we chose at some point to maybe get pregnant—even being arrested for drinking or taking drugs while decidedly not pregnant because it could affect a potential fetus at some point? Are we not degraded objects already? What does it mean for us to be reduced to “cumsocks” and pornographic objects on top of all this? How deeply destructive is this society, how much further will it go to enforce the category of woman as hole, woman as receptacle, woman as vessel, woman as meat?

[beaft]

ah. yet another romance novel falls victim to the classic blunder* of having a completely out-of-left-field scene where its characters abruptly abort their lovemaking so they can have a clinical conversation about consent and kinks and boundaries, all the while using terminology that's completely out of whack with both the tone of the story and the world that the author has constructed. many such cases i fear

*"blunder", a word here meaning "thing i do not personally like, or find distasteful"; should be considered in a similar category to "bugbear" or "pet peeve"

#like a bucket of icy water dumped into a bath #this is the regency era. they would not use the traffic light system #be shh now