It’s more that you phrased it “believed to be the real origin” which presents it like it’s somehow questionable - this was 1986, people who developed ARPANET are just recently retiring, this isn’t a lost or secret history. Also you say you’re not going to do something that sounds conspiracy-theory-y and then go on to do the thing you just said you wouldn’t do.

It’s a great game imho, but I was gifted my copy - in no world is any game worth €80, this one included, it’s completely divorced from reality to charge that much. Fucking tragic the publisher just killed it on delivery.

I know you’re accusing me of taking this too seriously, but I fat-fingered the downvote button and a few minutes later, on a 22 hour old post, you go thru and downvote everything I’ve said? I don’t even know how you’d notice that since it was only for a moment before I reversed the vote, but man if your attitude in a discussion is that malleable that’s concerning.

Edif: Yeah, saw that coming…

Yeah, exactly.

I think you’re dismissing my well founded concern over the eager acceptance of misinformation because you don’t want to see it as a problem to make fun of your enemies - sure, it’s fine to make fun of trump, but even in this thread people are going well beyond just making fun of him and are acting like this is clearly established fact.

A sound is audible, yeah. I can’t believe I’m using this argument but anyone in that room full of people could have farted, and it feels like the people really championing this have never watched another one of his pressers - he ends them abruptly like this all the time, the body language of the people behind him is always weird (they’re big enough freaks that they’re willing to be filmed standing behind trump), there’s really nothing abnormal (for trump) happening here.

If you want to believe trump shit his pants sure, you can do that - but the willingness of people to latch onto this and insist that it’s true (in the face of so many reasons to be skeptical), even presenting red-string-on-board evidence like in that youtube screenshot, should worry you. If they’re willing to accept this with no evidence, what else are they accepting with a similar degree of scrutiny just because it’s something you want to be true?

Those seem like… real stretches. When she “Gestures it’s a code 2” she scratches her nose, and the staff hot mic is extremely indistinct, to the point that even listening for “I really can’t do this again” I can only barely hear it - it could be anything, including an apology. Even the initial “shart” noise is an incredibly minor sound in a room with a whole lot of extremely minor sounds.

I hate when people leap to support this kind of rumor, because it’s just such a waste of time - there’s never going to be any proof, everyone is just putting string on a corkboard and insisting it makes sense. There’s so so many exhaustively well documented things to hold against trump, why in this case do we need to literally make shit up to feel superior to him? Isn’t the part where we’re not stupid corrupt racist genocidal narcissistic homophobic hypocritical monsters enough?

There was a weird noise in a recent press event at the oval office and then reporters were ushered outside - rumors are that the reporters said it smelled like he shit himself, but I haven’t seen any primary source stating that. Seems most likely that this is a rumor and something else was going on, though it would be amusing if it were true.

Chemical analysis takes a while even with a cooperative law enforcement system - unless he fesses up or it was something really obvious I doubt at this point that anyone knows what was in the syringe.

How often do you check the summaries? Real question, I’ve used similar tools and the accuracy to what it’s citing has been hilariously bad. Be cool if there was a tool out there that was bucking the trend.

Aii

Don’t get too excited folks, Nadella’s never been right about anything before…

“Almost everything on Linux is easier to set up than on windows” has me rolling. This shit is exactly why people dismiss Linux as an option - linux enthusiasts refuse to accept the flaws in the OS, and that means those flaws never get addressed. God, or they’ve never had to deal with a driver incompatibility before, maybe they’re just leading a charmed life…

And this is from someone that’s daily driven Linux for well over a decade. Like it’s a better option than windows, but it’s not so great that there’s not aspects that need to be improved.

While I appreciate the time you put into this, you haven’t really addressed my criticism - that podcast spends ~30 seconds on the topic, and even as explained in the article from whatever pride.com is, do not make a concrete statement beyond their own impressions. They even explicitly say that they feel like they are in the minority and that the prevailing attitude of lesbians is that we/they as a group don’t scissor. Also, there is a single comment on that page in support of their presentation of scissoring. That’s… not a plurality of support, nor is the podcast’s comment at odds with their own characterization of the culture surrounding the act presented in the podcast itself.

I’m not sure what your goal is with presenting the history of the term, but it is interesting to see the wikipedia article rewritten so succinctly, thank you!

Ngram viewer - it’s a representation of the data contained within it yes, as their initial paper says, but the way you’re using it here is at perfect odds with your own characterization of the service:

it’s true the corpora don’t reflect general language & culture

Which is what you’re claiming it does. If you’re shifting it to mean that tribbing hasn’t appeared in print much, I already agreed and my hypothetical addresses exactly this issue, as does the excerpt on the criticism of Google Ngram. Also wikipedia directly addresses this:

Scissoring is commonly used as an umbrella term for all forms of tribadism, and many lesbian and bisexual women are unaware that some of the sexual acts they include in their lovemaking are aspects of and are formally labeled tribadism, as tribadism is commonly omitted from mainstream sex research.

So there’s really not much to be said about it’s frequency of use in print media, just about the driving reasons behind it.

Thank you.

Polyqueue is a deeply entertaining term for the more promiscuous ways to approach poly relationships which I’m absolutely using in the future so there’s that lmao.

Also, thank you. It’s unfortunate that your characterization of what I was doing seems to have colored the rest of the interactions in this thread, since correcting a common misconception really isn’t a “well ackchually” but… that’s just me whining into the void.

I’m not 100% sure what the argument has become. Their source even lists the reason “scissoring” as it’s commonly shown in porn (the barbie thing) isn’t the real act. I think the issue is that I am using the term “scissoring” to refer to the barbie thing, as that is how the term is used among every lesbian I have interacted with as well as in all the writing about this topic from lesbians that I have engaged with, and their source is using the term “scissoring” as an umbrella term for “tribbing” (which they have clarified they’re doing).

I don’t think that we disagree on concept, just that they are arguing from a position of slight semantic difference. “Scissoring” the position seen in porn isn’t “real” tribbing. It’s a bit like the sex tips in cosmo - are there men that might enjoy having a doughnut eaten off their shaft, or who enjoy being jabbed in the balls with a fork while getting head? Yeah, probably, but I’m pretty sure we can agree that those specific examples shouldn’t be used as the common representation of what a “blowjob” consists of. Nor do I suspect anyone is going to argue that the insane and grotesque sex acts on urban dictionary are “real”, even if someone might have tried one of them once.

Anyone can do anything, and people are weird about sex - but as they’re intimated, the common depiction of the sex act in porn is a bad representation, and that is all I have been saying. If the argument truly is just that they think scissoring refers to all tribbing, their own sources show that’s a contested claim.

Are there nonabrasive dishwasher detergents?

No, it’s not going to look like when you made your Barbies scissor (and we know you did) because humans have joints, and fat, and can get tired in strenuous positions.

I don’t know what pride.com is, nor have I heard of the podcast they’re linking to, however! nothing you’re saying here actually disagrees with what I’ve said elsewhere in this thread. Yes, tribbing is a thing. No, the common depiction of “scissoring” is not representative of tribbing on the whole. Wikipedia even makes the argument that the use of the term “scissoring” is because the term “tribadism” (tribbing) is no longer used and use the term “scissoring” to describe the same sex acts (something I very much disagree with, and isn’t exactly supported by how the term is used extensively in the remainder of that section)

tribadism is commonly omitted from mainstream sex research. Scholar Judith Halberstam stated, “If we trace the use of the term forward into present, we find that tribadism is one of those rarely discussed but often practiced sexual activities, and the silence that surrounds it now is as puzzling as the discourse it produced in earlier centuries.” Halberstam added that Sigmund Freud “had nothing to say” with regard to the topic, “and few contemporary lesbian sex books even discuss it”.

Google Ngram Viewer isn’t a good source, btw. It’s neat, but it’s bad quality data that doesn’t control for biases and it really shouldn’t be used to indicate social trends.

The data sets of the Ngram Viewer have been criticized for their reliance upon inaccurate optical character recognition (OCR) and for including large numbers of incorrectly dated and categorized texts. Because of these errors, and because they are uncontrolled for bias (such as the increasing amount of scientific literature, which causes other terms to appear to decline in popularity), care must be taken in using the corpora to study language or test theories. Furthermore, the data sets may not reflect general linguistic or cultural change and can only hint at such an effect because they do not involve any metadata like date published, author, length, or genre, to avoid any potential copyright infringements.

As an example, a random alternative explanation for the trend seen (assuming the data is accurate which we cannot do with ngram viewer) that I’ve just made up is that papers about the details of lesbian sex were unpopular, and the body of scientific and recreational literature is catching up with the terminology used in their subject matter as the topic becomes less anathema in grant applications. This would very much line up with the dates, and explain the growing usage of the more technical terms as the broadly accepted terminology catches up with the usage of the terms in literature.

Edit:

The podcast, at least in pride’s reporting, doesn’t seem to corroborate that it’s a real thing? Or at least it doesn’t concretely do so, as they explain the podcast’s interaction as:

The back-and-forth left viewers amused as they desperately tried to parse out whether the conversation was for real or just messing around, which actually proves quite thoroughly how confused society as a whole remains about the mythology of scissoring.

Which really doesn’t seem like they’re making the definite claim that it’s real, and I’m not sure why it’s being used as a source here in light of that ambiguity?

Seriously, what is pride.com? I’ve never heard of them before, are they a known entity?