Errors-To: <nellardo@concentric.net>
Message-ID: <3903B103.E59C32F@concentric.net>
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000 22:27:21 -0400
Reply-To: nellardo@concentric.net
Organization: Herds of Wild Buffalo Girls
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Daniel Gudlat <d.gudlat@rpluss.com>
Cc: lojban@egroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] Sex words
References: <e.2738af7.262d7e36@aol.com> <033001bfa943$aaf2b900$22191bc1@rus.ger.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Brook Conner <nellardo@concentric.net>
Content-Length: 9096
Lines: 209

la kuot. Daniel Gudlat kuot. cusku di'e
> la pycyn. cusku di'e
> 
> > Lojban relationship words, Gender and relationship words  -- not a
> record but
> > an appeal for polishing an area off

Yay! :-)
 
> Disclaimer: I'm far from an expert in lojban, but I'll take a stab at
> it.

A superfluous statement, I think :-) We're all learning here.
 
> > Some words suggested, in need of definitions, explication, general
> tidying.
> > Brook Conner:
> > glependo  - "fuck-buddy" (but no derogatory connotations [makes "fuck"
> a bad
> > choice in English -- gletu has none in Lojban, pc])
> >             gletu pendo

Yes - that's why "fuck-buddy" was in quotes. It has an idiomatic use,
especially among sexual minorities (gay, bisexual, bdsm, polyamory, etc)
as a friend with whom you have sex, but does not imply any sort of
loving relationship or commitment or such. 

> In English, like in most western languages, words describing things
> sexual in nature either have derogatory connotations or are
> clinical/medical in nature. So "fuck-buddy" for a "sexual-intercourse
> type-of friend" is as good as anything you may possibly come up with.

Agreed - it's why I was trying out lojban for these words in the first
place - I've found most English words to either imply things you don't
mean to (i.e., are overly specific) or to omit things you mean to
include (i.e., are overly vague). la lojban. has the nice characteristic
(which lojbab really drove home for me, I think when I first posted
this) of being exactly as vague as you want to be. Which sounds like an
oxymoron, but is exactly what I'm looking for  - if I want to say
soemthing about about a relationship, I want to say that, nothing more,
nothing less. English seems to be poorly suited to this (leading to
jargon and argot (such as "fuck-buddy" or the slightly more affectionate
"fuck-muffin")). One of the best arguments I can think of for what
Loglan originally set out to test - that Worffian hypothesis bugaboo.
 
> > pampendo - "non-sexual lover/deep friend"
> >             prami pendo
> 
> A "loving/devoted kind-of friend", a deep friend. In lojban, I would
> imagine this doesn't suggest sexuality, but it doesn't specifically deny
> it either, so strike the "non-sexual".

Yes, exactly what I meant. Kinda proves my point about English, that I
(an articulate, native speaker, experienced in writing, discourse etc)
could not easily capture the concept. If you say "lover" in (American)
English, it carries a heavy implication of sexuality. "mi pampendo do"
doesn't say one way or another whether "mi gletu do" applies.
 
> > cinprami - "sexualove"  (?lover?pc)
> >             cinse prami
> 
> I agree with pc, this would be a "sexual lover" (gismu list: x1 loves
> x2, not **x1 is a love...)

Again, exactly what I meant - a "sexualove" can refer either to a person
or a state. "sexualove" in quotes is more jargon, argot, this time
specifically from the book "Polyamory" by Dr. Deborah Anapol. Of course,
she spends a fair amount of time explaining the word before using it.
Actually, wouldn't "mi cinprami do" translate equally well as "I am a
sexual-lover of you" and "I sexually-love you"? You'd need cmavo to make
clear which one you meant, wouldn't you?

> > pamgle - loving intercourse
> >           pamygletu - [same]
> >           prami gletu
> 
> And by the same rules, this would be a "loving intercourse-haver". I
> image you'd need an event abstractor to get to the suggested meanings,
> but then, I haven't yet started working through the lujvo making
> rules...

Again, see above. I think, without the cmavo, it could be translated in
English either way. "nu pamgle" is clearly an event, but "mi nu pamgle
do" could mean "I have loving intercourse with you" or "I
am-in-the-event-of loving intercourse with you". The lojban could mean
either repetitive action or a singular event (and would require more
cmavo for more specificity). Like oh crap, what's that word for the
grammatical structure for repeated action - russian uses it - it's a
distinction English doesn't make really at all (you need ancillary
phrases to convey it) and lojban conveys or not, depending on the cmavo present.


> > pamcinse - loving sexuality
> >             prami cinse
> 
> I agree on this one.
> 
> > pedgle   - friendly intercourse
> >             pe'ogle   - [same]
> >             pe'ogletu - [same]
> >             pedgletu - [same]
> >             pendo gletu
> 
> As a verb, yes. Again, strictly speaking this is a "friendly
> intercourser", or am I missing something with these tanru/lujvo? "mi
> pedgle do" would be "I friendly-fuck you", right?

Again, I think it's a matter of the cmavo around it. E.g., "la pedgle
mi" is the "friendly-fuck(er) of me" (i.e., the thinnk I name as having
to do with friendly fucking, where I'm the second argument of the intercourse).
 
> > malgle    fuck1 (? as opposed how to simple copulation?pc)
> 
> "derogatory intercourse", yup, this is as close to English "fuck" as it
> gets in lojban. As opposed to simple copulation in that it is
> derogatory, right?

Right, at least, that's what I intended, which, as long as you're
understanding me, is what really counts :-)
 
> > malpe'o  fuck (presumably, fuck3, since pendo has not implication of
> > intercourse, pc)
> 
> I tentatively agree: "derogatory friend" would presumably come close to
> the idea of "They are fucking their paying customers" when this is
> uttered anywhere but inside a whore house. ;-)

Or, as in the colloquial (American) English, "Fucker", when used to
refer to a friend. As in "Hey, fucker, how are you doing?" No literal
sexual intercourse is really implied in the English - it's like
"bonehead" being used in a similar situation. The insult is not literal
(in English).

In lojban, it seems a bit clearer that the "malpe'o" in question has
somehow done something wrong by you. As in referring to someone who's
spreading rumors behind your back "That fucker is spreading lies about
me!" "la malpe'o .... etc."
 
> > gletu appears to need some clarification, given the range of
> activities that
> > these (and the following) words suggest as possibly under it (oral?
> anal?
> > digital (yes, including big toes or the athletically inclined)? "clit
> > bumping"? mechanical?  self?  -- I assume that these will make cases
> of
> > German shepherds and sheep clear).
> 
> I'm German, but I know neither the shepherds nor the sheep nor their
> cases. Care to enlighten me?

Um, not on this list :-) I suggest looking up "zoophilia" (and while
you're at it, go for "coprophilia" too, just to get the breadth of
activity covered by (some peoples') sexual activity - but don't ask me
for help - not particularly my brand of kink).
 
> But anyway, according to the gismu list, gletu might be taken to mean
> only the sexual act involving the sexual organs of both sexes, as
> suggested by the translations "copulate, have coitus, mate, have sexual
> intercourse", and thus doesn't account for the wide range of sexual
> activities humans do for recreative purposes. (On the other hand, this
> narrow view would possibly leave even homosexual activity out of the
> picture.) 

Hahaha! The appearance of cultural bias in the originators of the gismu
list? :-)

> Since any departure from said narrow view is really but a
> question of degrees, the only viable alternative seems to me to be the
> adoption of a wider definition that does in fact account for all of
> mankinds wide field of sexual activity. (Or do we really want to go down
> the road paved by Billyboy Clintons unfortunate lawsuit?! ;-)

Um, in a word, no.

Personally, I would, in general, favor the broadest possible
interpretation of the base gismu, so long as no gismu becomes synonymous
with any other. If you want specificity, use more (presumably
clarifying) words.
 
> Once this view has been taken, the rest would become a question of
> building the proper tanru/lujvo:
>   "moklu gletu" mouth-kind-of sexing, oral sex
>   "ganxo gletu" anus-kind-of sexing, anal sex
>   "degji gletu" finger/toe-kind-of sexing, digital sex
> would probably do the trick, or have I missed any pitfalls? If you

They're still somewhat vague (as I see it), but again, that's the issue
: the base gismu are broad, and the more words you add, the more
specific it gets. E.g., moklu ganxo gletu ("rim job", roughly).

> actually mean vaginal-penile sex as opposed to any other way of
> "implementing" gletu, you then have to be accordingly specific...

e.g., natpinji fetpinji gletu - "a male-penis-kind-of clitoral-kind-of
sexual-activity". Or could that be "natpinyfetpinygle"? Or did I include
some extra "y"'s where I didn't need them?

Or would that (could that?) be fetpinynatpinygle for one partner on top
(as opposed to the other). Which would be which? I am presuming that
whoever is closest to the "gletu" is the one most relevant to the
"sexing" i.e., is the one deriving the most pleasure. Or,
"fetpinynatpinygle" is male on top, while "natpinyfetpinygle" is female
on top.... generally speaking, of course.


co'i me brukcr.