The term seems to have been invented by a ‘pickup artist’ (probably Mystery) because they didn’t bother to look up the standard term for communication with touch: haptic communication or ‘haptics.’
In the seduction community, ‘kino’ is short for ‘kinesthetics’, but unfortunately for the pickup community, kinesthetics is the study of the inner awareness of movement (similar to proprioception), not the study of communication with touch.
Another aside: does anyone else find a lot of the picture choices on wikipedia bizarre and/or disturbing? Both of the ones on the haptic communication article are pretty strong examples.
“As an aside” re: Mystery—I admit to being fascinated with his contribution to a Neil Strauss seminar. (It distills Mystery’s theories as found in his own book and in Strauss’ bestseller.) Mystery’s a skilled didactitian although I remember that when I watched the video a second time a couple of his points did lose a bit of their persuasiveness. The PU literature also shows how deeply Evolutionary Psychology has penetrated the popular consciousness, albeit with at least some degree of—pun intended in this case—vulgarizations. For those of you who are interested, the video I’m referring to can be found at YouTube with the following search: “Mystery Neil’s Annihilation Method DVD”.
The term seems to have been invented by a ‘pickup artist’ (probably Mystery) because they didn’t bother to look up the standard term for communication with touch: haptic communication or ‘haptics.’
What a hideous sounding name, at least in the context of doing it to another person. One would hope that if the mistaken word use was not adopted that they just minted a new one for themselves!
kinesthetics is the study of the inner awareness of movement (similar to proprioception), not the study of communication with touch.
The nature of what caused the original error may perhaps be better traced to the concept of kinesthetic learning. While still obviously mistaken in the way it has been adopted, the ‘learning styles’ categorization is more accessible to popular culture and also doesn’t imply inner awareness of the process.
and… seriously? There are girls that go around reading and writing male homo-erotic stories? Here I was thinking only guys did that (or the analogous) sort of thing to a significant degree. How narrow minded of me.
Text-based erotic stories in general are mostly the province of girls. Yaoi stories are a subset of that, still largely by and for women. (Of course there’s also manga and whatnot; I have less explanation for that.)
The link Khafra gave me the impression that Yaoi was often graphical too (compared to anime or manga). Does the same trend apply to those works? (Or, perhaps, are the wikipedia authors just biassed towards graphical media?)
Not going to happen. I can be confident in this because the very nature of “kino escalation” is that it involves implied consent and implicit or explicit participation by the other party. Without this it is called ‘molestation’ or ‘sexual assault’. I don’t especially mind people writing fiction about me being sexually assaulted. For that matter I don’t particularly care if people write fiction in which wedrifid is participating in homo-erotic kino escalation. I just don’t identify the latter fictional character as ‘me’.
But the former (the one being sexually assaulted) you do? and still don’t mind it? Interesting …
I should be clear that I consider it a fictional me, as distinct from a fictional some other guy. I can certainly understand why some people will be hurt or even traumatised by such things. I just don’t see any reason why I must be. I could instead just be flattered that some girl is including me in her erotic fantasies. So it is a crazy girl and homo-erotic fantasies but there is still no harm that is done to me.
Everything that we choose to be care deeply about gives another vulnerability that can be exploited. Choosing to care about fiction that other people write about you seems silly to me—it is completely and utterly out of your control and is essentially a property of them and not you. Not having that vulnerability means that you are immune to torture simulators without even relying on any acausal decision theory.
I should be clear that I consider it a fictional me, as distinct from a fictional some other guy.
OK, I undestand (I think). As long as the fictional person has the same character as you, then you can identify yourself with them, but if they have a different character (as they must have to engage in homo-erotic kino escalation) then you don’t identify yourself with them. But either way, you don’t mind that people write stories about them, since they’re fictional.
It sounds interesting enough in this branch too. :)
Mind you I think I was one of the nerds I’d be rather adamant that I wasn’t to be involved in any practice of “kino escalation”!
An aside on ‘kino escalation’...
The term seems to have been invented by a ‘pickup artist’ (probably Mystery) because they didn’t bother to look up the standard term for communication with touch: haptic communication or ‘haptics.’
In the seduction community, ‘kino’ is short for ‘kinesthetics’, but unfortunately for the pickup community, kinesthetics is the study of the inner awareness of movement (similar to proprioception), not the study of communication with touch.
Another aside: does anyone else find a lot of the picture choices on wikipedia bizarre and/or disturbing? Both of the ones on the haptic communication article are pretty strong examples.
Bizarre certainly.
“As an aside” re: Mystery—I admit to being fascinated with his contribution to a Neil Strauss seminar. (It distills Mystery’s theories as found in his own book and in Strauss’ bestseller.) Mystery’s a skilled didactitian although I remember that when I watched the video a second time a couple of his points did lose a bit of their persuasiveness. The PU literature also shows how deeply Evolutionary Psychology has penetrated the popular consciousness, albeit with at least some degree of—pun intended in this case—vulgarizations. For those of you who are interested, the video I’m referring to can be found at YouTube with the following search: “Mystery Neil’s Annihilation Method DVD”.
What a hideous sounding name, at least in the context of doing it to another person. One would hope that if the mistaken word use was not adopted that they just minted a new one for themselves!
The nature of what caused the original error may perhaps be better traced to the concept of kinesthetic learning. While still obviously mistaken in the way it has been adopted, the ‘learning styles’ categorization is more accessible to popular culture and also doesn’t imply inner awareness of the process.
Unfortunately for you, this sounds like the sort of fiction where Yowie Potter would make certain such things happened.
and… seriously? There are girls that go around reading and writing male homo-erotic stories? Here I was thinking only guys did that (or the analogous) sort of thing to a significant degree. How narrow minded of me.
Text-based erotic stories in general are mostly the province of girls. Yaoi stories are a subset of that, still largely by and for women. (Of course there’s also manga and whatnot; I have less explanation for that.)
The link Khafra gave me the impression that Yaoi was often graphical too (compared to anime or manga). Does the same trend apply to those works? (Or, perhaps, are the wikipedia authors just biassed towards graphical media?)
The word “yaoi” is extracted from Japanese; I don’t find it surprising that it would retain a connection to the Japanese story form.
Yes they do.
Not going to happen. I can be confident in this because the very nature of “kino escalation” is that it involves implied consent and implicit or explicit participation by the other party. Without this it is called ‘molestation’ or ‘sexual assault’. I don’t especially mind people writing fiction about me being sexually assaulted. For that matter I don’t particularly care if people write fiction in which wedrifid is participating in homo-erotic kino escalation. I just don’t identify the latter fictional character as ‘me’.
But the former (the one being sexually assaulted) you do? and still don’t mind it? Interesting …
I should be clear that I consider it a fictional me, as distinct from a fictional some other guy. I can certainly understand why some people will be hurt or even traumatised by such things. I just don’t see any reason why I must be. I could instead just be flattered that some girl is including me in her erotic fantasies. So it is a crazy girl and homo-erotic fantasies but there is still no harm that is done to me.
Everything that we choose to be care deeply about gives another vulnerability that can be exploited. Choosing to care about fiction that other people write about you seems silly to me—it is completely and utterly out of your control and is essentially a property of them and not you. Not having that vulnerability means that you are immune to torture simulators without even relying on any acausal decision theory.
OK, I undestand (I think). As long as the fictional person has the same character as you, then you can identify yourself with them, but if they have a different character (as they must have to engage in homo-erotic kino escalation) then you don’t identify yourself with them. But either way, you don’t mind that people write stories about them, since they’re fictional.
Got it!