Queer Canine Becomings
-
wrote on 12 Mar 2025, 08:40 last edited by jon-nyc 3 Dec 2025, 08:41
Read the whole abstract. It’s only a paragraph.
Good news: Your tax dollars didn’t pay for it.
Bad news: Mine did. (She/they works at SUNY Oneonta.
-
wrote on 12 Mar 2025, 11:31 last edited by
As bad as Trump is sometimes we do need him to save us from people like this.
-
wrote on 12 Mar 2025, 12:11 last edited by
Wow, I'm so glad my employer pays for library access to this journal.
-
wrote on 12 Mar 2025, 12:25 last edited by
What's that old saw about the inmates and the asylum?
-
wrote on 12 Mar 2025, 12:39 last edited by
It’s so gay and retarded.
-
wrote on 12 Mar 2025, 13:02 last edited by Klaus 3 Dec 2025, 13:02
Would Jon hit it, though?
-
wrote on 12 Mar 2025, 13:03 last edited by
The hyphenated last name is not surprising either.
-
wrote on 12 Mar 2025, 13:05 last edited by
BTW, and maybe this is a question for the PHDs in the room (@George-K @Doctor-Phibes @bachophile) but in these articles (and in PHD dissertations) is there like a competition to come up with the most confusing word salad titles and usage of confusing "big words" as possible?
-
wrote on 12 Mar 2025, 13:06 last edited by
Sorry, but I could not understand whatever it is she it trying to study. LOL
-
wrote on 12 Mar 2025, 13:07 last edited by
@Klaus said in Queer Canine Becomings:
Would Jon hit it, though?
Can we stop with the instrumentalization of violent ecologies?
I think its more appropriate to speak of canine-style entanglements of becoming.
-
Sorry, but I could not understand whatever it is she it trying to study. LOL
wrote on 12 Mar 2025, 13:09 last edited by@taiwan_girl said in Queer Canine Becomings:
Sorry, but I could not understand whatever it is she it trying to study. LOL
It's almost like she asked ChatGPT to come up with an abstract with as many Trump-baiting words as possible to see how long it is before he references this absolute bullshit of a study, 555.
-
wrote on 12 Mar 2025, 13:10 last edited by
BTW, you would think with all of those degrees she would've learned some basic grammar, such as "their" is not singular, but a plural pronoun.
-
BTW, and maybe this is a question for the PHDs in the room (@George-K @Doctor-Phibes @bachophile) but in these articles (and in PHD dissertations) is there like a competition to come up with the most confusing word salad titles and usage of confusing "big words" as possible?
wrote on 12 Mar 2025, 13:13 last edited by@89th said in Queer Canine Becomings:
BTW, and maybe this is a question for the PHDs in the room (@George-K @Doctor-Phibes @bachophile) but in these articles (and in PHD dissertations) is there like a competition to come up with the most confusing word salad titles and usage of confusing "big words" as possible?
This is the title and abstract of one of the most celebrated math papers of recent history.
The entropy formula for the Ricci flow and its geometric applications
We present a monotonic expression for the Ricci flow, valid in all dimensions and without curvature assumptions. It is interpreted as an entropy for a certain canonical ensemble. Several geometric applications are given. In particular, (1) Ricci flow, considered on the space of riemannian metrics modulo diffeomorphism and scaling, has no nontrivial periodic orbits (that is, other than fixed points); (2) In a region, where singularity is forming in finite time, the injectivity radius is controlled by the curvature; (3) Ricci flow can not quickly turn an almost euclidean region into a very curved one, no matter what happens far away. We also verify several assertions related to Richard Hamilton's program for the proof of Thurston geometrization conjecture for closed three-manifolds, and give a sketch of an eclectic proof of this conjecture, making use of earlier results on collapsing with local lower curvature bound.
You probably don't understand what's going on here, and neither do I.
I think it's OK and in fact expected to use technical jargon in research papers written for a community of experts.
The problem is not the jargon itself. The problem is she uses the jargon to hide that it's all drivel and ridiculous nonsense.
-
wrote on 12 Mar 2025, 13:15 last edited by
@Klaus that is funny. It sounds like the Retro Encabulator to me!
Link to video -
wrote on 12 Mar 2025, 13:19 last edited by
Can you imagine the conferences she/they goes to?
9:00 Weaving Majesty: The Socioeconomic Implications of Imperial Apparel
10:00 The Emperor's Fabric: A Post-Modernist Approach to Leadership Studies
11:00 Textile Sovereignty: The Emperor's Garments and the Limits of Perception
etc. -
wrote on 12 Mar 2025, 13:21 last edited by
A love story.
Jon and Chloe met in the shifting ecologies of a cityscape where bodies, machines, and organic matter coalesced in queer, posthuman intimacies. Their first encounter was mediated by a liminal presence—Milo, a rescue dog whose affective entanglement with Chloe extended beyond traditional human-animal binaries. Milo, with his wiry fur and knowing eyes, had learned to sense Chloe’s shifting emotional states, and when Jon reached out to scratch behind his ears, it was not merely a moment of tactile pleasure but an exchange of kin-making, a recognition of more-than-human affective circuitry.
Jon, a self-identified cyborg in a world that had long privileged the boundaries between flesh and metal, was drawn to Chloe’s ability to inhabit multiple relationalities at once. She was a becoming, a fluid articulation of lesbian-feminist kinship that resisted domesticated containment. Together, they walked the streets where the neon hum of surveillance drones blended with the scent of wet pavement, their bodies synchronized not in ownership but in mutual recognition of shared vulnerabilities.
Their intimacy unfolded in layers—Chloe teaching Jon the quiet, embodied language of canine communication, Jon introducing Chloe to the synthetic rhythms of cybernetic poetry. They read aloud to each other, voices vibrating against the pulse of the city’s electric heartbeat. Chloe recited Haraway’s cyborg manifesto in whispers, as Milo lay stretched between them, his body the bridge between their affective worlds.
One evening, beneath a sky thick with data streams and the spectral residue of machine-learning algorithms, Chloe reached for Jon’s hand. “What does it mean,” she asked, “to love in a world where flesh is no longer the only measure of being?”
Jon squeezed her fingers, their calloused warmth grounding her in the now. “It means rewriting the boundaries of intimacy,” he murmured, “letting our becomings bleed into one another.”
Milo exhaled, a slow, knowing breath. He understood. He always had.
In their entangled existence—human, canine, cyborg—they crafted a love that resisted singular definition, a queer ecology of tenderness shaped by circuits of care, flesh, and fur, always in motion, always in becoming.
-
A love story.
Jon and Chloe met in the shifting ecologies of a cityscape where bodies, machines, and organic matter coalesced in queer, posthuman intimacies. Their first encounter was mediated by a liminal presence—Milo, a rescue dog whose affective entanglement with Chloe extended beyond traditional human-animal binaries. Milo, with his wiry fur and knowing eyes, had learned to sense Chloe’s shifting emotional states, and when Jon reached out to scratch behind his ears, it was not merely a moment of tactile pleasure but an exchange of kin-making, a recognition of more-than-human affective circuitry.
Jon, a self-identified cyborg in a world that had long privileged the boundaries between flesh and metal, was drawn to Chloe’s ability to inhabit multiple relationalities at once. She was a becoming, a fluid articulation of lesbian-feminist kinship that resisted domesticated containment. Together, they walked the streets where the neon hum of surveillance drones blended with the scent of wet pavement, their bodies synchronized not in ownership but in mutual recognition of shared vulnerabilities.
Their intimacy unfolded in layers—Chloe teaching Jon the quiet, embodied language of canine communication, Jon introducing Chloe to the synthetic rhythms of cybernetic poetry. They read aloud to each other, voices vibrating against the pulse of the city’s electric heartbeat. Chloe recited Haraway’s cyborg manifesto in whispers, as Milo lay stretched between them, his body the bridge between their affective worlds.
One evening, beneath a sky thick with data streams and the spectral residue of machine-learning algorithms, Chloe reached for Jon’s hand. “What does it mean,” she asked, “to love in a world where flesh is no longer the only measure of being?”
Jon squeezed her fingers, their calloused warmth grounding her in the now. “It means rewriting the boundaries of intimacy,” he murmured, “letting our becomings bleed into one another.”
Milo exhaled, a slow, knowing breath. He understood. He always had.
In their entangled existence—human, canine, cyborg—they crafted a love that resisted singular definition, a queer ecology of tenderness shaped by circuits of care, flesh, and fur, always in motion, always in becoming.
wrote on 12 Mar 2025, 13:24 last edited by@Klaus said in Queer Canine Becomings:
A love story.
Jon and Chloe met in the shifting ecologies of a cityscape where bodies, machines, and organic matter coalesced in queer, posthuman intimacies. Their first encounter was mediated by a liminal presence—Milo, a rescue dog whose affective entanglement with Chloe extended beyond traditional human-animal binaries. Milo, with his wiry fur and knowing eyes, had learned to sense Chloe’s shifting emotional states, and when Jon reached out to scratch behind his ears, it was not merely a moment of tactile pleasure but an exchange of kin-making, a recognition of more-than-human affective circuitry.
Jon, a self-identified cyborg in a world that had long privileged the boundaries between flesh and metal, was drawn to Chloe’s ability to inhabit multiple relationalities at once. She was a becoming, a fluid articulation of lesbian-feminist kinship that resisted domesticated containment. Together, they walked the streets where the neon hum of surveillance drones blended with the scent of wet pavement, their bodies synchronized not in ownership but in mutual recognition of shared vulnerabilities.
Their intimacy unfolded in layers—Chloe teaching Jon the quiet, embodied language of canine communication, Jon introducing Chloe to the synthetic rhythms of cybernetic poetry. They read aloud to each other, voices vibrating against the pulse of the city’s electric heartbeat. Chloe recited Haraway’s cyborg manifesto in whispers, as Milo lay stretched between them, his body the bridge between their affective worlds.
One evening, beneath a sky thick with data streams and the spectral residue of machine-learning algorithms, Chloe reached for Jon’s hand. “What does it mean,” she asked, “to love in a world where flesh is no longer the only measure of being?”
Jon squeezed her fingers, their calloused warmth grounding her in the now. “It means rewriting the boundaries of intimacy,” he murmured, “letting our becomings bleed into one another.”
Milo exhaled, a slow, knowing breath. He understood. He always had.
In their entangled existence—human, canine, cyborg—they crafted a love that resisted singular definition, a queer ecology of tenderness shaped by circuits of care, flesh, and fur, always in motion, always in becoming.
Wow! @Klaus can write Harry Potter FanFic!
-
BTW, and maybe this is a question for the PHDs in the room (@George-K @Doctor-Phibes @bachophile) but in these articles (and in PHD dissertations) is there like a competition to come up with the most confusing word salad titles and usage of confusing "big words" as possible?
wrote on 12 Mar 2025, 13:57 last edited by@89th said in Queer Canine Becomings:
BTW, and maybe this is a question for the PHDs in the room (@George-K @Doctor-Phibes @bachophile) but in these articles (and in PHD dissertations) is there like a competition to come up with the most confusing word salad titles and usage of confusing "big words" as possible?
Don't ask me, my medical specialty is in Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis rather than hippopotomonstrosesquippedaliophobia.
-
@89th said in Queer Canine Becomings:
BTW, and maybe this is a question for the PHDs in the room (@George-K @Doctor-Phibes @bachophile) but in these articles (and in PHD dissertations) is there like a competition to come up with the most confusing word salad titles and usage of confusing "big words" as possible?
Don't ask me, my medical specialty is in Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis rather than hippopotomonstrosesquippedaliophobia.
wrote on 12 Mar 2025, 14:10 last edited by@Doctor-Phibes Always knew you'd pick the easier degree.