Thesis glossary

Jump to: navigation, search

This page is "Appendix E: Glossary" of the thesis, where it starts at page 100.

Ableism Categorism focused on a categorization of people by physical and/or neuropsychiatric functionality. (In Swedish: ableism)

Abstractions (of Categorism) An abstraction of categorism is a way in which categorization itself can become a part of categorism. Various forms of guilt by association, association by guilt, guilt by disassociation, and so forth. Not only is a category being targeted, the category itself may be complete nonsense bullshit – yet devastating to anyone constructed as belonging to that category. (In Swedish: abstraktioner)

Abyss-category A category that is constructed as being the ultimate out-group, the category that an entire society defines itself against. (In Swedish: avgrundskategori)

Afrophobia Categorism focused on targeting Africans and people who have African ancestors. (In Swedish: afrofobi)

Ageism Categorism focused on a categorization of people by age. Note that having different expectations on childten and adults is not necessarily prejudice and that treating children and adults differently is not necessarily discrimination. (In Swedish: ålderism)

Antimuslimism Categorism focused on targeting Muslims. See also: Islamophobia. (In Swedish: antimuslimism)

Antisemitism Categorism focused on targeting Jews. (In Swedish: antisemitism)

Antiromanism Categorism focused on targeting Romani. Also known as antiziganism. (In Swedish: antiromanism)

Aspects (of Categorism) Categorism has three aspects: The facets, the foci and the abstractions. For details, see the entries for “facets (of Categorism)”, foci (of Categorism)” and “abstractions (of Categorism)”. (In Swedish: Aspekter)

Atheophobia Categorism focused on targeting Atheists. (In Swedish: ateofobi)

A priori Arguments that are true by definition, so that they can be proven by reason alone without any involvement of reality. The opposite of “a posteriori”, which is arguments that are considered true because of the evidence for them being true. An example of an a priori claim that most people can (and in the opinion of this author, should) agree with is that the universe exists, rather than being a dream or illusion. An a priori argument that a vast majority of humanity disagree with is the specific claim that “X is always right, therefore any evidence against X is inherently false”, with X being any one particular person, organization, religious scripture, political doctrine or similar. Generally speaking, it s advisable to keep one's a priori beliefs as simple and basic as possible. (In Swedish: a priori)

Biased Balance A facet of categorism: Aiming for balance not between two sides coexisting, but rather between one side's right to exist and the other side's “right” to harass them. For example: Not standing up for the right for gay people to have their relationships in peace as well as the right for religious people to worship in peace, but instead standing up for a balance between the right for gay people to have their relationships in peace versus the “right” for religious people to persecute gay people. (In Swedish: balansbias)

Bigotry Categorism done through feelings. This is one of the three facet archetypes of categorism. Therefore, a key element in the definition of categorism is that this definition of bigotry is compatible with the standard dictionary definition of bigot(ry): “a person who strongly and unfairly dislikes other people, ideas, etc. : a bigoted person; especially : a person who hates or refuses to accept the members of a particular group (such as a racial or religious group) ”. (In Swedish: [[bigotteri – Note that this word usually has a more narrow definition in Swedish, being limited to bigotry done by people who are religious. When used as synonymous with “bigotry” as such, it may be prudent to point out that this wider definition is being used.)

Cateitization The act of assigning cateity to yourself and/or other people – deciding who and what these people are, and what that means. It can lean towards categorism, or even outright become categorism, if done in a way that expresses or encourages facets of categorism. (In Swedish: kateitetisering)

Cateitization Alliance Two persons or groups defining themselves against each other, helping each other to build identity by reinforcing the attitude of “We are us who are not them, and they are them who are not us”. Se also: “Discursive alliance” and “narrative alliance”. (In Swedish: kateitetiseringsallians)

Cateity The intersection of categorization and identity: Conceptualizing the self through conceptualizing others and the world, conceptualizing others and the world through the self. A cateity can be a categorization of people, an identity, a system for making sense of the world, or any mix of the above. Any religion or belief, ideology or policy, paradigm or theory can be used as a cateity. (In Swedish: kateitet)

Categorism Prejudiced beliefs, bigoted feelings and discriminatory behaviors that are based on a categorization of people. Includes facets such as othering, marginalization and demonization, as well as foci such as racism, sexism and homophobia. And also abstractions, where the categorization itself is a significant part of the problem. (In Swedish: kategorism)

Categorist Slurs A facet of categorism: The act of creating or reproducing a equivocation where the same word is used as a “bad word” in general while also used to refer to a category of people. For example, someone who is looking for a generic insult to spit at someone may use the word “gay” (thus building a discourse built on homophobia) or “retarded” (thus building a discourse built on ableism).

Category Agency A form of conspiracy theories where a category of people (for example “the Jews” or “the Muslims”) itself can have an agenda and take action in the same way as if it was a person or organization. Understanding history not as a matter of structures and discourses and organized groups such as nations, but instead viewing it as if categories were persons struggling against each other. (In Swedish: kategoriagens)

Christianism Christianism is politically totalitarian ways of adhering to Christianity, just like islamism is politically totalitarian ways of adhering to Islam. (In Swedish: kristianism)

Christianophobia Categorism focused on targeting Christians. (In Swedish: kristnafobi)

Cis person A person who's gender identity, biological gender, genetic gender, gender expressions and how the person is perceived by everyone else are all of the unambiguously same gender. There is a sliding scale between cis person and trans person. (In Swedish: cisperson)

Classism Categorism focused on a categorization of people by socioeconomic class. (In Swedish: klassism)

Co-definition A category or other concept is given a definition that is so wide that it includes things that don't really fit together at all. A classic co-definition concept is “the orient” with “oriental” as the corresponding category of people: This concept assumes that being Egyptian and being Japanese is pretty much the same thing. (In Swedish: samdefinition)

Collective Guilt The idea that individuals are guilty of having done things that they have in fact not done, sometimes including things that happened before they were born. Not to be confused with the responsibility to change, and to avoid reproducing, destructive structures that one benefits from but did not create. (In Swedish: kollektiv skuld)

Comprehensibilization To make something easier, or at all possible, to comprehend. The opposite of incomprehensibilization. Comprehensibilization can be a matter of explaining something in simpler terms and with better examples. It can also be a matter of creating new models and concepts that are easier to learn and thus in the ling term easier to comprehend. In many cases, the process of inventing/discovering an idea and refining it may be the easy part, far easier than making it comprehensible to a reasonably wide audience. This is and remains an ongoing struggle for greater understanding. (In Swedish: begripligörande)

Conceptualization To create an understanding of a concept, forming an image of it in one's mind, defining it. (In Swedish: konceptualisering)

Conspirationalism Constructing a discourse and/or narrative where innocent acts of individuals and groups are seen as if they were part of a conspiracy. For example, portraying the fact that some people of a certain category (such as gays, Jews or Muslims) are friends with each other while also having jobs as if they are infiltrating society and holding secret meetings, aka private dinners. Conspirationalism works well together with how stigmatization and violence pushes people underground, forcing them to keep their identities secret: For a secret to get exposed, it must first become a secret1. (In Swedish: konspirationalism)

Critical realism The stance that while our senses doesn't mirror physical reality, they do reference it: The basis for our sensations is a coherent and dependently consistent reality. In Swedish: kritisk realism)

Dehumanization Constructing a discourse and/or narrative where a certain category of people is seen as less than human. (In Swedish: dehumanisering)

Demonization Constructing a discourse and/or narrative where a certain category of people is seen as Evil. (In Swedish: demonisering)

Denial of Agency Making people powerless by making it harder for them to act or for their actions to be noticed. Includes leaving people without representation, or forcing them to be represented by individuals or organizations that they didn't chose at all or were coerced to chose. (In Swedish: agensförnekande)

Dicana The combination of DIscourse, CAteity and Narrativization, together forming a triad of how people think and talk, how they relate to themselves and each other, and how they contextualize it all into patterns of meaning. Note that the concept of discourse is flexible: A wide conceptualization of discourse may include cateity and narrativization, and may thus be synonymous with dicana. As all three aspects of dicana are done through each other, the acts of creating cateitization and narrativization are discursive acts even in the more limited definition of discourse. (In Swedish: dikana)

Dicanaism The combination of DIchotomism, CAtegorism and NArrativism, together forming a dark triad of destructive patterns of thought. (In Swedish: dikanaism)

Dichotomism To be stuck in black and white thinking where everything is either-or rather than sliding scales, and where concepts are tyrants of the mind. Mental cages, rather than tools for understanding. Dichotomism includes the use of “false dichotomies”, but also include over- reliance on dichotomies that are not in themselves false. Can be used as a facet or abstraction of categorism. (In Swedish: dikotomism)

Discourse How we talk, and therefore think, about things. Happening between people as well as within people, shaping concepts, definitions, connotations, meanings et etera - and thus our basis for understanding, social struggles, and so on. The definition of the word discourse is traditionally very flexible. See also: Dicana. (In Swedish: diskurs)

Discursive Alliance People agreeing on a key element of discourse. They may disagree with each other on everything else, being enemies in an antagonistic discursive alliance. Yet helping each other to gain relevance and interpretation privilege through the discursive alliance while marginalizing other discourses. See also: Narrative alliance and cateitization alliance. (In Swedish: diskursiv allians)

Discursive Struggle People arguing over discourse. How we should conceptualize various terms, what connotations and meanings we should use. (In Swedish: diskursiv kamp)

Discrimination Categorism done through acts. It is a key element in the definition of categorism is that this definition of is compatible with the standard dictionary definition of discrimination: “a : the act, practice, or an instance of discriminating categorically rather than individually. b : prejudiced or prejudicial outlook, action, or treatment ” (In Swedish: diskriminering)

Energy Drain Demanding time and energy out of people from a certain category by constantly pushing them to defend or explain themselves. When this happens on a structural or systemic level, getting small pushes of the same kind often and from many different directions can add up really quickly. (In Swedish: en form av energitjuvande)

Enforcing Cateity Limiting people's lives by enforcing a cateity, pushing a stereotype or perceived identity upon people. Either enforcing your own cateity, such as forbidding a non-Christian same sex couple from getting married because it goes against your own beliefs as a Christian. Or enforcing your own vision of someone else's cateity, such as forbidding a Christian same sex couple from getting married because although you are a non-Christian yourself it still goes against your own beliefs about what it means to be a Christian and thus of what the Christian same sex couple ought to want. (In Swedish: påtvinga kateitet)

Equivocation Letting a word mean two different things at the same time. In other words, using at least two more or less different concepts as definitions for the same term at the same time. Normally far more subtle than jokes such as “A feather is light. What is light cannot be dark. Therefore, a feather cannot be dark.” Equivocation can also be a matter of having different conceptualizations or connotations of the same concept, which is a step towards eventually splitting them into separate concepts. A equivocation can thus be a step towards a more nuanced understanding, but it can also be a kind of magical thinking or con artistry. A discursive sleight of hand, where different things become the same thing – or a category of people gains certain characteristics - simply by virtue of language having been used in that particular way. Note that equivocation can happen without being used by a person: It can also be a matter of two or more persons talking past each other by each of them using different definitions of the same word in the same conversation. (In Swedish: ekvivokation or dubbeldefinition)

Facets (of Categorism) A facet of categorism is a way in which categorism is done. With prejudice, bigotry and discrimination constructed as the archetypical facets (being categorism through beliefs, feelings and acts, respectively), there are also more specific facets. Such as marginalization, demonization, othering, and so on. (In Swedish: facetter)

Foci (of Categorism) A focus of categorism is a categorism being based on a certain categorization or targeting a certain category. When categorism is based on categorization by race or ethnicity or such, it is called racism. When categorism is targeting homosexuals and bisexuals, it is called homophobia. (In Swedish: fokus)

Gingerism Categorism focused on targeting people who have red hair. (In Swedish: gingerism)

Hard Supremacism To openly construct a dichotomy of two categories of people as one being superior people and the other being inferior people. For example, claiming that being of a certain race or gender makes people in that category inherently more moral, more valuable or more capable of ruling society. Compare: Soft Supremacism. (In Swedish: hård supremacism)

Heightism Categorism focused on a categorization of people by how tall they are. (In Swedish: längdism)

Heterosexism A combination of homophobia and sexism – including transphobia. (In Swedish: heterosexism)

Homophobia Categorism focused on targeting the category of homosexuals, usually including bisexuals. (In Swedish: homofobi)

Illegal Discrimination Any form of discrimination covered by national laws against discrimination. Discrimination that is not covered by such laws is still discrimination in other senses of the word, but not in a legal sense. For example, illegal discrimination against Jews may sometimes happen in contemporary Germany, but would never happen during the third Reich: The Jews were not even considered citizens in the first place, much less protected by laws against discrimination. (In Swedish: olaglig diskriminering)

Incomprehensibilization The discursive act of constructing something to be incomprehensible. This something may be a category of people or other concept, or it may be a wider range of discourse such as the argument for a certain position. Such incomprehensibilization has several potential uses. It is hard to argue against a position or argument that isn't comprehensible in the first place. It is harder to defend a category of people against prejudice, bigotry and discrimination when the people in the category has been made incomprehensible. This also makes it easier to get away with an argument that is truly based in prejudice or bigotry (or a behavior that is discrimination). On a more general level, it may be easier to get away with a very bad argument the more shrouded and vague the argument is. If the true point of an argument is not actual logic but to reinforce a certain narrative, obscurity may be preferable. Such reinforcement can come in forms such as polishing one's position with an appearance of being the logical and reasonable position, or in the form of “winning” a debate by making the other side stop responding. Incomprehensibilization can thus be a method of establishing and maintaining authority. From the basic “that's just the way it is” and “if you have to ask, you wouldn't understand anyway” to complex models based on circular reasoning for a premise such as the idea that the people in a certain category are by definition inherently bad. Constructing oneself as the only one who understands, while actively making sure that others will not be able to challenge this position. Incomprehensibilization can also sometimes be a method for avoiding the wrath of authorities, shrouding discourses and arguments for positions that are not socially accepted. Thus, incomprehensibilization is not always a tool of prejudice and bigotry, but can in some contexts instead be a tool to subvert prejudices and bigotries that it in the local social context is mandatory to subscribe to. (In Swedish: obegripliggörande)

Infantilization Treating a person or category of people as if they were children, when they in fact are not. While this does NOT apply to treating children as the children they are, it does apply to treating a child (by any definition of the word) as far younger and less mature than they actually are. (In Swedish: infantilisering)

Internal Reality The second of the three layers of reality is the more or less unique world or worlds inside each individual person. Primarily studied through psychology and neurology. Internal realities are built upon the first layer (physical reality), since every human being has a brain to think with - and this brain is composed of matter and energy in the physical world. Note that unlike the two layers of external reality (the physical reality we all share and the social realities built between us), an internal reality is entirely subjective to the individual mind which hosts it. (In Swedish: Inre verklighet)

Internalized Categorism Categorism against oneself. The most famous focus being “internalized homophobia”, such as a gay man believing negative stereotypes about himself and hating himself for it. (In Swedish: internaliserad kategorism)

Intersectionality Based on the word “intersection”, the word intersectionlaity signifies that each human belongs to more than one category and that the intersection between the categories can be more important than the individual categories – that the whole is more than the sum of the parts. Therefore, analysis that depends on one single categorization of people marginalize those who are already marginalized in more than one way. For example, black women will be marginalized not only in an analysis of sexism and gender oppression (which assumes that women are white), but also in an analysis of racism and racial oppression (which assumes that black people are men). (In Swedish: intersektionalitet)

Invisibilization The discursive act of making something invisible. Constructing the discourse around it, so that it is not mentioned or seen. When done against a category of people, it can be either a matter of making the people in the category invisible or a matter of misrepresenting those people by invisibilizing a relevant categorization. Thus making the problems these people face either become invisible or wrongfully appear to be their own fault. Often done through silence, suppression techniques2, or through using abstractions of categorism to hide or define away a real problem. Making people invisible also make them available to be used, denying their needs so that they can exist only to fulfill the needs of other people3. (In Swedish: onsynliggörande)

Islamophobia The word islamophobia is sometimes synonymous with antimuslimism, which is categorism against people who are self-identified as Muslims or assumed by others to be Muslims. However, the word islamophobia is also sometimes given very different meanings, where rights are assigned to a conceptualization of a religion in itself, rather that to the human beings who are categorized as being religious: A matter of protecting a perceived “true Islam” from apostates, heretics, blasphemers and unbelievers, rather than protecting human beings who happens to be categorized as Muslims. (In Swedish: islamofobi)

Kyriarchy The Greek word κύριος/kyrios means "lord or master". In this context, it refers to the power of dominant groups, whatever groups that might be, and to the structures that reinforce such power. Coined by Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza4, the term Kyriarchy refers to a social system, or set of connecting social systems, that is built around dichotomous categorization of people, with domination of one group and the oppression & submission of the other. For example men as a group having power over women as a group, or white people as a group having power over people of color as a group. These individual phenomena has been studied by feminist researchers under the name of patriarchy and by post-colonial researchers under the name of colonialism. The concept of Kyriarchy takes an intersectional approach to this phenomena, so that several power dynamics can be explored simultaneously: The same person may belong to the privileged group as well as the oppressed group. Strongly related concepts are “Cultural Imperialism” as used by by Iris Marion Young5 and “Symbolic Violence” as used by Pierre Bourdieu6. Both talk about dominant groups using social reality to ensure their power of disempowered groups. In the categorism model, they are both included in the Kyriarchy facet, being regarded as simply different names for, and perhaps slightly different interpretations of, the same phenomenon. (In Swedish: kyriarkat)

Layers of reality Reality can be described as having three different layers of reality: Physical Reality, Internal Reality and Social Reality. These realities can be hard to distinguish because they do not only overlap but are so intertwined with each other that every human being lives in all three of them at all times. Yet they are very different from each other, following very different kinds of laws of nature. And all of them are real. (In Swedish: Verklighetsnivåer)

Linguicism Categorism focused on a categorization of people by what language(s) they speak or do not speak. (In Swedish: linguicism)

Marginalization To be marginalized is to be locked out. Not able to participate and not able to contribute. Thus also locked out of opportunities to improve one's abilities, gather resources and gaining any authority as an insider. On a socioeconomic level, this can be a matter of excluding people from career and salary opportunities. On a local social level, it may be a matter of shunning a family – for example encouraging one's children to refuse to play with (or even outright harass) the children of gay parents or Muslim parents. (In Swedish: marginalisering)

Meso (level) An intermediate (medium) level between micro (small) and macro (large). On a scale where individuals and personal relations are the micro scale and society at large is the macro scale, a specific social context is on the meso scale. (In Swedish: meso)

Misandry Categorism focused on targeting men. (In Swedish: misandri)

Misogyny Categorism focused on targeting women. (In Swedish: misogyni)

Monolithization To see people as if they were not individual persons, but rather specimens of a monolithic category. For example, understanding statistical differences between groups as if they were categorical differences. As if a certain trait being somewhat more common in one group (compared to some other group) would mean that “the people in that group has that trait”. (In Swedish: monolitisering)

Narrative Alliance People agreeing on a mutual narrative. They may agree on it from opposite sides of the story, being enemies in an antagonistic narative alliance. Yet helping each other to gain relevance and interpretation privilege through the narrative alliance while marginalizing other conceptualizations of what kind of struggle is going on. Often combined with a discursive alliance and/or cateitization alliance. (In Swedish: narrativallians)

Narrativism Harmful use or misuse of narratives or narrativization. A mindset where real human beings are treated as plot devices or expendable extras, rather than as real people with their own needs and rights. A mindset where the truth is whatever happens to make a good story and fit into the narrative, while a fact or perspective not fitting into the narrative is treated as evidence of that fact not being true or the perspective not being valid. Can be used as a facet or abstraction of categorism. (In Swedish: narrativism)

Narrativism, contained When applied to a work of fiction, or to a roleplaying game between real human beings who all freely participate, narrativism is not inherently bad. To disregard facts and perspectives that goes against the narrative may make the story more entertaining. A “willing suspension of disbelief” that is harmless because it doesn't harm actual people. It is acceptable to disregard the human rights of the fictional persons in a movie or other fictional context, to care about their suffering if and only if it fits the story to care about them, because only actual human beings have actual human rights. Note that an actual human being has their own internal realities as well as being reflected in social realities and in the internal realities of those who hear about them, while a fictional person does not have a mind of its own but only the reflections in others. This creates a huge difference between perceiving an actual person as nothing more than a shallow stereotype (which may at best be an oversimplification, that doesn't take the complexity of the actual person into account) and perceiving a fictional person in the same way (which may be the whole truth about this fictional person, since there is no actual person behind the perception and therefore nothing to oversimplify).

Narrativization Building narratives to create meaning. This includes meaning in the sense of “being meaningful” as well as in the sense of “making sense”. The story of your life, your story about the world, and so on. Stories large and small. A religion or political ideology can be perceived as a story about The Struggle Between Good And Evil, while the self-images of individuals can be perceived as their story about themselves. To build narratives is not inherently bad. It doesn't become narrativism until it starts to suppress relevant facts or relevant points of views. (In Swedish: narrativisering)

Narrempiry Narrativism used as empirical evidence: By proving that a certain claim is part of a certain narrative, or at least fits into the narrative, the claim is also considered proven to be valid objective truth. (In Swedish: narrempiri)

Normative (and Normativity) The way something is supposed to be, according to a certain norm – a certain set of social expectations and values. Whether this normativity is a good or bad thing depends on whether the norm is necessary or not. For example, society need to have a norm that people shouldn't murder each other, but doesn't need to have a norm that everyone ought to be right-handed. It is reasonable to stigmatize murderers for being murderers, but not to stigmatize left-handed people for being left-handed. (In Swedish: normativ, normativitet)

Occidentalism Categorism focused on targeting “occidentals” - which includes three different categories of people, who in this focus of categorism are conceptualized as being the same category: people who are highly educated, people who live in big cities and people who are from Western countries conceptualized as being one unified category. (In Swedish: occidentalism)

Oppression Oppression is categorism in a severely unequal balance of power. A balance where a person, group or social structure doing categorism has a strong power advantage over the human beings who this categorism is being done to. (In Swedish: förtryck)

Orientalism Categorism focused on targeting the category of “orientals” - which includes many different categories of people, who in this focus of categorism are conceptualized as being the same category: Japanese, Egyptians, and so on. (In Swedish: orientalism)

Othering The discursive act of constructing a person or group as being “the other”, as in “not the same as one of us”. Thus pushing them away, branding them as being something different that do not belong. This act includes constructing people as “being” a race or other category, an act sometimes called making someone “racified”. The relevant part here is not that someone can be said to belong to a certain group, for example a race or ethnicity. The relevant part is that this categorization is used to push the person(s) away, branding them as being something different that do not belong. (In Swedish: [[andrefiering, rasifiering)

Paraphobia Categorism focused on a categorization of sexuality, particulary into a dichotomy of normal versus deviant/paraphilic. (In Swedish: parafobi)

Pedoparanoia Categorism focused on targeting people with accusations of being a pedophile, a child-molester, or some kind of unspecified-yet-serious danger to children. Baseless accusations of epidemic Child Sex Abuse has been compared to the “red scare” of the fifties and to the witchhunts of the sixteenhundreds7. Note the difference between condemning actual child-molesters for their actual crimes, and to assign such criminal status to people who do not do such things. Unlike the supernatural harm attributed to witches (see “witchparanoia” below), the harm of Child Sex Abuse is a very real problem. (In Swedish: pedoparanoia)

Physical Reality The first of the three layers of reality. Primarily studied through natural sciences such as physics, chemistry and biology. Note that while physical reality exists independently of the two layers of psychosocial reality (the internal realities inside individual minds, and the social realities built between minds), these layers do not exist independently of physical reality. (In Swedish: Fysisk verklighet)

Prejudice Categorism done through beliefs. It is a key element in the definition of categorism is that this definition of prejudice is compatible with the standard dictionary definition of prejudice: “an adverse opinion or leaning formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge”. (In Swedish: fördomar, fördomsfullhet)

Queer Not conforming to traditional categorizations and expectations, especially regarding gender and sexuality. To be non-queer is not only to conform to the norm of being categorized as heterosexual and as either male or female - but also to conform to a complex, yet arbitrary and changing-over-time, set of norms for what sexuality means and what it means to be male or female. (In Swedish: Queer)

Racify, racified To racify a person or group is to do racism against that person or group – which includes the discursive act of constructing the racified as being “a race” in the first place. (In Swedish: rasifiering, rasifierad)

Racism Categorism focused on a categorization of race, ethnicity, skin-color or similar. Includes targeting foci such as antiziganism and afrophobia. (In Swedish: rasism)

Racist Sexism Categorism focused on targeting people by a combination of race and gender. (In Swedish: rasistisk sexism)

Religism Categorism focused on a categorization of religion. (In Swedish: religism)

Representation Bias Mistaking representatives of a certain subset of a category for representing the wider category as a whole. For example, a psychologist may not meet any mentally healthy individuals from a certain minority – yet believe that his experience of mental patients from that minority is an experience of how people from that minority group are in general. (In Swedish: representationsbias)

Sexism Categorism focused on a categorization of gender. Includes targeting foci such as misogyny and transphobia. (In Swedish: sexism)

Slut-Shaming Categorism focused on targeting people who are deemed as “dressing provocatively” or otherwise deviate from traditional ideals of chastity. Typically targeting women only, making it a combination of misogyny and paraphobia. Often used as synonymous with whore-stigma, although the connotations can also be a bit different. (In Swedish: slutshaming)

Social Constructionism The stance that language and all other aspects of human interaction have been socially constructed and is a continuous process of being socially constructed, and to various extents reproduced or reconstructed, through human thought and interaction. Categories are arbitrary, concepts exists in a historical and cultural context, knowledge is a social process intertwined with social action. (In Swedish: Socialkonstruktionism.)

Social Reality The third of the three layers of reality. Primarily studied through social sciences and humanities. Social reality is constructed between human beings, and thus built upon the second layer (internal reality). (In Swedish: Social verklighet.)

Soft Supremacism To indirectly construct a dichotomy of two categories of people as one being superior people and the other being inferior people, by constructing it as a matter of compassion or respect. Such as claiming that women shouldn't have to worry about getting involved in politics because men should take care of all such unpleasantries for them. The core of such “condescending compassion”8 is that it is indeed condescending. (In Swedish: mjuk supremacism)

Stigmatization People being discredited or looked down upon for belonging to a certain category or seen as behaving in a way associated with that category. It is a matter of social norms for how people are supposed to behave and what categories it is considered acceptable to belong to. The same category or behavior that is preferred in one social context may be stigmatized in another.9 (In Swedish: stigmatisering)

Supremacism Assuming a position of superiority. Either in the form of a soft supremacism fueled by condescending compassion, or in the form of a hard supremacism fueled by straightforward hate and openly constructing the other as inferior. The “likely interactions” connections above are for both kinds of supremacism. The Soft Supremacism is also connected to Voice Appropriation, while Hard Supremacism is instead connected to Violence. (In Swedish: supremacism)

Termism Getting stuck in definitions. Getting stuck in magical thinking that a thing is what we call it, or the notion that something is true by definition or “a priori”. Failing to see the distinction between terms/words, concepts/categories and phenomena, mistaking a word for in itself being what that word is trying to describe. Easily goes together with equivocations, as two persons who talk with each other may each be stuck in their own definitions and thus simply talk past for each other. (In Swedish: Termism)

Trans person A person who's gender identity, biological gender, genetic gender, gender expressions and how the person is perceived by everyone else are not all of the same gender. There is a sliding scale between trans-person and cis-person. (In Swedish: transperson)

Transmisogyny Categorism focused on targeting trans women. (In Swedish: transmisogyni)

Transphobia Categorism focused on targeting trans people. (In Swedish: transfobi)

Unchecked Aversion Allowing an irrational aversion to affect ones understanding or treatment of a category of people. For any number of reasons10, a person may develop an aversion against a concept, and thus against people associated with that concept. Such aversions might need to be kept in check, lest they bloom into outright bigotry... or even a phobia, in the clinical sense11. (In Swedish: ohämmad aversion)

Violence Violence as a facet of categorism includes not only literal violence itself, but also the justifications for violence and the ever-present fear of violence among potential victims. Note that physical violence isn't always against the targeted person's body. It can also be done against the target's children or other family members, pets or possessions. To throw a stone through someone's window is an act of violence in itself, although not as severe as throwing it at an actual person, and also an implied threat of more severe violence. (In Swedish: våld)

Visibilization To make something visible. The opposite of invisibilization. Visibilization can be a matter of informing about facts or bringing attention to relevant underlying structures. (In Swedish: synliggörande)

Voice Appropriation Denying human beings the right to have a voice of their own by assigning a voice to represent them without their consent. This voice may be constructed as being the group itself, as being the expert who understand the members of the group better than people in the group could possibly understand themselves, or simply being the most “genuine” voice by fitting the narrative role for what that voice ought to be. Voice Appropriation can be done from the outside as an attempt to silence the entire group, or by elites within the group who not only speak as members of the group but also pretend that their opinions, values and interests are those of everyone in the group... at least everyone who counts as “true” members of the group. As a part of this dynamic, the group may develop a social norm where everyone who are not members of the dominant group-within-the-group are strongly encouraged to never speak up at all, as their voices would be their own and not truly representing the entire group.

Whore-Stigma Categorism focused on targeting people who are sex-workers, perceived as such, or otherwise deviate from traditional ideals of chastity. Sometimes also called “whore-phobia”. Typically targeting women only, making it a combination of misogyny and paraphobia. While mostly interchangeable, the words whore-stigma13 and slut-shaming do have slightly different connotations. The term whore-stigma tend to refer to accusations of being a sex-worker as well as prejudice, bigotry and discrimination against actual sex-workers.14 The term slut-shaming tend to be more about clothing style and supposed sexuality in general15. (In Swedish: horstigma or horfobi)

Witchparanoia Categorism focused on targeting people with accusations of being a witch, or of harming people through supernatural means such as magic or demonic powers. (In Swedish: häxparanoia)

Zero-category A normative category that is conceptualized not merely as being normative but as not being a category at all. For example, in a context where it is normative to be white and male, these categories can develop into zero-category by people getting the idea that gender is something that only women have and that skin-color is something that only “people of color” have. (In Swedish: nollkategori)

Zerosumming Making things into a zero sum game, when they don't have to be. That harming one group inherently benefits another group, and vice versa. Zerosumming can be a matter of setting the rules so that something needlessly becomes a zero sum game. It can also be a discursive act of dichotomism or narrativism, portraying something as if it were a zero sum game when it actually isn't. One way of doing this is the argument that people shouldn't care about a certain issue, because there is some other issue they should care about. As if it wasn't possible to care about both issues. This argument can be used against all and any activism, because there is always some other issue that one should also care about. Another way is the argument that it would be inherently “selfish” to be honest about one's religion/belief or sexual orientation if it differs from the preferences of the parents or of mainstream society, arguing that refusing to live a lie would be at the family's expense. As if relatives would be inherently incapable of adapting and accepting their loved ones for who they are. (In Swedish: nollsummeri)