let’s talk about recoining
(approx 3.6k long post ahead. heed my warning)
coining, or ‘to create a new word or phrase’, comes from the word coining which is used synonymously with minting, the physical creation of money.
coining within the mogai community often refers to the creation of a new word for a specific queer experience, be that a gender, a microlabel, an umbrella term etc. while coining is often used to refer to the creation of flags, this is a misconception likely formed from the fact that flags are frequently created alongside newly coined language. coining does not, however, refer to the creation of any kind of visual imagery.
the verb ‘to recoin’ does exist within the english language, but refers specifically to money. therefore, technically the verb ‘to recoin’ was coined at an unknown point by an unknown user likely within the mogai community to refer to the ‘re-creation’ of queer language. there is no official coining of this word and since there is not a version within the official dictionary that we can look to that does not relate to money, the definition is often varied and used vaguely.
today I’m going to be looking at different definitions of what it means to ‘recoin’ within the community, why this word is used and my personal opinions on its usage. a lot of this post will be speculation, observations, and some statements that I believe to be fact. I don’t necessarily aim to establish my opinions as the standard but i aim to open up a dialogue about the words we use and how to maintain consistency.
strap in because this is going to be a HEFTY one, I don’t feel capable of condensing this information so I apologise for my inability to be succinct. If you have any thoughts, opinions and concerns from this post please approach me and my inbox with respect and good faith.
as touched on above, one way that recoining is referred to is the practice of creating a new flag for a coined term that already has a flag. this often involves keeping the same name and definition but merely remaking the flag. I would consider this an incorrect usage of the word coin or recoin, since we’ve established that it does not refer to the creation of any kind of visual imagery.
this practice is otherwise referred to as ‘creating an alternative/alt flag’. it’s worth noting that this often happens alongside the other definitions that I’m going to expand on, which is likely where the misconception comes from.
there are lots of reasons why alternative flags are made, and I’m of the opinion that the act itself is entirely neutral. the intention behind it, however, is interesting and I think is where a lot of problems lie. there are some fairly good faith reasons to make an alt flag, adjusting them to cause less strain on the eyes, for example. there are fairly neutral reasons, like making them entirely on accident (though I think an effort should be made to look into the term one is considering coining or making for — more on that later), or making a personal version of a flag due to preferred colour associations, etc.
then there is the practice of making an alternative flag due to the creator of the previous flag. this might be due to a disagreement in opinion over online discourse, or perhaps the creator has been socially shunned due to a callout document. whatever the reason, this isn’t new to queer history — the “lipstick lesbian” flag created in 2010 has widely fallen out of use in part due to its focus on femme lesbians and in part due to transphobic and racist comments from its creator natalie mccray.
I have a lot of complicated thoughts about this practice but I will return to them once we’ve established what is and is not recoining so I can talk about it in a little more depth.
something that would much more accurately fall under the word recoining, that is to say that new language is being created (coined) again (re-), is when a new word is created for an already existing definition. as an example, this would be like if someone took the definition of my term monachoric— a neoumbrella based on the feeling monachopsis— and created a new word for this definition such as monachodal.
in my opinion this can be definitively considered recoining, and most commonly this case of recoining happens accidentally. sometimes, however, terms are recoined this way by their own creator or by their creator’s wish due to various reasons (see: arissomei being recoined to dissomei).
3. Making a new definition
something else that often occurs accidentally is the act of using a word that was already coined for an experience/definition and using it for another experience/definition. for example, this happens fairly often with in nature terms— these are terms that are acronyms of some kind of quality, often a gender quality, in nature e.g FIN meaning feminine in nature. due to the limited amount of letters at the start this often causes accidental coining of an in nature acronym that already exists for another kind of quality.
you’ll notice that it’s happening also with recoining, recoining being a word that means both to mint money again and also how we understand its usage within the mogai community.
I’ve gone back and forth on whether I consider this recoining. instinctively I want to say that new language isn’t being created. words have multiple definitions often within language due to the nature of how it is formed. however, when it is accidental, which is often, it is being created with the intention of coining a word, which makes me inclined to call it recoining. i’m still a little on the fence about it, because I wouldn’t typically say a word with multiple definitions has been recoined, but for the rest of this post I will tentatively refer to this as a case of recoining. recoining is, of course, a word that has been made up within the community, so I’m going to allow for a little wiggle room here.
I want to talk for a second about accidental recoining since it occurs a lot in the previous two cases. I mentioned before that language having multiple definitions for one word is common, but I think that within a niche community focussed on identity, when this occurs accidentally we should instead ensure we are using the resources available to us— of which there are several— to look for previous coinings.
that being said, I don’t think it’s particularly heinous and I don’t think that it’s completely black and white. I’ve heard of people enjoying and relating to definitions but not connecting at all with the name and I’ve always held the opinion that the ‘first come, first serve basis’ that the community operates on seems a little nonsensical and rigid at times. nobody should be forced to identify with a word that doesn’t fit right for them and be barred from an experience due to it.
I’ve also seen terms that use very simple words and word combinations where it seems that I may resonate with it but adds a lot of additional aspects to the definition I don’t resonate with at all. I can see in this case why someone may want to use that word for a more simpler and face-value definition.
ultimately, I think it comes down to intention. a lot of accidental recoins actually occur because people get an idea and do not do the relevant research beforehand, and if it were the case that they would avoid a repeated word or definition had they known about it, I think it should be avoided. however, with good reasoning I don’t think recoins of this nature are always inherently an issue. it’s more about intention, though for purposes of archival and community connectivity, there should be a practice of referencing and/or link the original coining when done with purpose and good intentions.
4. The whole kit and caboodle
like a combination of all previous versions, when a coined word and the same definition are posted/‘coined’ again, often but not always with an alt flag. this can be easily mistaken for or considered intentionally or accidentally making an alternative flag but I wanted to make it clear that this can occur with flagless terms too and that by removing the element of the new flag it is often the case that the individual believes that they are presenting a newly coined term.
for an example, see this post where @radiomogai brings up that there are five genders that are simply a gender connected to the song I/me/myself (with no other unique specifications) archived on its blog. many of these could be considered ‘accidental alt flags’ as I’ve discussed already at length but quite notably there is an evident element of unawareness that this term already has an established date of coining and rather than intending necessarily to create an alt flag it is being presented as a new, coined concept.
however, this practice does not always occur accidentally. there are instances of individuals taking a whole term with its coined word and definition making a new post with the same word and definition to establish a new date of coining for it as to credit the coining to them rather than the original coiner. this usually occurs due to a desire to completely detach from its original coiner in some way due to the kind of disagreements I’ve mentioned before.
to play the voice of the audience here, okay but whoooo cares? if recoining is a a word the community made up, why does it matter how we use it? why is it a big deal that coining means words not images?? why would spend this many words writing this all out??? why are you policing other people’s language????
bear with me for a moment because I’m going to make what is going to seem like a dramatic logical leap.
being able to clearly define the language we use is important to combatting fascism.
that comes across as extreme when we’re talking about the word recoining, but consider for a moment the way the queer community is talked about and represented. we talk about each other amongst ourselves, but we are also talked about in academic articles, in government meetings. while mogai is a niche community, it is important to treat it as seriously and real as any other aspect of a marginalised group.
taking away the language to speak about identity, political issues and the like is a tool of fascism in order to literally repress our inability to talk amongst ourselves and form community. even concepts that are abstract and varied and personal need to be able to be defined in order to talk about the issues that are relevant in the world today — “what is a woman” is a ‘gotcha’ used by transmisogynists even in political settings to undermine conversations around trans rights and we need to be able to answer these kinds of questions confidently to ward off these kind of bad faith arguments.
when we talk about this concept of ‘recoining’ we are often talking about it in the context of the creation of new queer language, in the archival of queer history and the kind of behaviour that is considered correct or incorrect within these spaces. it’s important that we get on the same page regarding what exactly we are all talking about. in online communities there is a common ‘telephone game effect’ where the meanings of words get slowly warped until their usage is rendered virtually meaningless as everybody ends up talking about a different thing via the same terminology.
so yes, standardising the definition of recoining is important. based on what we’ve parsed out above, we can say with decent confidence that recoining in this context is defined as creating language again, or ‘re-creating’ language. including:
1. the process of creating a word for a definition when it has a different word already created for it
2. the process of using a word that was already created for a different definition
3. the process of using a word that was already created for the same definition as if one were the individual originally creating it
obligatory disclaimer that you are welcome to disagree with me on this, this is just my own opinion which is believe to be accurate based on what I’ve talked about above and the meanings of the prefix ‘re’ and the root word ‘coin’. regardless of your own opinion we should aim to keep a level of consistency where possible and that might mean opening up a wider community dialogue.
Tumblr culture vs mogai: FIGHT!
something close to 2k words later we have established what recoining is. more or less. I’ve also talked a little about accidental recoinings and why they should be avoided, and why sometimes things that could be considered recoining are not so bad. now I want to talk a little more generally, and delve into the more intentional recoins centred around grievances with the original coiner.
like any app or website, tumblr has quite a unique culture to any other social media site. due to the kinds of content you’ll find and in particular because of the blog format and tagging systems, things operate a little differently. there is a strong sense of ‘curate your space’. there is a strong sense of ‘establish boundaries and make DNIs and draw the line in the sand’. I don’t disagree with these concepts at all— I think it’s important to be vigilant online and dictate your own experience to be as positive and stress free as possible.
but I do have a few thoughts about this when it comes to coining. coining is not a job, it is widely considered a hobby. creating flags and terms is sometimes undertaken to provide something for others, via requests, or sometimes it is called ‘self indulgent’ when a coiner creates something pertaining to themselves. overall, coining terms intends to fill a gap in the lexicon where a specific experience has no word to describe it.
it is interesting to note how this individual attitude surrounding blogs has extended to and affected the mogai community. ultimately, coining is a community exercise. you cannot stop any one individual for feeling or relating or living an experience that you coin a word for. you are not the creator of that experience, just the individual who first puts a word to it.
generally speaking mogai archives exist without limitations and anyone can access them. this is due to the fact that archives store terms without bias so that they can be accessed even in the event of a coiner’s termination or disappearance. mogai coins are, after all, a piece of queer history. what I find particularly interesting is people do not seem to think that archives allowing access to anyone due to their nature as an archive of a part of queer history is a concept that should extend to mogai blogs. I extend my thought that mogai blogs should be equally accessible due to them being the origin of this piece of history being archived. ultimately one blog is the creator and the other is the archivist.
I have always thought that many treat archive blogs as if they are more serious and academic. archivists do very important and incredibly helpful work, but ultimately due to this also get treated as if they are doing a job. if mogai coiners do not owe anyone anything, archivists should get treated as such. equally, even if mogai is for fun, it should be taken seriously. I post silly things and wildly self indulgent things as a coiner, but I don’t think this diminishes the seriousness of what I love doing. archives and coiners should not be considered so separate as they often work together to hold up different facets of the community.
I’ll admit that the designation of a ‘mogai blog’ gets a little messy — not all people who have coined have ‘mogai blogs’. you have blogs that post maybe a term or two in their lifetime but are overall a ‘personal blog’ and others that are more of a healthy mix. there isn’t a clear line here. the thought I keep returning to, however, is the point of this all in the first place.
why we have words like lesbian and transgender. why gilbert baker originally sewed together those rainbow stripes. the point I’m trying to make is that coining and flag creation is ultimately not a personal experience— or at least, it didn’t set out to be that. it’s a community endeavour, and it’s supposed to be seen and spread and cherished.
there is a widespread belief that you can cast out whoever you want from your space via the much loved block button, and you can do so for whatever reason and live your life to its fullest and most comfortable. the mogai community sometimes echoes this sentiment in that you can reject whoever you want from your coins, and equally that you can recreate them if their creator has some opinion or action that doesn’t fit into your personal beliefs. but when terms are recoined for these reasons I think that stopping at the ‘i’m uncomfortable that’s why’ reasoning falls too short.
at various times, discomfort should be unpacked. and my issue here is moreso with the implications about identity. why do you feel that a coiner’s beliefs are baked into the terms themselves? is that actually the case, or is the point at which you disagree some inane online argument that has no bearing on the term whatsoever? why do you think that using someone’s term reflects their own opinions and morality onto you? these are all things to consider, because whether you enjoy it or not these are the implications you are putting out into the world by recoining for this reason.
I’m sure this point will get some frustration and some kind of instinctual reactions of ‘well this person did this horrible thing so I don’t have to use the flag they made’. that’s fine. I’m not saying that ideology isn’t always involved and considered when it comes to popular flags— see again the lipstick lesbian flag I mentioned earlier— and I’m not saying you should or should not be doing something due to your discomfort. I’m merely asking you to think about coining and what it entails and where that discomfort stems from and what it implies about coining and coiners overall.
the last note on tumblr that I’ll make is that due to the general audience of tumblr and the kind of topics posted, the mogai community often exhibits fandom behaviours or could be considered adjacent in some way to fandom. this means that I often feel like the protectiveness and ownership felt towards coined terms and flags comes from this sense of the way coins are treated being comparable to fanworks like fanart or fanfiction. which may sound odd, but consider that fandom members produce these due to their hobby for fun and have them consumed by an audience of likeminded individuals.
this is pretty similar to coins and flags, but I think the sense of ownership translating over has affected the way mogai community members treat coining in general. there is fierce protectiveness around creations which I can understand but sometimes is taken to an extreme point where coins are almost regarded as intellectual property. I think often this can discourage collaboration and the evolution of terms and has encouraged this concept that nobody ‘owes’ their coins to anyone.
it is not about what is owed, but by putting coins in a public community you are sharing with the world your piece of queer history. understand that flags are ‘pride flags’ and that should be the central goal that links us all. we are sharing with each other pride and identity. we owe each other respect and patience and kindness and community and mutual aid. this is what was set out to be established and I think that it’s important to keep in mind.
this was so much longer than I wanted it to be. if you’ve made it this far number one I’m impressed number two thank you. even if you’ve skimmed thank you thank you for listening and reading and taking time to hear me ramble on and on about something I really care about.
I love this community, and coining has been an ongoing hobby for me for many years now. many times I’ve made errors— even I had called flag creation ‘flag coining’ for some time— and I don’t mean to condescend or condemn with anything that I’m saying here. this community overall suffers from lack of discussion and I appreciate everyone who talks with me on tumblr and in the servers I’m in— special shoutout to calico cove, the archivist server, gaias and of course my skunkies down in the den. a lot of this essay didn’t come out the way I intended because I’m not always good at getting my thoughts into words but I hope the overall message is coherent. any typos you see !! avert your eyes!!
coining is a community endeavour. recoining is a word we created as we tend to do here and I wanted to set the record straight on the way it’s used and maybe incite a little discussion about our attitudes towards it and moving away from individuality and towards collaboration when we can.
this was fun everybody. thank you for reading :-)
@io-archival @rwuffles @leibotomy @eternica @respirgender @dragonpride17 @your-neighbour-coining @frikeymogai
