Please check the about and the questions page for more information about this site and about what this site, the terms on it, and the experiences it describes are and are not.
While Tumblr is the main place that terms are coined for the plural community, I'm not using it to coin these terms. I want to coin these terms anonymously, or at least as anonymously as I can. If these terms catch on, I do not want to be the face of a big community or anything like that.
Also, Tumblr is not geared for lengthy or interrelated discussions in the way that a personally-constructed website is, or can be. Due to the heaviness and importance of the topics this site is about, I feel that an in-depth setting where they cannot just be shared by someone who'll just go "yeah I'll reblog that" is best.
Part of why this site is called "forcigenic" is because I want to make it clear that, while my terms aren't meant to be really associated with any particular discourse stances or communities outside of the plural, DID, and trauma survivor community, it is also coined by someone who is friendly to origins other than traumagenic, by virtue of using -genic terms.
While forcigenic is a form of traumagenic, most traumagenic systems who are exclusionary towards endogenic systems would not use -genic terms for themselves other than traumagenic, and I do care that systems of all origins understand they can use these terms if they feel described by them.
Basically, I'm a system who figured out that some of my experiences were almost definitely covered under the term "programming", which has a broader definition than I had been led to believe.
However, I also realized that I had had certain experiences that I either didn't remember well enough to be sure if they were programming or not (just that they involved abuse of my system), and also that some of my experiences had impacted me the same as my programming had, but some of them didn't count as programming despite being able to be described in similar terms.
Therefore, I coined the terms forcishaping/shaping and forcigenic to describe some of my experiences that were conceptually similar to programming but not the same thing.
While nothing is wrong with calling your experiences "programming" if they were programming, only some of the experiences that "felt" like programming really were, the more I learned about it all. However, there was definitely an umbrella of experiences that all felt similar in that an external party had influenced my system on purpose in a way that hurt me.
I therefore use the word shaping to refer to that experience and use language like a "forcimate" or a "shaped headmate" to describe a headmate who I feel was influenced in an adverse way by someone who was aware of the system, but it didn't entirely count as programming.
I consider this important because there are experiences that happen, including within the plural community - which I have been in for at least 20 years, at least things that would nowadays be considered plural or adjacent to it - but that we don't seem to have adequate language for.
In particular, it is possible to abuse systems in ways that are similar to the type of abuse known as programming, but that are not really programming per se. However, some systems have experienced forms of plural abuse that have shared experiences with some aspects of programming.
Therefore, it is valuable to have a word that includes things that are similar to "programmed" and "programming" in terms of being describable in similar ways, but that isn't as specific as programming-related language is.
Please see also this page of disclaimers that involve things you can or will see on this site.