sodomy
Enable an agent to interpret a use of the term sodomy, distinguish the conduct described from the classification imposed on it, and identify what evidence and context are needed before acting.
Research draft, second pass
A second pass drafted this model: the structure a model of this thing needs, and what is known about it in the world. The line under this one says how the second half was obtained - researched against sources, or recalled without web access, in which case nothing here was read anywhere and every claim is a lead to verify. Unreviewed either way.
recalled by Codex without web access - no source was read
Researched by: Codex
Purpose and description
Enable an agent to interpret a use of the term sodomy, distinguish the conduct described from the classification imposed on it, and identify what evidence and context are needed before acting.
Sodomy is a historically variable legal and religious category of sexual conduct, commonly including anal intercourse and, in some traditions or jurisdictions, oral sex or sexual acts involving animals, rather than a single consistently defined act.
It can be Disambiguate an occurrence of the word against an identified definition and context.; Compare definitions by the conduct and circumstances they include or exclude.; Assess whether an account supports a classification while preserving allegations and disagreements.; Replace an ambiguous label with a sourced, neutral description when the task permits.; Identify when jurisdiction-specific legal research or separate consent and safeguarding assessment is needed.; Limit reproduction of sensitive details and prevent unsupported inferences about identity or culpability..
Distinguishing features
A classification as sodomy requires an attributable meaning of the term; a description of a sexual act alone does not establish that classification.
The term must not automatically be substituted for anal intercourse: whether that or other conduct is included depends on the definition being used.
A person's sexual orientation, gender, or relationship status does not by itself establish an occurrence.
The label alone does not establish consent, coercion, injury, or incapacity; each requires separate evidence.
Use in a religious judgment, a legal allegation, and a colloquial insult must remain distinguishable even when the same word appears.
Scope
+ Definitions attached to the term by identified speakers, texts, institutions, or jurisdictions
+ Non-graphic descriptions of conduct included or excluded by a particular definition
+ Alleged, reported, or established occurrences classified using the term
+ Consent, capacity, and participant circumstances recorded independently of the classification
+ Legal, religious, and colloquial uses distinguished by place, time, and authority
+ Evidence, uncertainty, and consequences associated with applying the label
- Sexual orientation and gender identity as attributes of persons
- Sexual assault as a complete model of non-consensual conduct
- Sexual health assessment, diagnosis, and treatment
- Complete criminal proceedings, sentencing systems, or religious doctrines
- Detailed sexual techniques or erotic descriptions
- Population-level histories of sexuality, persecution, or social movements
Characteristics
- Usage context
- legal; religious; historical scholarship; colloquial; other; unresolved Determines which interpretive authority and evidentiary standards are relevant.
- Definition authority
- Identified text, speaker, institution, or other source defining or applying the term Prevents an agent from treating its own assumed meaning as authoritative.
- Spatial and temporal applicability
- Relevant jurisdiction or community, event date, source date, and effective interval where established Keeps a classification tied to the setting in which its definition applies.
- Conduct coverage
- Non-graphic act categories explicitly included, explicitly excluded, or unresolved under the cited definition Makes the boundary of the classification inspectable without inventing a universal list of acts.
- Consent and capacity evidence
- Separately attributed accounts of consent, coercion, capacity, and relevant age information; disputed or unknown where appropriate Prevents either consent or abuse from being inferred from the label.
- Occurrence evidence status
- hypothetical; alleged; reported; admitted; adjudicated; disputed; unresolved Distinguishes a claim about conduct from a supported determination.
- Classification fit
- supported under cited definition; excluded under cited definition; contested; insufficient information Allows an agent to withhold classification when either the definition or occurrence evidence is inadequate.
- Normative determination
- Attributed legal or religious determination, its authority, applicable date, and verification status Separates the description of conduct from judgments about prohibition, culpability, or sanction.
Where this came from
wikidata · CC0 1.0
Also registered as vr.tr.sodomy
Drafted structure
Bundle to layer to finding to question, as the second pass will find it: 5 bundles · 9 layers · 14 findings · 23 questions.
Meaning and attribution Establishes what sodomy means in the particular material being interpreted.
The registry has no recorded definition, so a usable draft must make competing meanings explicit rather than select one silently.
Source-bound meaning
Connects a use of the term to its defining source and interpretive setting.
Attributed definition
Record the meaning supplied by the relevant authority and distinguish an explicit definition from an interpreter's reconstruction.
- How does this source define sodomy, and which conduct does it expressly include or exclude? definition
- Who supplies this definition, and where can its wording and context be checked? provenance
Translation and neighbouring terms
Examines equivalence claims between sodomy and other descriptions of conduct.
Non-equivalent labels
Keep related act descriptions, historical expressions, translations, and evaluative labels distinct unless their equivalence is supported in the relevant context.
- Would replacing sodomy with anal intercourse or another act description change the source's intended scope? boundary
- If this is a translation, what original expression was used and what supports the chosen translation? provenance
Conduct and participant circumstances Records the minimum act-level information needed to evaluate the classification.
An ACT model must distinguish the occurrence being described from assumptions introduced by the word used to describe it.
Act description
Identifies relevant conduct without substituting identities or reputations for evidence.
Conduct-definition fit
Compare a neutral, non-graphic account of the occurrence with the explicit boundaries of the selected definition.
- What conduct is actually described, and which details necessary for applying this definition are missing? measurement
- Does the classification follow from the described conduct, or only from assumptions about the participants' identities or relationships? boundary
Consent and capacity
Keeps consent and participant vulnerability independent from the act label.
Independent consent assessment
Attribute evidence about consent, coercion, age, and capacity separately; silence in a source does not establish any of them.
- What evidence addresses each participant's consent, capacity, and any coercion at the relevant time? provenance
- Do the documented circumstances require a separate assessment of sexual assault, exploitation, or safeguarding needs? action
Normative context and applicability Situates legal or religious classifications within their applicable authorities and periods.
An agent must not convert the use of a historically or institutionally situated term into an unsupported present-day judgment.
Legal usage
Examines the requirements and applicability of a legal use without assuming that the label establishes an offence.
Jurisdiction and date
Any legal classification requires verified authority for the relevant location and time, together with the elements and legal status of the provision.
- Which jurisdiction, event date, and verified legal authority govern this use of the term? provenance
- What elements and applicability conditions must be established before the described conduct fits that legal category? boundary
- What further verification is needed before using this classification in a legal decision? action
Religious and evaluative usage
Attributes moral or theological judgments without presenting them as neutral descriptions or universal rules.
Community-specific judgment
Identify the tradition, interpreter, period, and disputed boundaries associated with a religious or evaluative use.
- Which text, tradition, or speaker supplies the judgment, and what meaning do they assign to sodomy? definition
- Does the source describe an act, allege wrongdoing, or use the term rhetorically without specifying conduct? boundary
Evidence and responsible classification Controls how claims become model assertions and how sensitive classifications may be used.
Applying this label can misrepresent intimate conduct or turn an accusation into an apparent fact unless attribution and uncertainty remain visible.
Claim and determination
Separates reported terminology, occurrence evidence, and institutional findings.
Assertion status
Track who applied the label, what evidence supports the underlying account, and whether a determination exists or is disputed.
- Who classified the occurrence as sodomy, and is that classification an allegation, self-description, interpretation, or formal determination? provenance
- Which claims about the underlying conduct are corroborated, contested, or unresolved? measurement
Representation and use
Determines how much sensitive information and inherited terminology a task actually requires.
Minimal attributed description
Preserve the term where its source-specific meaning matters, but use neutral descriptions and explicit attribution when presenting claims about participants.
- Does the task require the original label, a neutral conduct description, or both with an explanation of their relationship? action
- Which identifying or intimate details can be omitted while preserving the evidence needed for the task? action
Evidence and external alignment What the world already says about this thing, gathered so the model can be checked against it.
A model that cannot be lined up against existing standards, identifiers and practice cannot be adopted by anyone who already uses them.
Reported evidence
Findings from the breadth pass, kept separate from the structural claims.
Check these first
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- No sense is recorded, so the definition covers the historical category rather than selecting a particular jurisdiction's offense.
- Any legal application requires checking the jurisdiction, date, authoritative wording, and treatment of consent.
- This is recall only; no sources were consulted and no current legal status is asserted.
- Which of these check these first hold for the sense of sodomy this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Kinds and varieties
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Anal intercourse classified as sodomy
- Oral sex classified as sodomy
- Sexual acts involving animals classified as sodomy
- Which of these kinds and varieties hold for the sense of sodomy this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Real-world use
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Interpretation of historical criminal statutes, prosecutions, and judgments
- Study of religious teachings and classifications of sexual conduct
- Historical research on the regulation of sexuality
- Human-rights analysis of laws criminalizing consensual sexual conduct
- Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of sodomy this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Failure modes and hazards
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Treating the term as having one definition across periods, jurisdictions, and religious traditions
- Conflating consensual adult sexual conduct with sexual assault or acts involving animals
- Inferring sexual orientation from a sexual act or legal accusation
- Reading historical prosecution records as direct measures of sexual behavior
- Using a historically condemnatory category as a neutral clinical description
- Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of sodomy this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Regional variation
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- English-language legal traditions have used overlapping terms such as sodomy, buggery, and crimes against nature, with scope depending on the particular authority.
- Religious and secular authorities have differed over which acts fall within the category.
- Translation between legal and religious traditions can obscure differences in prohibited acts and evidentiary requirements.
- Which of these regional variation hold for the sense of sodomy this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- anal intercourse - Names a particular sexual act; sodomy is a variable category that may include that act and others.
- oral sex - Names sexual activity involving oral contact with genitalia or the anus; only some definitions classify it as sodomy.
- bestiality - Specifically concerns sexual acts involving animals; its inclusion within sodomy depends on the historical or legal definition.
- homosexuality - Concerns same-sex attraction or orientation; sodomy classifies conduct and does not reliably identify participants' orientation.
- sexual assault - Concerns sexual acts without legally valid consent; the label sodomy alone does not establish whether consent was present.
- buggery - Can overlap with sodomy, but any distinction must be established from the particular statute, judgment, or historical usage.
- Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of sodomy this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
What the second pass must settle
- Which sourced definition or set of definitions should anchor this registry entry, given that no definition is recorded?
- Does an existing Vercy world model already cover this concept and require this entry to link to it?
- Which historical, legal, religious, and linguistic contexts are necessary for adequate coverage, and which should remain linked specialist treatments?
- How should the ACT placement represent uses that classify or condemn conduct without identifying a particular occurrence?
- Which primary sources can establish the boundaries of the principal definitions, including disputed translations and changes over time?