[lettucehead]

This is outrageous. Consider math terminology as a so-called "term of art." An attractor, in dynamic systems, is something which attracts. A repellor is something which repels. Should it be called a "repellence?" Wouldn't that mean something undesirable? Should the opposite of "attractor" be a "repugnor," because repugnance is the opposite of attraction? What is the corresponding correct form of something that repels? Repellor (or repeller, for those who prefer American suffixes).

Forms matter. Colloquial meanings also matter, but not as much, particularly when they're an egregious violation of English and decency.