>For some reason Haskell users try to make things sounds as academic as possible.

Probably because Haskell ended up being the language for academics. If you want to do programming language research in an ML-type language use Haskell. If you want to make a product, use OCaml. Not entirely true, but pretty close.

>So bind is flat map in other languages.

In the case of a List, yes, but there are other datastructures that implement Monad. This type of thing happens a fair amount in Haskell. It is not that uncommon to see code like:

    instance Monad List where
        (>>=) = flatMap

That is to say, the implementation of the interface is just another function that has a more domain specific name.

There are other monads with a bind that cannot be understood as flatMap.

For example, the Maybe datatype is Haskell's version of Optional. For example, if a variable is of type `Maybe t`, it either contains a single value of type t, or no value. It is common to use Maybe without using it as a monad. However, Maybe does implement the Monad interface. In this case, bind is defined as follows:

    x.bind(f) =
      if (x.hasValue()) then { return Just(f(x.value)) }
      else { return Nothing() }

where Just and Nothing are two constructors of Maybe. If we view 'no value' as analogous to null, then this bind function is null propogation.