- 2 Posts
- 16 Comments
41·3 hours agoThe question is not whether every insult is aimed at the neurodivergent, it is whether we accept that our language, carelessly or maliciously deployed, reinforces a world where those already struggling are further ground beneath contempt.
You assert that policing language is futile, that insults are a “basic part of human language,”. This is the refuge of those who mistake tradition for truth. If language is merely a tool, then let us ask: what does it build? Does it foster understanding, or does it erect walls? Does it invite reflection, or does it demand submission?
You say, “It literally helps nothing even if you manage to ban these words.” But who, pray tell, is asking for bans? I am not advocating for the eradication of words, I am advocating for the examination of their purpose. You are correct that words are ever shifting and changing. Sever the verbal head of one hydra and witness as two new nouns emerge. This is precisely the reason for my conviction.
“100% policing language”? It is 100% asking for accountability. If you insist on wielding words as weapons, at least own the carnage. But do not pretend that this reflects anything but a commitment to a cruel world.
You state that words like “stupid” or “lazy” are mere descriptors for common traits, and in this, you are correct. But let us be explicit: these words are not neutral. They are not clinical. They are not even accurate. They are judgments masquerading as observations, and their function is not to describe, but to dismiss, belittle and shame.
It is not the existence of laziness or folly that demands scrutiny, it is the impulse to label a human being as such, as though their value hinges on productivity or flawless reasoning. When you call a person “lazy,” you are not documenting a transient state; you are rendering a verdict. A judgment from a throne no higher than theirs. You ignore the depressed individual for whom movement is a Herculean task, the neurodivergent mind locked in executive dysfunction, the exhausted worker crushed beneath systems designed to extract labor without regard for humanity. The word “lazy” does not describe a choice. It erases a context.
Likewise, “stupid” is not a measure of intellect, it is a weapon. It presumes intelligence is a moral achievement, not a confluence of biology, environment, and luck. It assumes that those who fail to meet an arbitrary standard of competence deserve contempt, rather than inquiry. If a machine malfunctions, we do not call it “stupid”; we examine its design. Why, then, do we reserve such charity for objects, and withhold it from people?
The question is NOT whether we should “ban” these words. It is whether we recognize their purpose: to punish, not to understand. Language does not merely reflect reality, it constructs our perception of it. When we default to scorn, we architect a world where struggle is met with derision, where complexity is flattened into moral failure, and where the burden of proof always lies with the accused. This is not how justice works. This is not how compassion works.
Furthermore, if one desires a change in the conduct of one they would deem a fool, has shaming been shown to work? NAY! It has been demonstrated time and time again that shaming yields not the behavior of a distinguished individual but a seething hatred towards those that inflicted the wound. A resentment that easily turns what was once a mere human folly into a vitriolic conviction. You may then have no hope of opening this fortress of bitterness to see the harm their actions wrought, indeed they may feel justified in their actions. So as have been done unto them, they will do unto others.
https://drdevonprice.substack.com/p/laziness-does-not-exist
https://neurosciencenews.com/guilt-shame-behavior-neuroscience-30065/
Of course, if your desire is merely to feel good for a moment as you unleash an insult upon another, by all means. But this is not the behavior of a paragon of virtue, rather it is base.
I command not for policing of language. I put forth the request for people to examine if shaming and name calling impacts behavior towards a more desirable outcome.
(Spoilers: It does not)
If I am wrong, the result is that everyone gets treated with more kindness.
If you are wrong, people who cannot help themselves get treated with cruelty.
How do you know? How can you be so certain in your judgment, and declare that another’s “stupidity” or “laziness” is not the shadow of a mind wired differently? Can you see the gears turning askew?
What is stupidity to your mind? What is laziness? If they were born stupid, if they were raised without care, would you fault them? When did Gods descent from heavens and bestow you with the wisdom to always do what is right? Why may not all have this privilege?
If you are wrong, if that “laziness” is exhaustion, that “stupidity” a misfiring synapse: then you’re not just cruel, you are part of the problem.
Accountability? Yes, accountability is good. It’s proper and necessary to address harmful actions and ensure steps are taken to prevent recurrence. This is entirely possible, and likely more effective, without resorting to insult.
Insults are just punitive justice in a social context: a counterproductive way to discharge outrage rather than foster change. It is to temporarily soothe the egoic zealot lurking within the hearts of all. The research is clear: whether in criminal justice or interpersonal conflict, rehabilitative approaches (clear boundaries, restorative dialogue, support) reduce harm more effectively than punishment alone.
To believe that hate may be remedied with further hate is to mistake fire for water.
Yes.
Would you judge this person then for acting like they have brain damage? Do you go around making fun of disabled people?
I’m sure, but do others understand the liberation?
One person decided that I lack empathy (he doesn’t know what the word means) based on this. He said as much. Possibly others read it and decided it must be true, and thus I am worthy of burial.
What if you can’t learn?
Also by whose dictionary are you defining empathy? I wish people well, would seek to alleviate their suffering, I practice compassion. I do not need empathy for any of it.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/empathy
paljastus
empathy noun em·pa·thy ˈem-pə-thē Synonyms of empathy
1 : the action of understanding, being aware of, being sensitive to, and vicariously experiencing the feelings, thoughts, and experience of another Lead by example and demonstrate the power of empathy and compassion.— Shari Bailey There’s no love in this character, no hidden empathy or tenderness that surfaces late in the story.— Julie Hinds A little politeness, respect and empathy go a long way toward making our online experiences enjoyable and fulfilling.— Jim Sabataso Seen from the protagonists’ worldview, the film becomes an earnest call for empathy in a country that is witnessing an unprecedented influx of immigrants.— Emiliano Granada also : the capacity for this … the bully shows a lack of empathy and may joke at another person’s expense. — Sherri Gordon We often think of empathy—people’s ability to share and understand each other’s experiences—as a hard-wired trait, but it’s actually more like a skill. The right experiences, habits and practices can increase our empathic capacity … — Jamil Zaki
2 : the act of imagining one’s ideas, feelings, or attitudes as fully inhabiting something observed (such as a work of art or natural occurrence) : the imaginative projection (see projection sense 6b) of a subjective (see subjective entry 1 sense 3a) state into an object so that the object appears to be infused with it To have empathy, in the early 1900s, was to enliven an object. … Some of the earliest psychology experiments on empathy focused on … a bodily feeling or movement that produced a sense of merging with an object. One subject imagining a bunch of grapes felt “a cool, juicy feeling all over.”— Susan Lanzoni
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/care for
paljastus
care for phrasal verb cared for; caring for; cares for
1 : to do the things that are needed to help and protect (a person or animal) : look after (someone or something) She cares for elderly patients. Who is caring for your son while you are at work?
2 : to feel affection for (someone) I got the feeling he never really cared for me.
3 somewhat formal : to like or enjoy (something) —often used in negative statements I don’t care for jelly beans. I don’t care for your tone of voice.
4 somewhat formal : to want (something) Would you care for some pie?
Yes, woman is a human. Humans are human. But we tend to only care about those we hear of. A woman in a dire circumstance without someone putting her on insta is still suffering just as much.
also, low empathy is a cognitive issue one cannot help. Refrain from ableism if you care for neurodivergent people. I do not need empathy to care for people.
I swear to god if you imply that we’re supposed to say “Peep”…
i get clean to get dirty 😈
No.