You must log in or # to comment.
I feel like most people are wildly inconsistent on this. Fat shaming? Small dick energy? How about mental illness? Baldness for some reason? Disabilities? Oh, we could probably go on about those. Some people seemingly decide a line is too simple and draw a complex sine function instead.
My rule is to try to be decent. Sometimes, I even succeed. But I don’t think I’m very good at it, and neither are most of you. Bunch of hypocrites, we are.
I’ve always liked “Just don’t punch down.” But you’re right, we’re all hypocritical in some form or another.
The issue is that even when your target is “up”, using common characteristics as insults means lots of people below that are going to catch strays, as it were.
The problem here is lots of people have different definitions of who is up or down.
I’m not really sure when it happened, but I’d say people were generally pretty successful at destroying the old social norms. There’s a lot of terrible slurs that are no longer socially acceptable to say today, there was a lot of power that white men had in conversations that was stripped from them, it was good to get rid of.
The problem is that we didn’t really replace it with anything. There was no great basic decency movement, nothing new about treating people with respect. If anything, it seems like we’ve embraced being more toxic than ever, and have decided to invent new ways to insult and belittle each other.
I agree.
Friendly reminder: deadnaming Twitter is not transphobic.
what??? that’s like deadnaming elons child!! oh wait, he does that.
I used to have a mate called Josh who’d always call things gay if he didn’t like him, and I asked him to stop. I said, imagine if I called stuff I don’t like “joshy” or something. Anyway he stopped talking to me after that. It was a bit more heated than I’ve made it sound but you get the point.
Pretty joshy of him
This is one of many reasons why I never liked the media going “I’m implying Putin and Trump are gay and wanna do it, that’s the joke!”
God, the media sucked at making fun of Trump.
Remember how starting in 2016 EVERY show had to have a character who was “Basically Trump”, and the plot was “Trump is bad.” And the ONLY thing to do it competently was The Boys; Because it showcased Trump/Homelander as an actual threat and character study into “What if someone has no brains, no skills, all the power, the humility of Julius Caeser and the tolerance of Henry the VIII. And no one in charge is going to do anything about it. Why? Corporate and political entities fully realize he’s a ticking time bomb they can barely control, but don’t care about that little detail because he’s useful to their agenda!”
instead of “Remember when Trump said dumb thing he actually said in real life? Laugh! Trump’s an idiot and a loser, but we’re also really afraid of him!” Which is not only not funny, but runs close to Fox News’ “Weak Willed Tyrant Fallacy”
It’s like, I get it, I hate Trump to, but for the love of God, change the fucking channel. I enjoy fiction to escape reality.
I’m really hoping we don’t get a second wave of that. Because, holy shit, I understand that “orange man bad”, please tell me what the fuck we’re going to do about it besides try to make a buck off of it.
But pointing out hypocrisy is AOK
I don’t see anyone, on the left, disparaging public figures for being gay. I see plenty of people disparaging gay public figures for being hypocrites.
Actually must be pretty sheltered cause I just don’t run into this shit anymore.
The cool kids have moved on to using ableism to mock public figures. Now Trump is a psychopath, Musk is a narcissist, and Peterson is schizo.
Drag, I get where you’re coming from, but don’t you think those three groups are different?
Schizo? Schizo ppl are harmless and don’t deserve to have something fundamental to their mental state used as an insult. I completely agree with you here.
Narcissist? This wasn’t always a diagnosis and doesn’t always refer to one. I don’t see anything wrong with using this as an insult. Defending it under ableism kinda feels like calling the word “abuser” abelist - sure, abusive people probably also struggle with mental health.
Psychopath? That’s also pretty hard to defend.
Honesty I think you’d be better off pointing out how these people aren’t mentally ill and are fully culpable for what they do, instead of labeling it all abelist.
The word Schizo definetly doesn’t belong here, that is abelist. Peterson isn’t schizo he’s a close minded misandrist.
Defending it under ableism kinda feels like calling the word “abuser” abelist
Drag is willing to accept that premise only after psychologists put “abuser disorder” in the DSM. They can probably put it right next to “crime disorder” and “being a bad person disorder” within the “things that are behaviours and not mental health conditions” section. Until that section gets made, everything in the DSM is a mental health condition and NOT an action.
Honesty I think you’d be better off pointing out how these people aren’t mentally ill and are fully culpable for what they do, instead of labeling it all abelist.
Por que no los dos?
Trump is a criminal because he’s chosen to do criminal things. Musk is an abuser because he’s chosen to do abusive things. ASPD and NPD aren’t choices and they aren’t actions. Mixing up criminal and abusive behaviour with mental health conditions is ableist. It’s the ableism that happens when you hear about a bad thing and assume a minority did it. “Someone robbed the convenience store? Must have been a black.” “A famous musician molested a child? I always knew he was gay.” “A politician bribed a pornstar with campaign funds to hide his relationship with her? He must have a mental illness.” It’s wrong.
Taking words away from people that they use to describe their abusers (narcissist, psychopath) is going to hurt people who don’t deserve it (schizophrenia, etc) when you lump it all together as abelism. That’s my point.
In my opinion, they did put abuser disorder in the DSM. Here’s the diagnosis criterion for NPD (need 5/9, must be maladaptive) Notice how its just the description of an emotionally abusive person, when you need 5 and its gotta be bad enough to affect your life?
A grandiose sense of self-importance (exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)
Preoccupation with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
Believing that they are “special” and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)
Requiring excessive admiration
A sense of entitlement (unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with their expectations)
Being interpersonally exploitative (taking advantage of others to achieve their own ends)
Lacking empathy (unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others)
Often being envious of others or believing that others are envious of them
Showing arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes
This is from Wikipedia, btw, I dont own the manual and cant find it online. DSM is just a guide to help psychiatrists give treatment to people who need help, not a list of descriptors you can no longer use.
Notice how its just the description of an emotionally abusive person, when you need 5 and its gotta be bad enough to affect your life?
Is it really? Let’s do some math.
A grandiose sense of self-importance (exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)
The way other people feel about themselves isn’t an attack on you. You don’t have the right to police other people’s level of self esteem. Abusive traits so far: 0/1
Preoccupation with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
The way other people feel about themselves isn’t an attack on you. You don’t have the right to police other people’s level of self esteem. Abusive traits so far: 0/2
Believing that they are “special” and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)
The way other people feel about themselves isn’t an attack on you. You don’t have the right to police other people’s level of self esteem. Abusive traits so far: 0/3
Requiring excessive admiration
Other people having needs isn’t an attack on you. You don’t have the right to police other people’s needs. You can say no, you can say you don’t personally want to be asked or expected to do it, you can’t get mad at people for wanting something. Abusive traits so far: 0/4
A sense of entitlement (unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with their expectations)
This is called being a Karen, not being an abuser. Abusive traits so far: 0/5
Being interpersonally exploitative (taking advantage of others to achieve their own ends)
This one is abusive. Abusive traits so far: 1/6
Lacking empathy (unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others)
Other people not having the feelings you want them to have isn’t an attack on you. You don’t have the right to police other people’s feelings. Abusive traits so far: 1/7
Often being envious of others or believing that others are envious of them
Other people having bad feelings isn’t an attack on you. You don’t have the right to police other people’s feelings. Abusive traits so far: 1/8
Showing arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes
The way other people feel about themselves isn’t an attack on you. You don’t have the right to police other people’s level of self esteem. Abusive traits so far: 1/9
Okay, we did the math and found that only one out of nine traits is abusive, and given five are required for a diagnosis, it’s reasonable to assume most people with NPD don’t have any symptoms that make them abusers. On the other hand, most of the traits you called abusive were just other people’s feelings you don’t like. So it sounds like you’re just interested in being the thought police and acting like the contents of other people’s heads is an attack on you. Which, you know, is a method abusers use to control their victims. Drag doesn’t like you.
Drag doesn’t like you
Alright Drag, that’s fine. I usually respect what you have to say that’s why I took the time to type all that out. I’ll stay out of your replies in the future.
I’m just going to point out the criteria is “maladaptive” not being a Karen sometimes, so I don’t agree with your ratings. Being a pain in the ass sometimes isn’t the same as having something so wrong with your personality that you need a pathological label.
It sounds like you are being the thought police
I’m pointing out a word people have used for thousands of years to reference antisocial behavior really shouldn’t be called ableism, because when you do that, you weaken the word ableism. That’s hardly thought policing.
Sorry about the aggression. Drag thought you were unfairly judging people for the way they are, and wanted to make you feel the way you make people with NPD feel.
Drag thinks you’ve maybe understood the meaning of the word “maladaptive”. It doesn’t mean hurting other people. It means hurting yourself. Remember, diagnoses are part of medicine. Medicine is about helping the patient. It’s not about judgement. People with NPD require an excessive need for praise, and it’s maladaptive because it hurts them. The diagnostic criteria don’t have anything to do with whether it hurts other people. That’s not a factor.
Drag interpreted your statements as wildly aggressive, because drag assumed you knew this. Drag can forget how little some people know about the field of medicine. Try to think about what you said in the context of the maladaptivity applying to the patient: “You have feelings that hurt you, and having those feelings is an act of abuse.” That’s what the discourse is if everyone understands that medicine is about helping patients. Drag forgot that not everyone spends hours pondering the philosophical purpose of medicine.
Anyway, before drag hits post, drag wants to share an article drag read which really contextualised the last two thousand years of history of the use of the word “narcissist”: https://medium.com/@viridiangrail/narcissus-wasnt-an-abuser-he-was-queer-15a74e456838. The people who said the word started out being about abuse lied to you.
It’s ableist to point out the (obvious) mental illnesses of some of the most successful people in the world?
I’m honestly curious how?
Cause they don’t have it. You think being pieces of shit makes them mentally ill because a liar told you that mental illnesses make people into pieces of shit, and you believed them.
You think Donald Trump… the guy who slaps his name on everything… the guy with a golden toilet… the guy who brags about being the best and biggest and greatest… You think he DOESN’T have a narcissism problem?
He’s not a piece of shit because of his narcissism. He’s a piece of shit AND a narcissist.
Drag doesn’t think he has NPD, and the guy who wrote the DSM entry on NPD agrees. A mental illness is a problem for the person who has the illness. Not for everyone else. Trump does not suffer any negative consequences from his level of self esteem. He’s doing great. He’s going to be the president again. He’s the most important person in the world. The DSM says the patient only has NPD if they’re in distress. Trump is not in distress.
You think he has NPD because you misunderstood what the point of the DSM was. And drag already told you that. You cited a bunch of examples of him being a piece of shit, you didn’t cite any examples of him suffering. Doctors don’t care if someone is annoying or evil, that’s not their job. They care if the patient is in distress. Go learn what medicine is and then come back and have this conversation. And only say Trump has NPD if you want to help him and make him happier. That’s the point of a diagnosis, it’s part of a plan to make the patient happier and more able. Do you want Trump to do better in life?
Yes. I do. I think if he were happier, instead of isolated from harm by his wealth, he’d be less driven to be a piece of shit.
Content happy people don’t feel the need to exploit others. To say he isn’t suffering because he’s rich and powerful seems like a poor metric. Those aren’t metrics of happiness or mental health.
Well drag thinks he’s been living in No Consequences Land for too long, doing whatever he wants, and he should go live in a prison cell instead. Drag thinks he needs to suffer in order to become a better person, not become happier.
I know right, can’t we just leave the high functioning unmedicated, untreated, psychopaths, narcissist, and schitzos alone. Its perfectly normal they hold reins of power.
You’re so cool
Not as cool as being an apologist for christo-fascists
You, uh, didn’t pay any attention to the point of the original post, did you?
It’s abelist to suggest that a personality that you don’t like is mentally ill.
If you want to insult someone, don’t say things you find offensive. Say things they find offensive.
I remember when I was a teen talking online with someone from Britain. I don’t remember why, but at one point, he called me a “wanker.”
I thought it was hilarious. He thought he was insulting me, but since I’d never seen nor heard that word used in real life before, it had no emotional meaning to me. Instead, I was tickled by how silly (and patently British) the word sounded.
Ya just imagine the same thing but with racism
This isn’t a meme
A meme is a self replicating unit of cultural information. This is a meme
Internet memes and cultural memes are not the same thing. This isn’t even a cultural meme - it’s a screenshot of political opinion. Internet memes are pictures that are funny, ironic or relatable.
Yes they are the same thing.
