You must log in or # to comment.
I agree.
Friendly reminder: deadnaming Twitter is not transphobic.
what??? that’s like deadnaming elons child!! oh wait, he does that.
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.
Haha you mean like when people make fun of ben shapiro for being short, “its ok because he’s a piece of shit” alright well then make fun of them for their shit takes not the stuff they cant control.
I’ll be over here minding my own short business catching strays from content creators I used to otherwise enjoy.
But what if it’s in the positive? Damn girl I like your fat ass. But I can see it being used negatively.
I like Big Dick Energy though. Can we keep that?
I think you answered your own question? It depends on meaning and context, not just words themselves. And while positive messages intersect the overarching topic, they’re different enough that we can’t just bundle them together and treat them in the same fashion.
I like Big Dick Energy though. Can we keep that?
Can’t handle the magnitude of that question on my own, I’m afraid.
Nope. Far too misogynistic and aggressive. It implies there are small dicks and it even completely ignores people born without dicks or had them removed.
The point is, there is no such thing as perfection. We all follow the “Open mouth and insert foot” rule on occasion. But we can try to do our best knowing we will often fail. And when others fail us in return, we must learn to gently correct and forgive.
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.
Yeah, that was my point
Yes, I agree with you
Whoa whoa whoa! No need to be so hostile with each other, why can’t we just get along?
If you want to insult someone, don’t say things you find offensive. Say things they find offensive.
Like when we called Conservatives weird and they had a literal meltdown?
yeah and when that was clearly working the Harris campaign just dropped it in favor of stupid shit like bragging about republicans endorsing her.
They had such a “literal meltdown” they took over all three branches of government.
Yeah, you really got under their skin.
How the country votes has nothing to do with actual conservatives melting down
Eh. He looks pretty happy to me, albeit a bit unhinged. My point was more that (moral high-ground not withstanding) the MAGAts appear to have gotten the last laugh this cycle, which his expression seemingly reflects.
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.
I am super racist against Republicans.
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
I said that on here and was heavily downvoted. Granted, I was inebriated so a lot of anger came across (so I’ve since deleted it) so maybe it was that.
I don’t even think it’s that. Sometimes people get mad when you point out that they did something bigoted, even if they claim to be progressive.
Ya just imagine the same thing but with racism
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.
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.
It’s abelist to suggest that a personality that you don’t like is mentally ill.
I don’t make a habit of it. I do think there are instances where it is justified.
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?
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.
You made a lot of assumptions about the person you’re responding to. Whose “they”? Who are the liars? When did the poster say anything about pieces of shit?
@surewhynotlem@lemmy.world to answer the question, one must assume that the celebrity is taking action based on choice, until they say otherwise. It is a person’s responsibility to inform people if their actions are compromised. Otherwise, one should point out traits that are toxic, disconnected from a suspicion of mental illness.
Yes, but this assumes self awareness on their part though. Are they narcissist, or are they not, but are making decisions that are self centered and destructive. I’m going on a limb, but I’m guessing most people haven’t done their homework to figure it out.
I thought they were pedos.
^^hey, ^^they ^^have ^^feelings ^^too!
Not this shit again…
That’s not it. It stigmatizes further people that actually have the mental illness. Calling someone a schizo stigmatizes people with schizophrenia.
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.
Republicans to Trump acting like he’s sucking dick: “see how these f*ggots are the problem with America?”
Democrats to Trump acting like he’s sucking dick: " you better not make fun of Trump for sucking dick."
The problem is, him acting like he’s sucking dick IS the joke to his supporters. It’s like the ableist joke he pulled during 2016, and the rapist “locker room talk” he did during the access Hollywood tape.
You’re not being a knight in armor by saying “pointing out Donald Trump’s homophobic acts is wrong,” you’re normalizing his homophobia.
Donald Trump should be allowed to fantasize about Arnold Palmer’s dick, and Tucker Carlson should be able to fantasize about some man coming into his house and saying “Daddy’s home, and you’ve been a bad girl.” They should not be allowed to judge other people who think the same way.
Everything a Republican is against is an admission of what they are for.
Using someones homophobia to mock them is highly ok.
Don’t call them a little faggot tho. That ain’t cool.
I guess this is what is implied, but this is what I read at first.
If everyone you meet is an asshole …
…You might just be a colorectal surgeon.
…you might be a redneck?
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.
Calling someone a dick is phallic. Got it.
And calling someone a cunt is yonic.
Counter point: I think the world would be a better place if Tucker Carlson would be able to admit to himself that he wants some dude he calls “daddy” dressed as the green m&m would spank Tucker and call him “a bad girl.” Also, the world would be a better place if Donald Trump could admit he wants to suck Arnold Palmer’s apparently massive dong.
My problem isn’t homophobia and transphobia, my problem is these homophobic and transphobic pricks performing these homophillic and transphillicic acts and getting away with “Satan made me do it.”
If these homophobes and transphobes do something that would trigger homophobes and transphobes, they should trigger homophobes and transphobes.
Does your Lord and and Savior want to suck dick? What’s wrong with that? Is it that your Lord and Savior wants to suck dick, or that the person who wants to suck dick is Your Lord and Savior?
I no longer say things like “Miss Lindsey Graham can take it in the ass as often as she likes and she puts the ‘smart’ in ᴅᴜᴍ sᴘɪʀᴏ sᴘᴇʀᴏ”, because I’m a good person.
