• HornyOnMain@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    In this case narcissist is being used as a general insult for someone where we have no indication whether she’s a narcissist or not.

    we don’t ban the word because it could have general use for someone who’s actually a narcissist in the same way we don’t ban the word schizophrenic except when it’s used as an insult

    • LinkedinLenin [any, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      My contest is with the idea that the medicalized category and its label takes supremacy over any behavior that uses the same label, especially when the specific behavior in question is defined by its problematic nature.

      In crystalizing this issue, I can maybe agree calling someone a narcissist isn’t ideal because it reasserts the existence and immutability of the category (which I and others believe is institutionally/socially constructed, not real in and of itself). But even so, the behaviors that define the word are not something I think should be tolerated or accepted, both due to their harmful nature and their ability to be relearned.