What's in a name? Why do semantics matter so much? Do we really believe a new label can cause the evolution of an old perception?
Take manic depression, for example. Maybe it's too harsh in this iteration; why don't we call it bipolar disorder instead? It's less descriptive but safer, like a childproof cover on a light socket. It doesn't invite ridicule the way differently abled does when substituted for retarded. Perhaps the use of softer terminology will ping the brain of the listener differently, overwriting preconceptions.
The idea of suffering is also distasteful. If one suffers, one must be a victim of something. Why not call manic depression madness? That sounds pretty cool, in fact. Then we can have mad pride,co-opting the language of ignorance. After all, gays call themselves queer, right? Slap it on a banner; the parade will soon follow.
Women call each other cunts, too, though it's not yet a term of endearment like nigger can be. It's still said mostly to men to denigrate other women. (Suggested reading: Female Chauvinist Pigs by Ariel Levy) Does this word have the power to transform itself? Does the speaker change the nature of the slur? If Oprah calls a vagina a va-jay-jay, does shame lessen or do douche sales increase?
But I digress. Funny how that happens. I blame my condition. You see, I'm mad. Does that suggest I am angry? Why yes, thanks for asking. Whether it means anything more is open for interpretation.
Labels: bipolar disorder, kathcom, Mad pride, madness, magick sandwich, manic depression, mental illness, opinion, semantics