Linguistic Fascism: how the bastardisation of therapy language contributes to the neglect of actual victims.
is societies responsibility to safeguard and protect vulnerable people lost via online discourse?
Last month as per usual on Elon’s Twitter, a discourse emerged from an article on everyone’s favourite subject: therapy. The article from Bustle titled “Is Therapy-Speak Making Us Selfish?” examines how therapy terminology is used in non-therapeutic situations, specifically, when setting boundaries and ending relationships. I want to preface that I believe the inclusion of words and phrases into the mainstream has had unfathomable beneficial effects. However, like anything beneficial that enters the digital space, it becomes bastardised and misused. I’ve witnessed this online and have experienced it in my own life as someone who has seen the benefits of using the terminology for my trauma and having it weaponised against me. For some background info, I’m the middle child of five siblings from a British Bangladeshi family. So, I don’t need to go into the depths of generational trauma, especially on girls from certain, if not all, cultures. But you can probably already understand the reasoning behind my opinions and where they come from.
Historically, language, or the exclusion of it, has been used as an elitist tool to separate classes and for authority figures to manipulate the narrative. As argued by Hutton (1999),
“Linguistics is a scholarly discipline, not a liberated nation, and many of its descriptive or methodological principles reflect the politics of European nationalism in the last two centuries. Notions such as ‘native speaker’ and ‘native speaker intuition’, ‘natural language’, ‘linguistic system’, ‘speech community’ have their roots in nationalist organicism, and the fundamental ‘vernacularism’ of linguistics needs to be seen as an ideology with a complex history and real political consequences. That ideology is alive and well today and informs much thinking in all branches of the discipline, including theoretical and cognitive linguistics.”
The speed at which therapy language has been bastardised to undermine the imperatives of why it exists in the first place is essentially Linguistic Fascism. This occurs with Sylheti, Patois, Creole, black Feminist vernacular, AAVE and other forms of language and linguistic framework deemed ‘other’. There’s an explicit systemic erasure of therapy language’s intended usage, and the internet fuels this and weaponises it as a means for the abuser and oppressor. This is why we have words such as triggered being used in jest by incels to mock real-life victims of abuse or to use against an opposing point of view. It’s also erased the need for context and discussion, because language is nothing without context, and when the context is picked apart, chopped and screwed, what comes out is, once again, victims and minorities left in dangerous environments where seeking help from authorities become void, because the perpetrator uses the same, taught language to discredit victims.
A further example would be the exclusion of the phrases used to appoint autonomy and vindication for victims of abuse/domestic violence. Previously, abuse/abusive behaviour victims never had the language to understand how abuse is more than a physical action. However, as access to the internet increased, descriptive sociological terms are no longer confined to a professional environment. People could share their experiences, journey, and methods toward healing from trauma. Initially, we all celebrated and revelled in access to therapy without the cost. We could take bits people have shared from their sessions and apply them to our lives. This is because healing from trauma and having access to mental health services is a privilege most victims don't have. But as we know, too much of a good thing leaves room for cherry-picking and manipulation.
With ‘good’ therapist language and the rise of social media content creation, the natural linguistic evolution skipped a few decades beyond bastardisation into master manipulation of the appropriate narrative—no longer a tool used for victims to heal but into a weapon to escape accountability. We are seeing it happen in real-time by how fast language is being co-opted and redefined within weeks after introduction. A key proponent here is Instagram, as seen in an episode of ‘Sounds Like a Cult’ called ‘The Cult of Instagram Therapists’, where they explain the damaging effects of bad therapy and how the language has isolated people into ruining valuable relationships instead of fixing them.
Certain individuals who misappropriate neo-therapy language use terms like 'boundaries' to be unapologetically self-centred. Often they are unaware or unable to see how their actions can be received as callous. In the worst-case scenario, which is typical for the internet, they might not care. When their loved ones challenge them or hold them accountable, their immediate reaction is defensiveness and to accuse others of ‘emotional manipulation’. There's a reason why they call it manipulation rather than basic care. That's because they can only show care for their loved ones if they're manipulated into doing so. But unfortunately, the concept of 'manipulation' has been distorted through filters of online discourse.
Whether you like it or not, we all have a certain emotional obligation to the people in our lives. We should be able to navigate the needs of ourselves and the needs of others by making a judgement call. This means I don't expect to be a blanket priority in anyone’s life, but I expect to be respected enough to be put at emotional ease. It deflects my need for ‘capacity’ but reassures me that I’m cared for. We can think about the needs of ourselves and others and know who to prioritise. Ultimately, I think we can do a disservice to ourselves by the way we overindulge in some of this behaviour in the name of self-care. I understand conflict can be difficult, and you might think you can avoid it by enforcing your needs in a way that completely shuts someone down, but it neglects any of the care we should have for each other, whether it be family or friends. This dunya is hard enough—why make it harder?
Have you ever been met with "I didn't tell/ask you to do that" when giving an example of how you previously decided to prioritise their emotional needs at a time when you didn’t necessarily have the “capacity”? But you understood the implications of both situations and did a mental triage of how to proceed with your interaction. The lack of reciprocity feels like a punch in the gut. I understand that not every act of kindness is about the prospect of a future transaction, fuck, I’d barely even call it an act of kindness. It’s just called not being a c*nt. But it shouldn’t be so hard to be a decent human being, especially during a post-COVID world where having a community is sometimes your only saving grace.
The ”I didn’t ask” rebuttal has always seemed intriguing. I mean, how do you even reply to that? “Yeah, and? I’m well aware you didn’t ask, but evidently, you had no problem accepting”. It’s an admission of not being good enough without mental gymnastics. Perhaps I’m too entitled to other people’s time, or people can sometimes be terrible. Either way, you cannot shake off the responsibility of being a good person for the people you care about because of capacity. And sometimes, your attempts to protect your boundaries overlook that someone else is on the other side of that setting. The misuse of language is performative and an indication of toxic individuality. We are all grown enough to dissect our emotional needs, understand our capacity and maintain boundaries for when we can and can't show up for the people in our life.
In my experience, those same people expect you to be receptive to their needs whilst clearly ignoring your need for reassurance— it’s a uniquely human response, whether you agree with that or not. I am only human, and my need for kindness should be prioritised before establishing “boundaries”. You should be able to maintain boundaries with patience, honesty and regular reflection whilst honouring yourself with clear communication.
What does it take for compassion to be an automatic reflex, especially towards your loved ones? Is it too much to ask to be respected enough for dialogue without withholding affection? When you are unkind – you think you are setting boundaries because you know you cannot be who is needed. But you need to think about the implications of the words you decide to use. Do they reinforce distrust, and you are so very unapologetic about it? We all have shit and can still be decent human beings with all the boundaries in the world.