FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to The Lounge

'Mental', 'Nutter', 'Loony', etc. Are these appropriate?

Jump to newest
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

We're clearly in the midst of a the huge mental health crisis, follow the impact of lockdown and recession. So, are nicknames on here that include such words as 'Mental', 'Loony', 'Nutter' and so on, really appropriate?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If it bothers you ignore it?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *allySlinkyWoman
over a year ago

Leeds

I think it is a very valid point.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I say nutter and loon. Maybe I shouldn’t . There are definitely some words I wouldn’t use though. Like I said on a thread not long ago people just won’t say anything soon as it’s bound to offend someone.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"We're clearly in the midst of a the huge mental health crisis, follow the impact of lockdown and recession. So, are nicknames on here that include such words as 'Mental', 'Loony', 'Nutter' and so on, really appropriate?"

Depends on how it's being said. To a friend I don't see a problem and I'm classed as one of these 'nutters' so I find it funny

In a argument nope.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rumpyMcFuckNuggetMan
over a year ago

Den of Iniquity

I'm not fussed in the slightest if anyone calls me that. I take it as a term of endearment

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Depends who you saying then too, I say some very off colour things to my friends between friends, regularly! My black friend calls me pinky, I have a name for him too.. and it’s nothing but love!

Granted somethings should be between your walls and not publicly shouted about. But it’s all about context and are people just looking for something to be upset about.

It seems to me more people are getting offended on behalf of other people these days which in itself is disrespectful.

So yea just be careful and considerate to where it’s used I guess.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *naswingdressWoman
over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

I don't think it was ever appropriate. Maybe a bit of empathy will do us good.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Depends who you saying then too, I say some very off colour things to my friends between friends, regularly! My black friend calls me pinky, I have a name for him too.. and it’s nothing but love!

Granted somethings should be between your walls and not publicly shouted about. But it’s all about context and are people just looking for something to be upset about.

It seems to me more people are getting offended on behalf of other people these days which in itself is disrespectful.

So yea just be careful and considerate to where it’s used I guess. "

Exactly this. Know your audience

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ssex_tomMan
over a year ago

Chelmsford

Some of my favourite words...

Better than swearing..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Having had a wife who suffered mental health problems the last six year of her life, including a 14 month stay in a psychiatric hospital, being sectioned for 9 of those months, thinking she was from outer space and wanting to return there, being afraid of the television, I would never use the term mentioned above, or any of the others. Loony bin, madhouse etc etc

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I think if a person describes themselves using any of those phrases, then it is ok for you to call them that too, as they see the terms as descriptive words that aren’t derogatory

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *pursChick aka ShortieWoman
over a year ago

On a mooch

I would say it depends on the context it is used and to who. I call my friends this and it’s normally part of a longer sentence and in reference to something they’ve done.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *naswingdressWoman
over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)


"Having had a wife who suffered mental health problems the last six year of her life, including a 14 month stay in a psychiatric hospital, being sectioned for 9 of those months, thinking she was from outer space and wanting to return there, being afraid of the television, I would never use the term mentioned above, or any of the others. Loony bin, madhouse etc etc"

I wish both of you well.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Words only have meaning if you use them in a negative way....nothing wrong with the word you or fuck but put them together they become negative...also other people will take offence for somebody else's behalf

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Having had a wife who suffered mental health problems the last six year of her life, including a 14 month stay in a psychiatric hospital, being sectioned for 9 of those months, thinking she was from outer space and wanting to return there, being afraid of the television, I would never use the term mentioned above, or any of the others. Loony bin, madhouse etc etc"

And in this context and the emotions involved I would very much expect you to say this....

however if you said to me I should be in a looney bin because I don’t like Jaffa cakes... I wouldn’t be offended, as it’s a joke and it’s the contexts of which it’s used... just my opinion obv

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ssex_tomMan
over a year ago

Chelmsford

Essex Tom has suffered mental health issues for decades and they are words I love and embrace.. lunatic, mentalist, tune all amongst my faves and Barking is right up there too..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ssex_tomMan
over a year ago

Chelmsford

And fruitcake, fruitloop,

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ljamMan
over a year ago

Edinburgh


"Some of my favourite words...

Better than swearing.. "

Is it fuck

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rincess peachWoman
over a year ago

shits creek

I've had a full on breakdown,

I'm not afraid to tell people I have mental health issues.

If I'm acting silly and people say I'm nuts or mad as a box of frogs bla bla bling, then no, no issue at all from me on a personal level.

However.... if I'm in the middle of a wobble where the window looks pretty inviting to jump out of, having someone use those kinds of words towards me to cause harm, then yeah, it's a sign they're sick puppies.

We should be aware though, that everyone is different. Some will take huge offence and others won't.

Know your audience and don't be a cunt with it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ssex_tomMan
over a year ago

Chelmsford


"I've had a full on breakdown,

I'm not afraid to tell people I have mental health issues.

If I'm acting silly and people say I'm nuts or mad as a box of frogs bla bla bling, then no, no issue at all from me on a personal level.

However.... if I'm in the middle of a wobble where the window looks pretty inviting to jump out of, having someone use those kinds of words towards me to cause harm, then yeah, it's a sign they're sick puppies.

We should be aware though, that everyone is different. Some will take huge offence and others won't.

Know your audience and don't be a cunt with it.

"

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ssex_tomMan
over a year ago

Chelmsford

Mad as a box of frogs.. love that one too...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Depends who is saying it and whether there is venom behind the words or not. I've had a number of breakdowns and those words have been used as a weapon against me. They've also been said with affection as terms of endearment. Context is everything.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

Our language has enormous power and we should use it wisely. This is especially the case with those who are less fortunate than many.

Some self-awareness and a little momentary thought process isn't much to ask for, before communicating anything that can knock others.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I think the words are still appropriate at certain times. I understand there is a mental health crisis going on, but culturally those words aren’t used to describe those who are mentally ill.

They’re used to describe people that are acting out of order. I think we should continue to have a right to use those words to highlight how someone is acting. The whole intent behind those phrases coming into common slang use was to say look you’re being odd.

I don’t think anyone uses the term against someone with an actual mental health problem?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I think people are getting far too sensitive and offended these days.

When will it end? When you cant say bitch incase it offends the dog?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

They are fine. You just have to know your audience

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

People get offended for nothing now days.

Not a day goes by at work I don't get called a window licker thick fat grey old with bastard at the end of them.

I wouldn't have it any other way

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The words are used in both hateful and loving ways.but in keeping with common language.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rightonsteveMan
over a year ago

Brighton - even Hove!


"People get offended for nothing now days.

Not a day goes by at work I don't get called a window licker thick fat grey old with bastard at the end of them.

I wouldn't have it any other way"
Mansfield Town Council?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *emorefridaCouple
over a year ago

La la land

It's definitely down to context. And the words that are used there's a vast difference between saying people won't want you because they think your mental (when you have mental health issues) oh my gosh remember that night in Birmingham it was flipping mental.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

There will be no words left we can use soon!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *JB1954Man
over a year ago

Reading

Years back had a friend. He was nick named one of the words. The reason was he liked the type of what some people would call extreme sports. Like bungee jumping etc. But would always try to find highest etc which he could get to / afford.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ljamMan
over a year ago

Edinburgh


"People get offended for nothing now days.

Not a day goes by at work I don't get called a window licker thick fat grey old with bastard at the end of them.

I wouldn't have it any other way Mansfield Town Council? "

Mansfield Primary School.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *stbury DavenportMan
over a year ago

Nottingham

I don't think they're appropriate.

Bit confused by the people claiming to be concerned that there'll be no words left to use. There are hundreds of thousands of other words floating around, and new ones cropping up all the time. Do they not know many words, perhaps? Or are they really worried that it might be marginally more difficult for them to be cruel and hurtful to others in future?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I'm not offended by words.

I recently got called a fucking ugly fat N word recently.

I don't care.

The person that said it is so many words that I'm too polite to say

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iamondsmiles.Woman
over a year ago

little house on the praire

I dont think there appropiate unless im describing myself.

Id say ive been in the loony bin but i wouldnt say it about anyone else7

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I'd only feel comfortable using them with someone I know really well as part of jokey banter

As part of a serious conversation or a conversation with someone you don't really know, they're inappropriate

As a descriptive in a conversation between people about a third party, they are careless choices

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Yes. Know your audience op.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Plenty of barm pots on fab lol .....!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *phroditeWoman
over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland

Context and closeness of relationship are the main factor (and I probably would not use them there either, there are other words that are still banter without being offensive)

With anybody else outside family and (very)close friends these words are no longer appropriate.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ssex_tomMan
over a year ago

Chelmsford

The lunatics have taken over this asylum...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icolerobbieCouple
over a year ago

walsall


"The lunatics have taken over this asylum..."

To quote George Orwell,

“ By controlling the language, Big Brother controls the way that the people think. With a limited vocabulary, the people are limited in how much they can think, as well as, what they think about. ”

Almost uncanny if you ask me.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"The lunatics have taken over this asylum...

To quote George Orwell,

“ By controlling the language, Big Brother controls the way that the people think. With a limited vocabulary, the people are limited in how much they can think, as well as, what they think about. ”

Almost uncanny if you ask me."

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Plenty of barm pots on fab lol .....!"

Tea cake

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

As they say,know your audience. You can't make a blanket decision. Different words mean different things to different people. Please don't decide for me what is appropriate for me.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There will be no words left we can use soon! "

We can use hand signs or emojis I guess

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *VineMan
over a year ago

The right place

I get called ‘weirdo’ quite a lot. I take it as a compliment.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I get called ‘weirdo’ quite a lot. I take it as a compliment. "

Yeah I use weirdo a lot to my mates. I also get called loopy / looney / head case . I don’t really think anything of it as it’s just banter with people in my social groups.

If anyone got riled we would just say , some of my pals call me a tranny hag now many trans women would have a meltdown of Chernobyl levels over this. I just find it a playful term and I use it myself a lot anyway .

Always going to be confliction between different people over terms / words / habits What is acceptable to one might be abhorrent to others

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *a LunaWoman
over a year ago

South Wales

My mum calls me a weirdo. But as I keep telling her, the Apple doesn’t fall far from the tree

Like most things in life, it’s about context and timing and remembering that some folk are more sensitive than others.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ssex_tomMan
over a year ago

Chelmsford

When I was a lad we had cretins and spastics..

We even had the spastic society..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *aitonelMan
over a year ago

Away for Christmas

Context of words, all words. As stated by the great late George Carlin.

"There is nothing wrong with the words in and of themselves. It is the **context** that counts. It is the user. It is the **intention** behind the words that makes them good or bad."

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *uyfrombristolMan
over a year ago

Bristol


"We're clearly in the midst of a the huge mental health crisis, follow the impact of lockdown and recession. So, are nicknames on here that include such words as 'Mental', 'Loony', 'Nutter' and so on, really appropriate?"

Context is key and no one has the right to go through life without being offended (despite what people might say).

If it's an off-hand 'you loon' to a mate that's one thing, but a targeted attack at someone you know to be suffering is another.

One thing society appears to have lost sight of is context and as such we have people's lives being irrevocably ruined for ill judged analogies.

I'm fairly left leaning, but it's becoming harder by the day when you have rhetoric that contradicts the very principals leftists claim to stand for.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"The lunatics have taken over this asylum...

To quote George Orwell,

“ By controlling the language, Big Brother controls the way that the people think. With a limited vocabulary, the people are limited in how much they can think, as well as, what they think about. ”

Almost uncanny if you ask me.

"

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *acey_RedWoman
over a year ago

Liverpool

As others have said, I think friendly banter between friends who have no issue with what's being said doesn't hurt anyone. I personally though don't think words like that should be used in certain contexts, especially about people you don't know well. I particularly dislike the whole "crazy girlfriend" narrative as if the majority of women are somehow somewhat unstable. On the flip side though I was once called ableist in a Facebook group for saying the supermarket was crazy busy .

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *stbury DavenportMan
over a year ago

Nottingham

Intent does not trump impact and never has.

"It's just a joke!" is the bleating of bullies trying to avoid accountability and always has been.

All the people whining about being "silenced" should explicitly and openly tell us all the things they "can't" say any more. And when they've told everyone who they are, they should listen.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ools and the brainCouple
over a year ago

couple, us we him her.

Problem is someone is always offended by something these days, whilst there's been lots of changes for the good particularly in terms of racial name calling there does come a point where people are reading too much into light hearted comments and claiming to be offended.

Even worse are people who claim that this is offensive on someone else's behalf even tho that person hasn't even been asked if it bothers them.

Look the fact is some people are just bonkers nothing offensive intended people can be this way without having a mental illness. Eccentric is a more apt term but sometimes it just doesn't fit ,I mean does anyone take issues with the term"crazy cat lady" ?

Standing up for those who are unable to defend themselves is noble and just.

But shouting people down because a very harmless word is used to describe someone who is exactly as described but in all other aspects perfectly fine is a bit too much.

Censorship can be taken too far.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *stbury DavenportMan
over a year ago

Nottingham


"Problem is someone is always offended by something these days"

All that has changed is that the people being harmed have slightly more of a voice now.


"there does come a point where people are reading too much into light hearted comments and claiming to be offended."

Who gets to judge whether someone's offence is genuine or not? What criteria is used to make that determination?


"Even worse are people who claim that this is offensive on someone else's behalf even tho that person hasn't even been asked if it bothers them."

How do you know that person hasn't been asked? Have their answers been listened to in the past? Is their previously ignored answer now being routed through allies who have more of a voice? If those with a voice are ignored because they aren't personally the voiceless, how do the voiceless get heard at all?


"Look the fact is some people are just bonkers nothing offensive intended"

Intent does not trump impact and never has.


"people can be this way without having a mental illness."

How do you know they don't have a diagnosis? Why should they have to tell you even if they have?


"Eccentric is a more apt term"

Precisely. Why don't we use that instead? If that in turn later proves to be problematic, we can update our thinking and our language use again.


"I mean does anyone take issues with the term "crazy cat lady"?"

Plenty of people. Firstly there's the stigmatic use of mental illness, then there's the misogyny, then there's the shaming of single and / or childless people. Furthermore, there are studies from both UCLA and UCL indicating that "crazy cat ladies" statistically aren't even a thing.


"Standing up for those who are unable to defend themselves is noble and just."

Yes, it is! We should all do it more.


"But shouting people down"

Pointing out that certain uses of language are problematic and shouldn't be used does not constitute "shouting down".


"because a very harmless word"

Who gets to decide whether a word is harmless? Is it you?


"is used to describe someone who is exactly as described"

Who gets to decide whether someone is "exactly is described"? Is it you?


"but in all other aspects perfectly fine"

Who gets to decide whether someone is "perfectly fine? Is it you?


"is a bit too much."

Who gets to decide whether something is "a bit too much? Is it you?


"Censorship can be taken too far."

Pointing out that certain uses of language are problematic and shouldn't be used does not constitute "censorship".

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ools and the brainCouple
over a year ago

couple, us we him her.


"Problem is someone is always offended by something these days

All that has changed is that the people being harmed have slightly more of a voice now.

there does come a point where people are reading too much into light hearted comments and claiming to be offended.

Who gets to judge whether someone's offence is genuine or not? What criteria is used to make that determination?

Even worse are people who claim that this is offensive on someone else's behalf even tho that person hasn't even been asked if it bothers them.

How do you know that person hasn't been asked? Have their answers been listened to in the past? Is their previously ignored answer now being routed through allies who have more of a voice? If those with a voice are ignored because they aren't personally the voiceless, how do the voiceless get heard at all?

Look the fact is some people are just bonkers nothing offensive intended

Intent does not trump impact and never has.

people can be this way without having a mental illness.

How do you know they don't have a diagnosis? Why should they have to tell you even if they have?

Eccentric is a more apt term

Precisely. Why don't we use that instead? If that in turn later proves to be problematic, we can update our thinking and our language use again.

I mean does anyone take issues with the term "crazy cat lady"?

Plenty of people. Firstly there's the stigmatic use of mental illness, then there's the misogyny, then there's the shaming of single and / or childless people. Furthermore, there are studies from both UCLA and UCL indicating that "crazy cat ladies" statistically aren't even a thing.

Standing up for those who are unable to defend themselves is noble and just.

Yes, it is! We should all do it more.

But shouting people down

Pointing out that certain uses of language are problematic and shouldn't be used does not constitute "shouting down".

because a very harmless word

Who gets to decide whether a word is harmless? Is it you?

is used to describe someone who is exactly as described

Who gets to decide whether someone is "exactly is described"? Is it you?

but in all other aspects perfectly fine

Who gets to decide whether someone is "perfectly fine? Is it you?

is a bit too much.

Who gets to decide whether something is "a bit too much? Is it you?

Censorship can be taken too far.

Pointing out that certain uses of language are problematic and shouldn't be used does not constitute "censorship". "

You have made my point about over sensitivity exactly by your over analysis of my response.

Are you constantly correcting people when you are out and about on everything that offends you?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icecouple561Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

East Sussex

I think it will become less and less acceptable to use certain terms that imply mental ill health in a derogatory or casual way. A lot of younger people are much more aware of mental health issues and associated problems and I think they'll lead the way.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"We're clearly in the midst of a the huge mental health crisis, follow the impact of lockdown and recession. So, are nicknames on here that include such words as 'Mental', 'Loony', 'Nutter' and so on, really appropriate?"

They’re not really ones I would use a lot, I’m sure nobody speaks, thinks or acts in a way that could technically never offend anyone, but just being as empathetic as possible is only a good thing. But there are definitely some people, including those who suffer poor mental health, who have no issue with those terms. As ever, there is no one size fits all.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *stbury DavenportMan
over a year ago

Nottingham


"You have made my point about over sensitivity"

Challenging a point of view and explaining why one believes it to be wrong does not constitute "over sensitivity", regardless of attempts to dismiss it as such.


"exactly by your over analysis of my response."

Analysis is a good thing. The world would benefit from more of it.


"Are you constantly correcting people when you are out and about on everything that offends you?"

We're not out and about. We're on a forum, which literally means "A meeting or medium where ideas and views on a particular issue can be exchanged." We're not in the supermarket.

But to humour you, which is probably a mistake: If I *am* in the supermarket, and I see someone behaving offensively – berating a member of the BAME community, groping a woman, shitting on the floor or whatever – yeah, I'm probably going to do something. There are too many bystanders in the world.

It might be worth checking in about the use of the word "offensive".

What I find offensive: People being harmed by the actions or behaviours of others.

What a lot of people bleating about offence and censorship seem to find offensive: Anyone disagreeing with them.

Disagreement is fine. I don't give a shit whether or not someone likes Marmite or pineapple on pizza or whatever.

Harm, obviously, is not fine.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *stbury DavenportMan
over a year ago

Nottingham


"I think it will become less and less acceptable to use certain terms that imply mental ill health in a derogatory or casual way. A lot of younger people are much more aware of mental health issues and associated problems and I think they'll lead the way."

I agree with this. I have a lot of faith in the youth. They seem to be a lot better at caring about other people.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If somebody choses to describe themselves with words like that then that's their choice.

I would never ever call anyone any of those and wouldn't assume that person struggled with their mental health.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ools and the brainCouple
over a year ago

couple, us we him her.

I think the main point is context and intent.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"It's definitely down to context. And the words that are used there's a vast difference between saying people won't want you because they think your mental (when you have mental health issues) oh my gosh remember that night in Birmingham it was flipping mental. "

Yes this completely.

I'm definitely guilty of this. I use crazy quite often but never ever mean it in a way to hurt someone. I say things like oh that was absolutely crazy! Or when my daughter is hyper I'll say she is a crazy little bean.

I think it does come down to context. I'm open to changing my ways though and wouldn't hesitate to apologise if words like that did offend someone as I can completely see why they would be hurt.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *emini ManMan
over a year ago

There and to the left a bit

As far as I'm concerned the answer to the OP lies in two words and nothing more - context and intent.

That's all there is to it really - the words in themselves are not offensive, it's how they are used that is.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Intent does not trump impact and never has.

"It's just a joke!" is the bleating of bullies trying to avoid accountability and always has been.

All the people whining about being "silenced" should explicitly and openly tell us all the things they "can't" say any more. And when they've told everyone who they are, they should listen. "

So so true... Nobody ever wants to look beyond the reasons as why people feel and think how they do but instead label in the negative. Nobody has the right to say that someone else is over sensitive or easily offended. Empathy is a rare trait.

Walk a mile in someone elses shoes is something we could all do with

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Intent does not trump impact and never has.

"It's just a joke!" is the bleating of bullies trying to avoid accountability and always has been.

All the people whining about being "silenced" should explicitly and openly tell us all the things they "can't" say any more. And when they've told everyone who they are, they should listen.

So so true... Nobody ever wants to look beyond the reasons as why people feel and think how they do but instead label in the negative. Nobody has the right to say that someone else is over sensitive or easily offended. Empathy is a rare trait.

Walk a mile in someone elses shoes is something we could all do with"

True but empathy is a two way process. Calling complete strangers 'bullies' and taking about 'bleating'and'whining' is hugely judgmental language that may well have a detrimental effect on others mental well being.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *acey_RedWoman
over a year ago

Liverpool


"Intent does not trump impact and never has.

"It's just a joke!" is the bleating of bullies trying to avoid accountability and always has been.

All the people whining about being "silenced" should explicitly and openly tell us all the things they "can't" say any more. And when they've told everyone who they are, they should listen.

So so true... Nobody ever wants to look beyond the reasons as why people feel and think how they do but instead label in the negative. Nobody has the right to say that someone else is over sensitive or easily offended. Empathy is a rare trait.

Walk a mile in someone elses shoes is something we could all do with

True but empathy is a two way process. Calling complete strangers 'bullies' and taking about 'bleating'and'whining' is hugely judgmental language that may well have a detrimental effect on others mental well being."

True. Plus everything is so open to interpretation, especially in a purely text format. I've seen a few fairly nasty witch hunts on here.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Intent does not trump impact and never has.

"It's just a joke!" is the bleating of bullies trying to avoid accountability and always has been.

All the people whining about being "silenced" should explicitly and openly tell us all the things they "can't" say any more. And when they've told everyone who they are, they should listen.

So so true... Nobody ever wants to look beyond the reasons as why people feel and think how they do but instead label in the negative. Nobody has the right to say that someone else is over sensitive or easily offended. Empathy is a rare trait.

Walk a mile in someone elses shoes is something we could all do with

True but empathy is a two way process. Calling complete strangers 'bullies' and taking about 'bleating'and'whining' is hugely judgmental language that may well have a detrimental effect on others mental well being."

But you don't know the experiences that he has had for him to say that. I don't believe he has directed the term bully at anyone has he? Just reiterating behaviours he has observed overall in life and online not necessarily in this thread

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rincess PhoenixWoman
over a year ago

Southampton

I have MH issues and often call myself a looney toon I have no objection to friends and colleagues calling me names as in my job I get called a hell of a lot worse by our 'clients'! But it is a case of know your audience I wouldn't call strangers or people I don't know well those sort of things.

Oh and I embrace the term crazy cat lady as that is my goal when I'm old

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icolerobbieCouple
over a year ago

walsall


"Intent does not trump impact and never has.

"It's just a joke!" is the bleating of bullies trying to avoid accountability and always has been.

All the people whining about being "silenced" should explicitly and openly tell us all the things they "can't" say any more. And when they've told everyone who they are, they should listen. "

So, if a mountain biker was out riding the huge dirt jumps and managed a particularly difficult aerial manoeuvre and all the other bikers cheered and shouted some very inappropriate terms such as “that was sick”, “mental”, “insane”, would that be ok, or are they all being offensive?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"As far as I'm concerned the answer to the OP lies in two words and nothing more - context and intent.

That's all there is to it really - the words in themselves are not offensive, it's how they are used that is."

Absolutely spot on GM as usual.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *stbury DavenportMan
over a year ago

Nottingham


"Calling complete strangers 'bullies'"

If bullies don't want to be called bullies, they shouldn't engage in bullying behaviour. See also racists complaining about being called racist, et cetera.


"and taking about 'bleating'and'whining' is hugely judgmental language that may well have a detrimental effect on others mental well being."

You're correct; it *is* judgemental language. But when the "silenced" person is complaining about it despite *demonstrably not being silenced*, what else should we call it? "Hypocrisy"? "Disingenuousness"? "Mendacity"? "Lying"? "Arguing in bad faith?" Or are those terms too judgemental as well? Should those doing harm never be called out?

It is very, very telling that the loudest shrieking about "censorship" comes from right-wing grifters with TV shows, large internet presences, and frequent columns in the 80% of the UK media owned by a handful of hard-right tax-avoiding press barons. Wow. Very censorship. Much silent. Grifters gonna grift.

It's astonishing to me how hard the right wing are able to play the victim card despite controlling both houses of parliament, owning most of the press, and having got their tax-dodge power-grab Brexit. And yet, somehow, they're *still* "victims" because we in the "lower orders" are finally able to object to them absuing us.

Once again: All the people whining about being "silenced" should explicitly and openly tell us all the things they "can't" say any more.

And when they've told us who they are, we should listen.

Addendum: I find it very concerning the number of people who seem to consider "Nah, I didn't *mean* it!" to be some sort of magical get-out-of-jail-free card.

Hurl a plate on the kitchen floor. Watch it smash. Tell the pieces that it was only a joke. Magically fixed now, yes?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"As far as I'm concerned the answer to the OP lies in two words and nothing more - context and intent.

That's all there is to it really - the words in themselves are not offensive, it's how they are used that is.

Absolutely spot on GM as usual. "

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ittleMissCaliWoman
over a year ago

all loved up

As already said it depends on the context.

I will always welcome people to the " madhouse " when they are coming to mine...

I'll refer to my cats as having a mad half hour.. or going loopy.

My sister has spent a good proportion of her adult life in and out of in her words " the nut house " ... however I refer to it as hospital x she calls herself my loopy little sister x

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *indergirlWoman
over a year ago

somewhere, someplace


"As far as I'm concerned the answer to the OP lies in two words and nothing more - context and intent.

That's all there is to it really - the words in themselves are not offensive, it's how they are used that is.

Absolutely spot on GM as usual. "

Exactly this! Just recently I've been on the back end of them in a hurtful way, that I'm mental, a nutter, a headcase and going to die alone.

But you can mean them in an innocent way too, someone does something extraordinary you may say you're mental for doing that because it's outside your comfort zone and impressed

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *adame BWoman
over a year ago

C'est moi Boudoir

I think because they have different meanings it's all about context. Life doesn't get out of people's way, people have to find coping mechanisms. People can be harsh with so many words. I think there is a huge difference between someone having mental health issues or a breakdown and the words crazy/bonkers/nuts. I would never use them to describe behaviour other than something I find funny. I think most people use them in that way.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *adame BWoman
over a year ago

C'est moi Boudoir


"As far as I'm concerned the answer to the OP lies in two words and nothing more - context and intent.

That's all there is to it really - the words in themselves are not offensive, it's how they are used that is."

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ssex_tomMan
over a year ago

Chelmsford

Well I have been barking mad for years. Some people may deduce that from my shark posts. I am not bullying myself I hope. We can disect, word by word a posters comments and mark them like a crazy newly qualified schoolteacher. I am a fruit and nut case and not ashamed of that or telling people that. No stigma on my doorstep.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *igmaMan
over a year ago

Yorkshire


"Well I have been barking mad for years. Some people may deduce that from my shark posts. I am not bullying myself I hope. We can disect, word by word a posters comments and mark them like a crazy newly qualified schoolteacher. I am a fruit and nut case and not ashamed of that or telling people that. No _igma on my doorstep.

"

Yeah, sorry about that Tom. Won’t happen again

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Well I have been barking mad for years. Some people may deduce that from my shark posts. I am not bullying myself I hope. We can disect, word by word a posters comments and mark them like a crazy newly qualified schoolteacher. I am a fruit and nut case and not ashamed of that or telling people that. No _igma on my doorstep.

Yeah, sorry about that Tom. Won’t happen again "

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icolerobbieCouple
over a year ago

walsall


"Calling complete strangers 'bullies'

If bullies don't want to be called bullies, they shouldn't engage in bullying behaviour. See also racists complaining about being called racist, et cetera.

and taking about 'bleating'and'whining' is hugely judgmental language that may well have a detrimental effect on others mental well being.

You're correct; it *is* judgemental language. But when the "silenced" person is complaining about it despite *demonstrably not being silenced*, what else should we call it? "Hypocrisy"? "Disingenuousness"? "Mendacity"? "Lying"? "Arguing in bad faith?" Or are those terms too judgemental as well? Should those doing harm never be called out?

It is very, very telling that the loudest shrieking about "censorship" comes from right-wing grifters with TV shows, large internet presences, and frequent columns in the 80% of the UK media owned by a handful of hard-right tax-avoiding press barons. Wow. Very censorship. Much silent. Grifters gonna grift.

It's astonishing to me how hard the right wing are able to play the victim card despite controlling both houses of parliament, owning most of the press, and having got their tax-dodge power-grab Brexit. And yet, somehow, they're *still* "victims" because we in the "lower orders" are finally able to object to them absuing us.

Once again: All the people whining about being "silenced" should explicitly and openly tell us all the things they "can't" say any more.

And when they've told us who they are, we should listen.

Addendum: I find it very concerning the number of people who seem to consider "Nah, I didn't *mean* it!" to be some sort of magical get-out-of-jail-free card.

Hurl a plate on the kitchen floor. Watch it smash. Tell the pieces that it was only a joke. Magically fixed now, yes? "

That rant was “sick” dude...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"As far as I'm concerned the answer to the OP lies in two words and nothing more - context and intent.

That's all there is to it really - the words in themselves are not offensive, it's how they are used that is."

exactly this

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icolerobbieCouple
over a year ago

walsall


"As far as I'm concerned the answer to the OP lies in two words and nothing more - context and intent.

That's all there is to it really - the words in themselves are not offensive, it's how they are used that is.

exactly this"

Yep, my point and most others on this thread.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *aunchy RaccoonsCouple
over a year ago

Exeter

People need to stop getting offended by everything. Don't like, ignore it and stop being wet whipe! (not particularly aimed at anyone here)

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icolerobbieCouple
over a year ago

walsall


"People need to stop getting offended by everything. Don't like, ignore it and stop being wet whipe! (not particularly aimed at anyone here)

"

Wet wipes have feelings too you know.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *phroditeWoman
over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland


"Calling complete strangers 'bullies'

If bullies don't want to be called bullies, they shouldn't engage in bullying behaviour. See also racists complaining about being called racist, et cetera.

and taking about 'bleating'and'whining' is hugely judgmental language that may well have a detrimental effect on others mental well being.

You're correct; it *is* judgemental language. But when the "silenced" person is complaining about it despite *demonstrably not being silenced*, what else should we call it? "Hypocrisy"? "Disingenuousness"? "Mendacity"? "Lying"? "Arguing in bad faith?" Or are those terms too judgemental as well? Should those doing harm never be called out?

It is very, very telling that the loudest shrieking about "censorship" comes from right-wing grifters with TV shows, large internet presences, and frequent columns in the 80% of the UK media owned by a handful of hard-right tax-avoiding press barons. Wow. Very censorship. Much silent. Grifters gonna grift.

It's astonishing to me how hard the right wing are able to play the victim card despite controlling both houses of parliament, owning most of the press, and having got their tax-dodge power-grab Brexit. And yet, somehow, they're *still* "victims" because we in the "lower orders" are finally able to object to them absuing us.

Once again: All the people whining about being "silenced" should explicitly and openly tell us all the things they "can't" say any more.

And when they've told us who they are, we should listen.

Addendum: I find it very concerning the number of people who seem to consider "Nah, I didn't *mean* it!" to be some sort of magical get-out-of-jail-free card.

Hurl a plate on the kitchen floor. Watch it smash. Tell the pieces that it was only a joke. Magically fixed now, yes? "

Perfectly put - could not add anything to this. But I will lol, just one thing:

Irrespective of whether the intent was banter, if it was not intended to cause upset - nobody has the right to tell another person not to be offended. You can think that somebody is for example a "snowflake" by all means but you have no right to question their emotional response to it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ssex_tomMan
over a year ago

Chelmsford


"Calling complete strangers 'bullies'

If bullies don't want to be called bullies, they shouldn't engage in bullying behaviour. See also racists complaining about being called racist, et cetera.

and taking about 'bleating'and'whining' is hugely judgmental language that may well have a detrimental effect on others mental well being.

You're correct; it *is* judgemental language. But when the "silenced" person is complaining about it despite *demonstrably not being silenced*, what else should we call it? "Hypocrisy"? "Disingenuousness"? "Mendacity"? "Lying"? "Arguing in bad faith?" Or are those terms too judgemental as well? Should those doing harm never be called out?

It is very, very telling that the loudest shrieking about "censorship" comes from right-wing grifters with TV shows, large internet presences, and frequent columns in the 80% of the UK media owned by a handful of hard-right tax-avoiding press barons. Wow. Very censorship. Much silent. Grifters gonna grift.

It's astonishing to me how hard the right wing are able to play the victim card despite controlling both houses of parliament, owning most of the press, and having got their tax-dodge power-grab Brexit. And yet, somehow, they're *still* "victims" because we in the "lower orders" are finally able to object to them absuing us.

Once again: All the people whining about being "silenced" should explicitly and openly tell us all the things they "can't" say any more.

And when they've told us who they are, we should listen.

Addendum: I find it very concerning the number of people who seem to consider "Nah, I didn't *mean* it!" to be some sort of magical get-out-of-jail-free card.

Hurl a plate on the kitchen floor. Watch it smash. Tell the pieces that it was only a joke. Magically fixed now, yes?

Perfectly put - could not add anything to this. But I will lol, just one thing:

Irrespective of whether the intent was banter, if it was not intended to cause upset - nobody has the right to tell another person not to be offended. You can think that somebody is for example a "snowflake" by all means but you have no right to question their emotional response to it.

"

I think it's the people who set out to be offended by any perceived slight, offended on behalf of other groups that are either perfectly capable of defending themselves or don't give a monkeys. They are the people who prattle on about the most lost of lost causes when the battle is already won and never seem to grasp the real issues affecting the planet. These are the people who would not care if the Titanic sank but whose only comment would be that ships were always called 'she' and that is in some way offensive to somebody..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Calling complete strangers 'bullies'

If bullies don't want to be called bullies, they shouldn't engage in bullying behaviour. See also racists complaining about being called racist, et cetera.

and taking about 'bleating'and'whining' is hugely judgmental language that may well have a detrimental effect on others mental well being.

You're correct; it *is* judgemental language. But when the "silenced" person is complaining about it despite *demonstrably not being silenced*, what else should we call it? "Hypocrisy"? "Disingenuousness"? "Mendacity"? "Lying"? "Arguing in bad faith?" Or are those terms too judgemental as well? Should those doing harm never be called out?

It is very, very telling that the loudest shrieking about "censorship" comes from right-wing grifters with TV shows, large internet presences, and frequent columns in the 80% of the UK media owned by a handful of hard-right tax-avoiding press barons. Wow. Very censorship. Much silent. Grifters gonna grift.

It's astonishing to me how hard the right wing are able to play the victim card despite controlling both houses of parliament, owning most of the press, and having got their tax-dodge power-grab Brexit. And yet, somehow, they're *still* "victims" because we in the "lower orders" are finally able to object to them absuing us.

Once again: All the people whining about being "silenced" should explicitly and openly tell us all the things they "can't" say any more.

And when they've told us who they are, we should listen.

Addendum: I find it very concerning the number of people who seem to consider "Nah, I didn't *mean* it!" to be some sort of magical get-out-of-jail-free card.

Hurl a plate on the kitchen floor. Watch it smash. Tell the pieces that it was only a joke. Magically fixed now, yes?

Perfectly put - could not add anything to this. But I will lol, just one thing:

Irrespective of whether the intent was banter, if it was not intended to cause upset - nobody has the right to tell another person not to be offended. You can think that somebody is for example a "snowflake" by all means but you have no right to question their emotional response to it.

I think it's the people who set out to be offended by any perceived slight, offended on behalf of other groups that are either perfectly capable of defending themselves or don't give a monkeys. They are the people who prattle on about the most lost of lost causes when the battle is already won and never seem to grasp the real issues affecting the planet. These are the people who would not care if the Titanic sank but whose only comment would be that ships were always called 'she' and that is in some way offensive to somebody.."

Not often I agree with you Tom but I think you’re right here.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ssex_tomMan
over a year ago

Chelmsford


"Calling complete strangers 'bullies'

If bullies don't want to be called bullies, they shouldn't engage in bullying behaviour. See also racists complaining about being called racist, et cetera.

and taking about 'bleating'and'whining' is hugely judgmental language that may well have a detrimental effect on others mental well being.

You're correct; it *is* judgemental language. But when the "silenced" person is complaining about it despite *demonstrably not being silenced*, what else should we call it? "Hypocrisy"? "Disingenuousness"? "Mendacity"? "Lying"? "Arguing in bad faith?" Or are those terms too judgemental as well? Should those doing harm never be called out?

It is very, very telling that the loudest shrieking about "censorship" comes from right-wing grifters with TV shows, large internet presences, and frequent columns in the 80% of the UK media owned by a handful of hard-right tax-avoiding press barons. Wow. Very censorship. Much silent. Grifters gonna grift.

It's astonishing to me how hard the right wing are able to play the victim card despite controlling both houses of parliament, owning most of the press, and having got their tax-dodge power-grab Brexit. And yet, somehow, they're *still* "victims" because we in the "lower orders" are finally able to object to them absuing us.

Once again: All the people whining about being "silenced" should explicitly and openly tell us all the things they "can't" say any more.

And when they've told us who they are, we should listen.

Addendum: I find it very concerning the number of people who seem to consider "Nah, I didn't *mean* it!" to be some sort of magical get-out-of-jail-free card.

Hurl a plate on the kitchen floor. Watch it smash. Tell the pieces that it was only a joke. Magically fixed now, yes?

Perfectly put - could not add anything to this. But I will lol, just one thing:

Irrespective of whether the intent was banter, if it was not intended to cause upset - nobody has the right to tell another person not to be offended. You can think that somebody is for example a "snowflake" by all means but you have no right to question their emotional response to it.

I think it's the people who set out to be offended by any perceived slight, offended on behalf of other groups that are either perfectly capable of defending themselves or don't give a monkeys. They are the people who prattle on about the most lost of lost causes when the battle is already won and never seem to grasp the real issues affecting the planet. These are the people who would not care if the Titanic sank but whose only comment would be that ships were always called 'she' and that is in some way offensive to somebody..

Not often I agree with you Tom but I think you’re right here. "

Marry me Nora

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Calling complete strangers 'bullies'

If bullies don't want to be called bullies, they shouldn't engage in bullying behaviour. See also racists complaining about being called racist, et cetera.

and taking about 'bleating'and'whining' is hugely judgmental language that may well have a detrimental effect on others mental well being.

You're correct; it *is* judgemental language. But when the "silenced" person is complaining about it despite *demonstrably not being silenced*, what else should we call it? "Hypocrisy"? "Disingenuousness"? "Mendacity"? "Lying"? "Arguing in bad faith?" Or are those terms too judgemental as well? Should those doing harm never be called out?

It is very, very telling that the loudest shrieking about "censorship" comes from right-wing grifters with TV shows, large internet presences, and frequent columns in the 80% of the UK media owned by a handful of hard-right tax-avoiding press barons. Wow. Very censorship. Much silent. Grifters gonna grift.

It's astonishing to me how hard the right wing are able to play the victim card despite controlling both houses of parliament, owning most of the press, and having got their tax-dodge power-grab Brexit. And yet, somehow, they're *still* "victims" because we in the "lower orders" are finally able to object to them absuing us.

Once again: All the people whining about being "silenced" should explicitly and openly tell us all the things they "can't" say any more.

And when they've told us who they are, we should listen.

Addendum: I find it very concerning the number of people who seem to consider "Nah, I didn't *mean* it!" to be some sort of magical get-out-of-jail-free card.

Hurl a plate on the kitchen floor. Watch it smash. Tell the pieces that it was only a joke. Magically fixed now, yes?

Perfectly put - could not add anything to this. But I will lol, just one thing:

Irrespective of whether the intent was banter, if it was not intended to cause upset - nobody has the right to tell another person not to be offended. You can think that somebody is for example a "snowflake" by all means but you have no right to question their emotional response to it.

I think it's the people who set out to be offended by any perceived slight, offended on behalf of other groups that are either perfectly capable of defending themselves or don't give a monkeys. They are the people who prattle on about the most lost of lost causes when the battle is already won and never seem to grasp the real issues affecting the planet. These are the people who would not care if the Titanic sank but whose only comment would be that ships were always called 'she' and that is in some way offensive to somebody..

Not often I agree with you Tom but I think you’re right here.

Marry me Nora "

No

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *affron40Woman
over a year ago

manchester


"Calling complete strangers 'bullies'

If bullies don't want to be called bullies, they shouldn't engage in bullying behaviour. See also racists complaining about being called racist, et cetera.

and taking about 'bleating'and'whining' is hugely judgmental language that may well have a detrimental effect on others mental well being.

You're correct; it *is* judgemental language. But when the "silenced" person is complaining about it despite *demonstrably not being silenced*, what else should we call it? "Hypocrisy"? "Disingenuousness"? "Mendacity"? "Lying"? "Arguing in bad faith?" Or are those terms too judgemental as well? Should those doing harm never be called out?

It is very, very telling that the loudest shrieking about "censorship" comes from right-wing grifters with TV shows, large internet presences, and frequent columns in the 80% of the UK media owned by a handful of hard-right tax-avoiding press barons. Wow. Very censorship. Much silent. Grifters gonna grift.

It's astonishing to me how hard the right wing are able to play the victim card despite controlling both houses of parliament, owning most of the press, and having got their tax-dodge power-grab Brexit. And yet, somehow, they're *still* "victims" because we in the "lower orders" are finally able to object to them absuing us.

Once again: All the people whining about being "silenced" should explicitly and openly tell us all the things they "can't" say any more.

And when they've told us who they are, we should listen.

Addendum: I find it very concerning the number of people who seem to consider "Nah, I didn't *mean* it!" to be some sort of magical get-out-of-jail-free card.

Hurl a plate on the kitchen floor. Watch it smash. Tell the pieces that it was only a joke. Magically fixed now, yes?

Perfectly put - could not add anything to this. But I will lol, just one thing:

Irrespective of whether the intent was banter, if it was not intended to cause upset - nobody has the right to tell another person not to be offended. You can think that somebody is for example a "snowflake" by all means but you have no right to question their emotional response to it.

I think it's the people who set out to be offended by any perceived slight, offended on behalf of other groups that are either perfectly capable of defending themselves or don't give a monkeys. They are the people who prattle on about the most lost of lost causes when the battle is already won and never seem to grasp the real issues affecting the planet. These are the people who would not care if the Titanic sank but whose only comment would be that ships were always called 'she' and that is in some way offensive to somebody..

Not often I agree with you Tom but I think you’re right here.

Marry me Nora

No "

Ah I think this is the start of something beautiful

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Amour fou going on here ^^

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icolerobbieCouple
over a year ago

walsall

Can I be the best woman?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *eoeclipseWoman
over a year ago

glasgow


"We're clearly in the midst of a the huge mental health crisis, follow the impact of lockdown and recession. So, are nicknames on here that include such words as 'Mental', 'Loony', 'Nutter' and so on, really appropriate?"

No they are not appropriate because the people who are usually called these names (inc myself) are typically

1. Women - used in a way to diminish her mental capacity to understand a situation or to even have the right to object to it. Used in everyday misogyny and domestic abuse.

2. quite often actually are neuro diverse mening they don't see or understand the world the same as a neuro typical person, many are undiagnosed due to old prejudices and women especially are often fobbed of as just having anxiety and depression when those are symptoms to not being able to understand and therefore struggle to live in this very industrious production line style lives that we have.

Many neuro diverse people also struggle with emotional regulation so something small to a neuro typical person can have a large effect on a divergent.

This is also a common tactic to dismiss sexual abuses,

"she's mental mate, doesn't know what she's talking about, you know me, I'd never do anything like that, she's just lost it"

as she's shouting in the background getting more and more frustrated just trying to get someone to listen and believe her, whilst he just plods on with his life.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

There are little jokes and silly jokes that can be passed, but I do get angry when people use menthal health or disabilities as insults or derogatory adjectives. Even adjectives related to women.

In another context and maybe more relaxed, but still kind of inappropiate, is the use of the names of genitalia, why people use d*ck or c*nt as insults. After all they are the fun bits of the human body

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"The lunatics have taken over this asylum...

To quote George Orwell,

“ By controlling the language, Big Brother controls the way that the people think. With a limited vocabulary, the people are limited in how much they can think, as well as, what they think about. ”

Almost uncanny if you ask me."

wouldn’t this work both ways though, by providing language for something can you make them think a certain way about things?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

ok so i think for most of us we all have language that we would use in some company and not others, even for example I’ve said in another thread think about the tone of the room when your granny comes for dinner versus the things that might be said when she doesn’t

its something we probably instinctively do is judge our language used based on the audience be it work, friends, family etc

this includes me so I’m not claiming to be on a pedestal or anything but threads like this get me thinking, so to play devils advocate to the people saying its fine to say it as long as you are careful who you say it around

would we not previously have justified racist language or sexist or homophobic language in the same way? like for example years ago people might have referred to their corner shop as the **** shop in close company but wouldn’t have said it while in the shop itself knowing it might cause offence , same with what are now seen as derogatory terms for gay men

so why is it that we can accept that we have grown over time to realise that no it wasn’t ever really even appropriate in the private company with some things, but on the other hand still justify other language as ok to use in the right setting

surely if it could offend someone that would identify with it at any point then we just shouldn’t be saying it , surely we should be evolving to see these problems sooner rather than wait til people have been complaining for decades while we cling into it as people being too PC

as someone has said there are plenty of new words being invented all the time , its not like we are going to run out if we take a few that people find problematic out of use

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icolerobbieCouple
over a year ago

walsall


"The lunatics have taken over this asylum...

To quote George Orwell,

“ By controlling the language, Big Brother controls the way that the people think. With a limited vocabulary, the people are limited in how much they can think, as well as, what they think about. ”

Almost uncanny if you ask me.

wouldn’t this work both ways though, by providing language for something can you make them think a certain way about things? "

I’d prefer to think for myself than be steered towards some kind of group think personally. It prevents situations that resemble the emperor’s new clothes.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Intent does not trump impact and never has.

"It's just a joke!" is the bleating of bullies trying to avoid accountability and always has been.

All the people whining about being "silenced" should explicitly and openly tell us all the things they "can't" say any more. And when they've told everyone who they are, they should listen.

So, if a mountain biker was out riding the huge dirt jumps and managed a particularly difficult aerial manoeuvre and all the other bikers cheered and shouted some very inappropriate terms such as “that was sick”, “mental”, “insane”, would that be ok, or are they all being offensive?"

well that comes back to context doesn’t it - some words have more than one meaning and in this context the meaning is cool/ rad/ out of this world

its like saying someone went to the football match and someone lit the candle with a match

the word might look the same but its not the really the same word

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"The lunatics have taken over this asylum...

To quote George Orwell,

“ By controlling the language, Big Brother controls the way that the people think. With a limited vocabulary, the people are limited in how much they can think, as well as, what they think about. ”

Almost uncanny if you ask me.

wouldn’t this work both ways though, by providing language for something can you make them think a certain way about things?

I’d prefer to think for myself than be steered towards some kind of group think personally. It prevents situations that resemble the emperor’s new clothes. "

but in theory if you believe you can restrict peoples thoughts by restricting their language then surely you can also influence thoughts by creating language that embodies those thoughts

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *affron40Woman
over a year ago

manchester

This is a really interesting thread and it has made me think about our use of language. I go however think there’s a big difference in how these words can and are used.

Mental health is already a protected characteristic so it’s already against the law to discriminate on that basis. So calling someone a name in malice is already unlawful. I do think however, that these words have many gradients in context so it’s very hard to blanket them in any way.

But it’s something I’ll ponder further I’m sure. As always much depends on intent and the persons reaction on the other side. I have had this kind of thing said maliciously and it was vile. But as everyday language I’ve never thought twice about it. But I don’t speak on behalf of other sufferers. I can only speak from my experience.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icolerobbieCouple
over a year ago

walsall


"The lunatics have taken over this asylum...

To quote George Orwell,

“ By controlling the language, Big Brother controls the way that the people think. With a limited vocabulary, the people are limited in how much they can think, as well as, what they think about. ”

Almost uncanny if you ask me.

wouldn’t this work both ways though, by providing language for something can you make them think a certain way about things?

I’d prefer to think for myself than be steered towards some kind of group think personally. It prevents situations that resemble the emperor’s new clothes.

but in theory if you believe you can restrict peoples thoughts by restricting their language then surely you can also influence thoughts by creating language that embodies those thoughts "

Yes, I do see your point. You can’t think a thought if no word exists to articulate it, but you could if you were learned one.

So it’s still a way of thought control though I think.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icolerobbieCouple
over a year ago

walsall


"This is a really interesting thread and it has made me think about our use of language. I go however think there’s a big difference in how these words can and are used.

Mental health is already a protected characteristic so it’s already against the law to discriminate on that basis. So calling someone a name in malice is already unlawful. I do think however, that these words have many gradients in context so it’s very hard to blanket them in any way.

But it’s something I’ll ponder further I’m sure. As always much depends on intent and the persons reaction on the other side. I have had this kind of thing said maliciously and it was vile. But as everyday language I’ve never thought twice about it. But I don’t speak on behalf of other sufferers. I can only speak from my experience. "

There are a few on these forums who are very quick to call people stupid, or imply they can’t read or comprehend properly. They are usually the ones condescending from their high horse.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *affron40Woman
over a year ago

manchester


"This is a really interesting thread and it has made me think about our use of language. I go however think there’s a big difference in how these words can and are used.

Mental health is already a protected characteristic so it’s already against the law to discriminate on that basis. So calling someone a name in malice is already unlawful. I do think however, that these words have many gradients in context so it’s very hard to blanket them in any way.

But it’s something I’ll ponder further I’m sure. As always much depends on intent and the persons reaction on the other side. I have had this kind of thing said maliciously and it was vile. But as everyday language I’ve never thought twice about it. But I don’t speak on behalf of other sufferers. I can only speak from my experience.

There are a few on these forums who are very quick to call people stupid, or imply they can’t read or comprehend properly. They are usually the ones condescending from their high horse. "

As everywhere unfortunately. Insults are insults regardless of their topic. It’s very much about the way in which words are used to belittle another that makes them negative.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icolerobbieCouple
over a year ago

walsall


"Intent does not trump impact and never has.

"It's just a joke!" is the bleating of bullies trying to avoid accountability and always has been.

All the people whining about being "silenced" should explicitly and openly tell us all the things they "can't" say any more. And when they've told everyone who they are, they should listen.

So, if a mountain biker was out riding the huge dirt jumps and managed a particularly difficult aerial manoeuvre and all the other bikers cheered and shouted some very inappropriate terms such as “that was sick”, “mental”, “insane”, would that be ok, or are they all being offensive?

well that comes back to context doesn’t it - some words have more than one meaning and in this context the meaning is cool/ rad/ out of this world

its like saying someone went to the football match and someone lit the candle with a match

the word might look the same but its not the really the same word

"

I disagree with the match analogy. In the sick or insane situation, it is usually when someone has done something that far out that it is literally an insane act, that no level headed person would attempt. They are literally questioning that persons mental health, even if they are cheering them on and bogging them up.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icolerobbieCouple
over a year ago

walsall

Bigging not bogging

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Intent does not trump impact and never has.

"It's just a joke!" is the bleating of bullies trying to avoid accountability and always has been.

All the people whining about being "silenced" should explicitly and openly tell us all the things they "can't" say any more. And when they've told everyone who they are, they should listen.

So, if a mountain biker was out riding the huge dirt jumps and managed a particularly difficult aerial manoeuvre and all the other bikers cheered and shouted some very inappropriate terms such as “that was sick”, “mental”, “insane”, would that be ok, or are they all being offensive?

well that comes back to context doesn’t it - some words have more than one meaning and in this context the meaning is cool/ rad/ out of this world

its like saying someone went to the football match and someone lit the candle with a match

the word might look the same but its not the really the same word

I disagree with the match analogy. In the sick or insane situation, it is usually when someone has done something that far out that it is literally an insane act, that no level headed person would attempt. They are literally questioning that persons mental health, even if they are cheering them on and bogging them up."

i guess thats not how i would have understood it in that context , like i said used in that way i would understand it to be along the lines of cool/ rad

i think generationally we change the way we use language too so the meanings are always evolving ... i think the kids don’t even say that’s sick now.. they say thats ill

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icolerobbieCouple
over a year ago

walsall


"Intent does not trump impact and never has.

"It's just a joke!" is the bleating of bullies trying to avoid accountability and always has been.

All the people whining about being "silenced" should explicitly and openly tell us all the things they "can't" say any more. And when they've told everyone who they are, they should listen.

So, if a mountain biker was out riding the huge dirt jumps and managed a particularly difficult aerial manoeuvre and all the other bikers cheered and shouted some very inappropriate terms such as “that was sick”, “mental”, “insane”, would that be ok, or are they all being offensive?

well that comes back to context doesn’t it - some words have more than one meaning and in this context the meaning is cool/ rad/ out of this world

its like saying someone went to the football match and someone lit the candle with a match

the word might look the same but its not the really the same word

I disagree with the match analogy. In the sick or insane situation, it is usually when someone has done something that far out that it is literally an insane act, that no level headed person would attempt. They are literally questioning that persons mental health, even if they are cheering them on and bogging them up.

i guess thats not how i would have understood it in that context , like i said used in that way i would understand it to be along the lines of cool/ rad

i think generationally we change the way we use language too so the meanings are always evolving ... i think the kids don’t even say that’s sick now.. they say thats ill "

They are going full circle, everything will be groovy again soon

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

my use of language is far from perfect, i know for a fact i use the word mad all the time when i mean, a bit wild or a bit extra, or peculiar, unexpected

threads like this just make me think could i instead be more specific about what i am saying rather than chuck in that catch all of “mad” which might potentially also have a negative connotation

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *gent CoulsonMan
over a year ago

Secret hideaway in the pennines

Having recently been diagnosed with depression, I have to say that what we have been through had probably been the worst time in my life, my business has been shut for months, very little financial support, and the break up of my relationship after 4years.

Mental health in this country is probably at an all time high.

Problem is a lot of people won't admit to suffering from it, I know I didn't at first.

Thankfully I am on a CBT program and on the way to recovery, day by day

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *arakiss12TV/TS
over a year ago

Bedford

In context I think it's fine. Boris called the Labour party squatting buddhas in a derogatory manner this week and got away with it live and on TV.

There are nutters you'll meet on a night out who might want lick your face for no particular reason in the kebab shop, then there's the mentally disturbed who are having a moment in public because the meds don't work. Two entirely different types of conditions but neither classed as normal behaviour.

Talking pc starts at school it's the only way things would improve, unfortunately playground slang never leaves some people myself included.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Bloody Karen’s

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Like anything... They’re fine as words. Being offended is a choice.

Discriminating against or demonising somebody because of a perception that they may be those things is a completely different circumstance. That’s prejudice.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *eoeclipseWoman
over a year ago

glasgow


"Intent does not trump impact and never has.

"It's just a joke!" is the bleating of bullies trying to avoid accountability and always has been.

All the people whining about being "silenced" should explicitly and openly tell us all the things they "can't" say any more. And when they've told everyone who they are, they should listen.

So, if a mountain biker was out riding the huge dirt jumps and managed a particularly difficult aerial manoeuvre and all the other bikers cheered and shouted some very inappropriate terms such as “that was sick”, “mental”, “insane”, would that be ok, or are they all being offensive?

well that comes back to context doesn’t it - some words have more than one meaning and in this context the meaning is cool/ rad/ out of this world

its like saying someone went to the football match and someone lit the candle with a match

the word might look the same but its not the really the same word

I disagree with the match analogy. In the sick or insane situation, it is usually when someone has done something that far out that it is literally an insane act, that no level headed person would attempt. They are literally questioning that persons mental health, even if they are cheering them on and bogging them up."

Believe it or not these people are usually ADHD people, many who are in extreme sport if not all are, even if undiagnosed this is usually because they are getting their adrenaline fix by doing their sport & therefore do not get the flaws that occurs in say a boring office job...distraction, daydreaming, hyperactivity.

an adhd person's preset is an adrenaline junkie and to change up the situation often so high risk jobs like police, army, fire service etc all have high numbers of undiagnosed adhd folk who skate under the radar purely due to getting their fix daily. project managers, entrepreneur's, celeberaties (ant, richard bacon, russell brand, emma watson, michelle rodrigez, johny deep, yes Branson & many other have it).

It's though they alone make up 10% of population.

and there are many more than ADHD so imagine how many that actually is who are walking around undiagnosed because to date it has never caused significant issues or they have found coping mechanisms to deal with it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By *ssex_tomMan
over a year ago

Chelmsford

Am I ok too call myself a loony.. I am Barking ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top