Pathologizing politics
Is really just a form of cultural censorship
If you believe in the importance of free speech, subscribe to support uncensored, fearless writing—the more people who pay, the more time I can devote to this. Free speech matters. I am a university professor suspended because of a free speech issue, so I am not speaking from the bleachers. The button below takes you to that story if you like.
Please subscribe and get at least three pieces /essays per week with open comments. It’s $5 per month and less than $USD 4. I know everyone says hey, it’s just a cup of coffee (with me, not per day but just one per month), but if you’re like me, you go, “Hey, I only want so many cups of coffee!” I get it. I don’t subscribe to many here because I can’t afford it.
But I only ask that when you choose your coffee, please choose mine. Cheers.
_______________________________________________
I'm not sure if my Aunt Raisa’s fears qualify as an authentic DSM-approved phobia, but the day she sent me downstairs to use the basement shower, I found out why she avoided the basement. My first reaction post-shower was that she’d painted the sliding glass doors black. But no, on closer inspection, it was dark and nasty mould. Auntie wouldn’t go inside that bathroom, and my mother mumbled that Raisa had a thing about mould, among other things.
It reminded me of my daughter’s friend's fear of heights. That fear emerged on a July afternoon when I took them to Canada’s Wonderland. When she looked at the Goliath, I saw her friend start to shake, so it was off to the merry-go-round, which, like the other rides, was probably built in the 1950s.
Those types of phobias, even if they aren’t doctor-validated, still ring true. A phobia is an overwhelming and debilitating fear of an object, place, situation, feeling, or animal. When doctors get involved and give the official phobia stamp, they tend to go beyond Aunty Raisa and the kiddie ride-loving 13-year-old. Phobias are visceral; they develop when someone has an exaggerated or unrealistic sense of danger about a problem or object.
So, in hindsight, the person who came up with the idea to start tagging political positions as phobias should get a marketing prize; kudos to them. Their fake medical condition political brand positions have become well-established in the name-calling market.
A quick inventory check brings up homophobia, transphobia and Islamophobia; it’s easy to turn them from a condition to a person by replacing the ia with an e.
The three are attempts to pathologize political expression, an expression that someone doesn’t want to hear or have others hear. It’s that simple.
Of course, these phobias are misnomers. Users are simply defaming anyone they disagree with. But the tags work. The three of them, plus the big cheese of racism, strike fear in people’s hearts.
It’s ironic - with all the attention to mental health, one would think that hijacking a medical term to label someone mentally ill would irritate the same crowd that loves to toss around the ‘phobe’ words.
But people have their moral priorities, and sometimes you need to compromise, like we have LGBT+ for Gaza—same deal.
These three words are well accepted. Other than “Trump Derangement Syndrome,” a term far less entrenched, pathologizing contrary political positions, is an idea that emerged from the left.
Political branders chose the suffix “phobia” because specific thoughts are symptoms of psychological conditions; I wonder if they considered going with “osis,” “itis,” or perhaps “ism?” That might be too bacteria-related.
And they don’t roll off the tongue as nicely.
Islamosis? Sounds like a gum disease. Islamitis (already taken by Islamism) or transitis? It's not likely to knock the phobia words off the podium.
The problem with the ‘phobe’ words is not only their inaccuracy and their usurping of medical language. They aren’t used to define a condition; they are used as terminal judgements.
One is an Islamophobe, homophobe or transphobe. Some fellow probably has nailed all three. These words are designed to end the discussion; when a doctor says, “You have cancer,” it is a clear statement of a condition, and one generally doesn’t respond with, “But what does cancer mean? Is it just a type of constipation?” It is the same with the ‘phobe’ words.
Name-calling someone using a pseudo-medical tag is anti-intellectual. It is an adult version of a four-year-old calling someone a “poophead.”. Of course, that scatological slight does not mean the person's face looks faecal. But equally, if a person doesn’t accept leftist political orthodoxy on transgenderism, homosexuality or Islam, it is permissible; it is free speech, and they should be allowed to speak without being called mentally ill.
When adults act like children, we have a problem. The horse has left the proverbial barn on these three. Here’s hoping that this suffix doesn’t gallop off to find new medically-based pejoratives.
Climate change phobia? Corporate pork phobia?? Critical race theory phobia? Rivertotheseaphobe?
Please stop. Enough.
Please subscribe and get at least three pieces /essays per week with open comments. It’s $5 per month and less than $USD 4. I know everyone says hey, it’s just a cup of coffee (with me, not per day but just one per month), but if you’re like me, you go, “Hey, I only want so many cups of coffee!” I get it. I don’t subscribe to many here because I can’t afford it.
But I only ask that when you choose your coffee, please choose mine. Cheers.
_______________________________________________
