gailsimone:

criptheatrequeer:

gailsimone:

Holy crap, what is going on?

I’m so frustrated with this cause that I dearly believe in. Instead of reaching for tolerance and high ideals, the intellectual wing of feminism seems mired in ego, short-sightedness and celebrity snark.

Instead of being a philosophical haven for both the poet and…

Gail, there are a lot of things I like about this post. I like that you reject the idea that feminism should be made palatable to mainstream audiences. I like your emphasis on the breadth of feminism. I like how well you articulate your ideas. And I like your pointing out that mainstream feminism has historically a great many problems around inclusivity or the lack thereof, and in fact has been in many ways a movement borne of privilege (though I do hope that because of this you accept that many people have very valid reasons for not identifying with feminism, and it’s not the place of a white cis woman to tell them that feminism isn’t like that any more, or whatever. Because it certainly is, or large parts of it are).

It is because you acknowledge this truth that I hope you’ll be receptive to my one major criticism (other than the above):

“lunatic”.

This is a really loaded word. And for me - and a lot of other feminists and social-justice-minded people with mental illnesses - it is an extremely harmful one.

Because when you use this word to categorise “every religious zealot, every hardcore bigot, every sad, confused misogynist”, you are saying that to be those things is to be insane.

And we get so much bigotry from society at large. There is so much prejudice aimed against us in so many ways. So to be told (not just by you, but over and over again by “progressive” and rightwing people alike) that we are equivalent to everything that is wrong in society? That to be evil, to be bigoted or a murderer or maliciously, wilfully ignorant and callous is to be a “lunatic”, or to be “crazy”?

This hurts. And it has very real consequences.

We are disproportionately victims of violent crime. Of abuse. Of myriad forms of human-rights violations.

And to have that twisted—to have the way language is popularly constructed suggest that we are not the victims, but the perpetrators—that, in fact, to be a perpetrator of these abuses is inherently to be insane?

This is really hurtful.

I am not trying to pick on you. The reason I am writing this is because I know you think about oppression. I know it’s something you take seriously. So when I say this, I’m hoping you’ll take it to heart, or at least not dismiss it out of hand.

Please don’t prove me wrong.

No, I think instead I’ll just agree with you and apologize. I don’t even have the excuse of ignorance because people have pointed this out to me a couple times in the past. 

I think it’s probably because I’ve never heard anyone self-identify as a “lunatic” in a serious way. I’m careful not to use a phrase like, say, “mentally ill,” inappropriately, but that’s a line too thin to walk with any confidence. I write about people who genuinely are disturbed in one way or another…I do like to think that many of them own that label and are not exactly ashamed of it. But that doesn’t mean it needs to be thrown about pointlessly in real life.

No excuses, I’ll be more careful with that kind of terminology. I don’t think I made the connection you imply that evil = mentally ill, however. I think most evil is simple selfishness and ignorance, as in the examples you mention.

But I get the point about the rest and will try to be smarter in the future. If I mess up again, you have my delightedly given permission to mock me for being a dunder-headed lout who can’t seem to learn.

I’m mentally ill, I’m not insane. There is in practise - in conversation, a distinction between the term mental illness and the word insanity. Insanity insinuates that the afflicted has no hope. Insanity implies those with a serious mental illness aren’t going to recover, rather say locked in an insane or lunatic asylum.

Mental illness describes someone who is sick with a treatable disease.

I think getting upset over the use of lunatic, a word that dropped out of legal use decades ago and has a particular meaning, insane and out of control, with added implication of danger to self and or others, doesn’t help the cause of those who are ill mentally.

I have depression. I take pills. I am comfortable that my brain chemistry needs tweaking in the same way my blood chemistry may need tweaking with antibioitcs.

Insanity in the common consciousness is going to include people who legally are responsible, ie sane before the courts, for their actions.

That shouldn’t preclude the labelling of a serial killer, convicted as sane legally speaking, as an example of insanity. To try and do so would be like King Canute standing before the tide, and demanding it roll back.

Once upon time the dangerous and disadvantaged, the insane and troubled were all branded lunatics and were locked up in asylums. There is still a long way to go.

But things aren’t as bad as they were. People in my experience are able to differentiate between mental illness and the more lurid terms once legally applied people with mental health problems. They remain pejorative, and in some cases “every religious zealot, every hardcore bigot, every sad, confused misogynist”, does deserve the title insane - and when harmful dare I say lunatic.