¿Cómo curar los tabúes?
¿Cómo romper el tabú para liberar al mundo de la enfermiza costumbre de no llamar a las cosas por su nombre? ¿Por qué a la muerte se le llama “este momento” o por qué está mal hablar de la enfermedad mental de un tío frente a un niño? ¿Por qué alguien con una orientación sexual diferente es "invisible" y una persona con Síndrome de Down es tratada como un leproso? ¿Cómo curar el mundo de los tabúes?
¿Cómo romper el tabú para liberar al mundo de la enfermiza costumbre de no llamar a las cosas por su nombre? ¿Por qué a la muerte se le llama “este momento” o por qué está mal hablar de la enfermedad mental de un tío frente a un niño? ¿Por qué alguien con una orientación sexual diferente es "invisible" y una persona con Síndrome de Down es tratada como un leproso? ¿Cómo curar el mundo de los tabúes?
5 users upvote it!
7 answers

In order to avoid the use of a taboo word, the speaker uses replacement words or expressions, i.e. euphemisms. We do not like them, and yet, when we are to talk about unusual things or enchanted by, for example, the institution of the church, we lower our voices or avoid the presence of children. We constantly produce taboos ourselves.
In order to avoid the use of a taboo word, the speaker uses replacement words or expressions, i.e. euphemisms. We do not like them, and yet, when we are to talk about unusual things or enchanted by, for example, the institution of the church, we lower our voices or avoid the presence of children. We constantly produce taboos ourselves.
Machine translated
2 likes

More and more often in the media I see educational campaigns that try to tame certain concepts such as domestic violence, depression or exclusion and menstrual poverty. These are much needed actions. People are used to not talking, or even thinking, about embarrassing or difficult matters, and that does not make them cease to exist. I did not think that I would live to see the topic of women's period on national television. She herself was not aware of some of the problems faced by girls from poor families, but one campaign was enough for me to look at them differently.
On the other hand, I can see that not every campaign has a positive response. I remember the saddest example from France. When the images of smiling children with Down syndrome were shown in the media, protests from pro-abortion groups appeared immediately. According to them, the campaign was harmful because it could cause sadness among those women who had had abortions in the past precisely because of suspected trisomy of chromosome 21 in a child. The effect of the protests was such that the campaign ended immediately. Thus, the attempt to change the attitude of society towards these children turned out to be less important than the well-being of some women. Do we have the right to compare these two matters at all? And which taboo was stronger: about eugenic abortion or the existence of happy children with disabilities? Does it make any sense to fight one taboo with another?
I do not know the answer to these questions today, but one thing is certain, there is still a lot of work ahead of us.
More and more often in the media I see educational campaigns that try to tame certain concepts such as domestic violence, depression or exclusion and menstrual poverty. These are much needed actions. People are used to not talking, or even thinking, about embarrassing or difficult matters, and that does not make them cease to exist. I did not think that I would live to see the topic of women's period on national television. She herself was not aware of some of the problems faced by girls from poor families, but one campaign was enough for me to look at them differently.
On the other hand, I can see that not every campaign has a positive response. I remember the saddest example from France. When the images of smiling children with Down syndrome were shown in the media, protests from pro-abortion groups appeared immediately. According to them, the campaign was harmful because it could cause sadness among those women who had had abortions in the past precisely because of suspected trisomy of chromosome 21 in a child. The effect of the protests was such that the campaign ended immediately. Thus, the attempt to change the attitude of society towards these children turned out to be less important than the well-being of some women. Do we have the right to compare these two matters at all? And which taboo was stronger: about eugenic abortion or the existence of happy children with disabilities? Does it make any sense to fight one taboo with another?
I do not know the answer to these questions today, but one thing is certain, there is still a lot of work ahead of us.
Machine translated
2 likes

Machine translated

In my opinion, we are currently dealing with topics that should not be discussed, rather than with a religious prohibition. Most often it concerns sex, money, mental illness, and in some groups also politics and religion. A person who decides to break the generally accepted rules may encounter misunderstanding, social ostracism or, in extreme cases, be accused of using hate speech or hurting other people's feelings. We can say that taboo has been turned into political correctness, and I am not convinced that such a change will be good for us. To me, it's just the new face of taboo.
So what if we avoid the word homosexual less and less, if in some circles and media it is even forbidden to speak about people of a certain orientation otherwise than well, even when they are suspected of committing a crime? And every remark directed at them is perceived as an attack? On the other hand, anything can be said and written about a heterosexual, white and well-to-do man.
We also have a problem with certain nationalities or (especially in the US) with skin color. Others try not to offend them, even when they behave in a completely unacceptable way, because they are afraid of legal consequences. Compared to this, the problem of avoiding the words vagina or schizophrenia in public is minor, though I do not claim to be insignificant.
There will always be words and topics that some people prefer not to talk about. We have different sensitivities and upbringing. So I don't think it will ever change.
In my opinion, we are currently dealing with topics that should not be discussed, rather than with a religious prohibition. Most often it concerns sex, money, mental illness, and in some groups also politics and religion. A person who decides to break the generally accepted rules may encounter misunderstanding, social ostracism or, in extreme cases, be accused of using hate speech or hurting other people's feelings. We can say that taboo has been turned into political correctness, and I am not convinced that such a change will be good for us. To me, it's just the new face of taboo.
So what if we avoid the word homosexual less and less, if in some circles and media it is even forbidden to speak about people of a certain orientation otherwise than well, even when they are suspected of committing a crime? And every remark directed at them is perceived as an attack? On the other hand, anything can be said and written about a heterosexual, white and well-to-do man.
We also have a problem with certain nationalities or (especially in the US) with skin color. Others try not to offend them, even when they behave in a completely unacceptable way, because they are afraid of legal consequences. Compared to this, the problem of avoiding the words vagina or schizophrenia in public is minor, though I do not claim to be insignificant.
There will always be words and topics that some people prefer not to talk about. We have different sensitivities and upbringing. So I don't think it will ever change.
Machine translated

Machine translated

Machine translated

Machine translated