It is. And I would really like, if people would nuance it more. Calling something empathy when it’s clearly not, or positivity, when it’s clearly not, is just confusing everyone.
That’s a very fair point. In my mind though, when you put toxic in front of it, you are kinda saying that it isn’t the real thing. But that is kind of a weak modifier.
It is a weak modifier, but I get your point. I just see a lot of people (often without empathy) using it to attack empathetic people. Especially the right wing in a lot of countries, are trying to tarnish good and ethical words, so that you can’t use those against their hate and violent speech and actions.
That was why my last line was something about how the story wasn’t about the same kind of toxic empathy you and I are talking about, so fuck em (as in the people misusing it) I could have written it better for sure.
But what you describe is not an empathic person, but someone with poor boundaries and maybe a fragile ego. That’s not the same.
The same is usually true of people with toxic positivity. Both are describing outward behavior, not internal reality.
It is. And I would really like, if people would nuance it more. Calling something empathy when it’s clearly not, or positivity, when it’s clearly not, is just confusing everyone.
That’s a very fair point. In my mind though, when you put toxic in front of it, you are kinda saying that it isn’t the real thing. But that is kind of a weak modifier.
It is a weak modifier, but I get your point. I just see a lot of people (often without empathy) using it to attack empathetic people. Especially the right wing in a lot of countries, are trying to tarnish good and ethical words, so that you can’t use those against their hate and violent speech and actions.
That was why my last line was something about how the story wasn’t about the same kind of toxic empathy you and I are talking about, so fuck em (as in the people misusing it) I could have written it better for sure.