Hacker News Reader

Comment by unethical_ban | Hacker News Reader

If someone has a broken leg, the word "crutch" isn't derogatory in the first place.

Cessation tools are not negative. Yes, root causes of abuse should be addressed, but aids are aids.

    Crutch (n)
    a : a support typically fitting under the armpit for use by the disabled in walking
    b : a source or means of support or assistance that is relied on heavily or excessively

Use a is a neutral, non-judgmental, literal use of the word. Use b is clearly a pejorative, judgmental, metaphorical use of the word. The two are not the same.

Is this an argument that you should use crutch and everyone ever will always read it as version b?

It might be more good faith to just pick language that is more clear. The alternative feels a lot like pretending to be one thing while trying to make people think something else - it rings just like a bad faith "Im just asking questions"

I'm a bit confused. Would you mind clarifying whether you think using "crutch" is the more clear vocabulary, or whether alternative vocabulary would be more clear?

To be clear, version a is referring to literal (non-metaphorical) crutches, and is not the version being used here because GLP-1 agonists are not literal crutches. Version b is the only possible use of the word being used in this conversation, and is always pejorative. "Oh, you broke your foot, you're getting around on a crutch" = Always version A, literal, non-pejorative. "Oh, you're obese, you're using medicine as a crutch to cure it" = Always version B, metaphorical, pejorative. There's no confusion.

> relied on heavily or excessively

That _OR_ is doing a lot of work. I believe that 'or' makes the word not objectively pejorative. Context is important. A no-true-scotsman insinuation, or an insinuation that the crutch will never be removed does lack empathy and would seem pejorative to me.

Though, an empathetic concern that the crutch will never be removed - is not necessarily pejorative IMO. Either way, the crutch is a tool to "healing." Context matters.

The negative connotation of a crutch implies that you are past the point of needing it and should be standing on your own two feet. If a thing is not meant to be temporary, or if you'll never be able to perform a task as well without it as you could with it, then it's a tool rather than a crutch.

Thus, calling GLP-1 meds a “crutch” implies that they are unnecessary, and that the patient should be able to do it without medication, which then creates guilt and shame where there shouldn’t be any.

> If someone has a broken leg, the word "crutch" isn't derogatory in the first place.

It is so profoundly disingenuous to pretend not to know what the word "crutch" means or what connotations it has in this context. Like, come on.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com