What,

 

There is more going on than meets the eye, with the push for inclusion of non-binary people. Rather than merely being seen, people insist on being heard and in doing so, they demand from others, that they use the words and the language, they want them to use. This phenomenon isn’t anything new, as it describes the way of talking, which has been going on, ever since we became verbal. What is easily forgotten, is that, one day, we were without language, but, at some point in human history, it began to emerge.

 

Our verbal, individual lives are very short, in comparison to the evolution of human language, which is approximately 200,000 years old. It is no exaggeration to say, that our language plays a much more crucial role in our lives than our genes. Each of us is born without language and unless someone repeatedly produces an English or a Dutch sound, we don’t learn how to speak the English or Dutch language. Yet, if we speak intellectually about the origins of language, what we say takes precedent over how we say it, as we keep ignoring the great  importance of how we sound, while we speak. The old saying: it is not what you say, but how you say it, is more relevant than ever, but who is saying this? It is a courageous listener, who had the gall to become a speaker, because he or she didn’t like the sound of that pushy speaker, who dominated and, of course, prevented him or her from also being a speaker.   

 

What is often described as the main characteristic of human language, is that it is compositional, that is, it allows us, as speakers, to express ourselves in sentences, which consist of subjects, verbs and objects – such as ‘I ate my sandwich’ – while using the past, the present (‘I eat my sandwich’) or the future tense (I’m going to eat my sandwich’). What has, however, been missing completely, in all the debates about language, is that compositionality gives us the capacity to endlessly generate new sentences, as we – due to how we sound – become able or unable to combine or recombine sets of words into their subject, verb and object roles.

 

What we are able to say, to each other, but, more importantly – to ourselves – depends on whether we are feeling threatened and fearful or safe and at ease. In the former, we will engage in Disembodied Language (DL), as our autonomic nervous system is in a state of alarm. Unfortunately, most interaction is based on this fight-flight-freeze behavior, which, obviously produces a different sound, than when this biological survival system isn’t elicited. What happens is, the aforementioned compositional and generative aspects of our language are shut down. In Embodied Language (EL), by contrast, we can be socially engaged with each other – and ourselves – as the sound of our voice, produces and maintains the wellbeing, which we express and reciprocate.

 

Everyone can hear what is happening, when we, out of fear, mechanically fight, dominate, manipulate and coerce each other – but, also, ourselves – to talk in a predetermined manner. This acted speech is DL, which sounds and feels terrible and unnatural. EL, on the other hand, sounds and feels good, as we speak effortlessly and without any negative tension. What we will say, when we have stopped our DL, is something to look forward to, as it will be new.   

 

What is the word ‘woman’ supposed to mean, if we are being forcefully told, that it is more inclusive, to use ‘birthing persons’ or ‘persons with uteruses’? Should inclusion of trans and nonbinary individuals result in the exclusion of all women? What is lost in this whole nasty discussion, about what we consider to be our identity, is that – regardless of what and who we believe ourselves to be – our voice always sounds aggravated, as long as we cannot be ourselves.

 

I have worked for many years in mental health and I still feel relieved, I have left that field and teaching psychology for good. Although I may have forgotten most of the professional jargon, what I will never forget, is the energy-draining sounds of all those who suffer. Only a few terms have survived, in my vocabulary, which I still find useful in describing DL and EL. What I can suddenly remember, is the term derealization, which is the experience of feeling separated from our immediate surroundings, but, presumably – and I have always wondered how that is even possible? – without an associated change of consciousness or impaired awareness. Moreover, derealization is often mentioned in conjunction with depersonalization, which, among other things (?), can be described, as a detachment within the self, regarding one’s mind or body, or being a detached observer of oneself. Anyone who is diagnosed with depersonalization, may feel, they have changed and that the world has become vague, dreamlike, less real, lacking in significance or being outside reality while looking in. However, these are typical features of what we are all – unconsciously – experiencing every day, when we engage in our common way of talking, which is DL. Depersonalization – which, not surprisingly, is also prevalent in other dissociative disorders, including dissociative identity disorder – is described as a feeling of being on autopilot and that the person’s sense of individuality or selfhood has been hindered or suppressed. Sounds familiar? In DL, we keep getting carried away by what we say and are seemingly imprisoned our so-called mind.  

 

What nobody wants to know – not even scientists,   psychiatrists, psychologists, therapists, politicians, parents or teachers – is that none of these mental health issues would ever even occur, if we were able to speak with ourselves and listen to ourselves and happily engage in EL. Body-dysphoria – which is one of the features of gender-dysphoria, and which, of course, refers to our autonomic fight-flight-freeze behavior – is felt by everyone, who engages in DL, but nobody ever talks about that. It is only when we engage in EL, that we can say what we want to say.