There’s a reason why we have such a visceral reaction to certain words. Words carry weight; they shape discourse, they encapsulate emotions, ideas, and shape thoughts. We enter dangerous territory when we lose sight of this. That said, I recently heard the term “unalived” used offline in casual conversation, and I was taken aback. I recognize that social media — especially TikTok — infiltrating the way we speak is not something new or out of the ordinary. I mean, a couple of years ago, the phrase “24 karte Labubu 67 dubai chocolate matcha” would have just sounded like gibberish to me, but today, due to way too many hours doom scrolling on TikTok, I understand the intricacies of each reference and can perfectly decode the message.
So, I want to make it clear that I am not against language that begins in online spaces entering the “real world.” My concern lies with online censorship bleeding into people’s everyday vocabulary, and how that self-censorship contributes to the growing numbness to violence in younger generations.
I find it absurd that, as social media users, we are exposed to such an influx of violent and often graphic content, yet if a user wants to discuss said content with their audiences, they have to use unserious terms like “unalived” or “graped ” to avoid their video being flagged by the algorithm or taken down. This undoubtedly dilutes the gravity of the heinous issues being discussed, because words hold gravity, and when we disregard this fact, they lose their power as symbols and gateways to meaningful discourse.
Furthermore, my worry deepens when I think about the younger generations —who definitely shouldn’t be on TikTok anyway, but I digress— whose introduction to these serious topics is occurring through the clouded lens of these terms made up to trick an algorithm.
Especially in the instance where this slang goes offline and seeps into real conversations. So, although there is a school of thought that may argue that terms like “unalive” ensure sensitivity, and I agree that topics like suicide, murder, and assault deserve the utmost sensitivity, I also argue that these topics deserve a reverence that only comes with using the words that have held the gravity of these macabre topics for centuries.
In a climate that is inundated with violence, and the internet that brings said violence to our attention relentlessly. We mustn’t become numb to it, especially when discussing it. There is enough censorship digitally and institutionally causing harm; we do not need to add to it in our one-on-one human conversations to preserve the gravity these topics deserve.