[SketchySeaBeast]

That seems to me to be an example where the language is forced to change but the thoughts remain the same. Sure, people are using the "safe" terms, but they're using them to continue to subvert the rules, not to bow to them.

[illusive4080]

The problem is when that vernacular extends into regular life. I haven’t noticed it yet with unalive, but I’m sure there will come a day. Eventually if the censors continue suppressing the word suicide, we will end up with unalive taking suicide’s place both online and offline. Then, the censors will censor unalive, and a new word will be coined, and the cycle continues.

[_whiteCaps_]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/health-wellness/2024/08/...

> On Friday, a social media user tweeted an image from the Nirvana exhibit at the Museum of Pop Culture in Seattle. A placard dedicated to the “27 Club” read, “Kurt Cobain un-alived himself at 27.”

[SketchySeaBeast]

I'm not fully comfortable with the shift in language either, but my point is that, even if the language is changed, the thoughts will remain. To use 1984 (is there a Godwin's law equivalent for this now?), the party taught that 2 + 2 = 5, which is changing thought. Social media is trying to do that, but failing. The danger is if it's one day effective, but to date it hasn't been.