if you agree with the statement "even if endogenic was a word used by ableist scientists in the 50s doesnt mean endogenic systems should stop calling themselves that because of ableist scientists in the 50s", then you agree that it is morally okay to use the term "Asperger's", correct? the nazi term used to separate "good" autistics from "bad" autistics to aid in the killing of "bad" autistics? the term that actively separates and harms the autistic community? because endogenic is the same thing. this is the exact same situation, a term created and used by harmful people that is for some reason, still being being used.
please try to actually read what I'm saying instead of blowing me off, thank you. its a common trend for you to badly misinterpret what someone else is saying and create your own meaning
this is the exact same situation
In truth, I'm not overly educated on the history of Asperger's and am reading some conflicting accounts of the history of Hans Asperger, so I'm just going to take the details you provided at face value.
Neither "endogenic" nor "endogenous" were made by bad people. These words already existed before Freud used them. He didn't coin them.
These are basic words with a Greek etymology. "Endo" means inside or within. "Genous" means originating.
In contrast, Asperger is a person's name. The name of a Nazi or Nazi aligned individual according to this account. Who was associated with the deaths of disabled people.
Aspurger's is a specific word that only applies to this one disorder. It doesn't have any existence or meaning outside of that.
Endogenic and endogenous have a long history with broad uses in a huge variety of contexts. Both within and outside of psychology and psychiatry.
Now, despite saying I was going to take this at face value because I am still learning. I will say that from what research I've done, it at least doesn't look Asperger's Syndrome was actually a "Nazi term." It wasn't coined until 1976 by Lorna Wing.
From what I've gathered... the term Hans Asperger actually used for his syndrome in the beginning... was autism. (Well, more specifically, it was "autistic psychopathy.")
And that would probably be a closer comparison. A word with a complex history including some ableist uses along the way. But one that most reasonable people wouldn't consider ableist.
Which brings me to the question... do you feel autism should be retired as well due to the fact that this is what Hans Asperger originally called his disorder?
I feel you should by your logic.
In any case, there's one last point I want to make on this.
You know Freud was of Jewish descent, right? And that many of his works were destroyed by Nazis who hated the field of psychoanalysis that he founded? (In fact, Hans Asperger himself was an opponent of psychoanalysis as well.)
There's something that really rubs me the wrong way when the comparison you're making is between a word that you claim was coined by Nazis who used it to kill disabled people, and one that's being associated with a man of Jewish heritage who was victimized and persecuted by the Nazi regime.
I don't think this is intentional. I don’t think you woke up this morning and decided "you know what? I'm going to equate a German Jew who suffered under Nazi rule to his Nazi-aligned opponent."
But I do wish you would strive for greater awareness before falling on Nazi comparisons in syscourse.