There is a claim going around that sounds progressive at first glance, like it is wrapped in soft velvet and self-care:

β€œWords can mean whatever I want them to mean.”

And I need everyone to understand how horrifying that actually is. Not because I am a dictionary-worshipping Puritan who wants to chain language to a wall and baptise it in Merriam-Webster.

… communication requires shared meaning.

And if meaning becomes a personal choice that changes whenever someone’s feelings shift, then we are no longer talking. We are just making noises at each other. Language is not a private diary or a crystal, nor is it aΒ  β€œvibe.”

Language is infrastructure.

And infrastructure only works when we agree on what the signs mean. Words are not personal property. They are communal tools. They work because we all participate in a basic agreement:

  • β€œThis sound means this thing.”

  • β€œThis group of letters points to this concept.”

  • β€œWe will use it consistently enough that you can understand me and I can understand you.”

This is not about control. This is about not devolving into interpretive screaming.* Because the moment we start changing the meaning of words each time we use them, the shared map disappears. And then you cannot navigate anything. Not truth,Β  intent, accountability or shared reality.

People love to declare that dictionaries are fake news now, as if lexicographers are hiding in a cave like little goblins deciding what words mean. That is… not what a dictionary is. Dictionaries do not create meanings. They are not lawgivers. They are record keepers. They document how words are commonly used across time, across communities, across contexts.

Yes β€” language changes. But it changes the same way forests change: slowly, socially, collectively. Not because one squirrel woke up and decided trees are now called sky noodles (okay, but you guys know I am firmly against naming anything without its consent and all but sky noodles is pretty cool). If you want to invent a new word, amazing. I love that. Humans doing human things. Delicious (that sounded like I think humans are delicious, which is weird, but I am leaving it there).

But inventing a word is not the same as making that word function socially. A word does not become ‘real’ because one person says so. It becomes real when other people recognise it, use it, adopt it β€” and meaning becomes shared.

That is how dictionaries work.

Creoles make perfect sense to me. They are one of the most beautiful linguistic phenomena we have: language blending, adapting, building a bridge between worlds. But creoles take time. They form through:

  • repeated usage

  • shared context

  • necessity

  • community adoption

They are not a β€œtoday I feel like this word means something else” situation. Creoles are a social evolution. Random personal redefinitions are linguistic arson.

If words can mean anything, they mean nothing.

If β€œharm” can mean five different things depending on the speaker’s emotional weather, then we cannot even discuss morality.

If β€œviolence” can mean literal assault or β€œa tone I did not like,” then we have destroyed our ability to name real danger.

If β€œaccountability” becomes β€œyou agreeing with my version of events,” then the word stops functioning.

And the horrifying part is that this does not create freedom.

It creates power games.

Because what happens when definitions become private? The strongest, loudest, most manipulative person wins. Not the clearest. Not the most honest. Not the most logical. Just the one who can weaponise confusion fastest.

You cannot walk into traffic and declare:

β€œTo me, red means go.”

Because you will die, and you will possibly take other people with you. Words are the same type of agreement. Not because feelings are not real β€” they are. Feelings do not automatically rewrite shared reality. You are allowed to say:

  • β€œThis word feels hostile to me.”

  • β€œI do not like how this term is used.”

  • β€œThat word carries pain in my history.”

  • β€œI think we need a new language for this.”

All valid.

But that is not the same as:

β€œThis word means something else now because I said so.”

That is not language. That is coercion wearing a vocabulary costume.

Silly made-up words? Give me twenty. I will put them in a trenchcoat and let them haunt society. New meanings emerging over time through collective use? Completely normal. Natural. Beautiful, even. But changing the context and definition of a word every time you use it is not evolution. It is sabotage (and not in a fun Beastie Boys kind of way).

And it leads to one inevitable outcome: We stop understanding each other.

Or worse β€” we pretend we understand each other, while actually talking about completely different things… and calling it moral progress.

 

*interpretive screaming sounds like the official activity for 2026.Β 

Tags: