The "S" Word? Oh My!

Oh my, Dearies, I have to confess that I'm a bit mortified by the speech I've heard this past week. I'm almost hesitant to even write the word. However, I must—because we need to discuss this together.

It's especially disheartening when the “S” word is uttered by the leader of this country I love so much. All right, I’ll swallow hard and type it: sleazebag. And I’m sorry to say, that’s not the only “S” word that’s been tossed around lately. Scumbag also comes to mind.

So, with my heart turning upside down at hearing such words flung at people who have simply upset the President in some way, I did what any curious (and slightly distressed) grandmother might do: I went straight to my favorite AI companion—ChatGPT—and asked about the psychological implications of using derogatory terms for people with whom we disagree. I did include a question of “what kind of person” would do that, again, thinking in terms of psychological development.

Here’s that conversation.

Note: I kept my first question to ChatGPT very general, not revealing the specific circumstance.

Later, ChatGPT asked me for the context so it could provide a more precise answer. That discussion follows the first question, so be sure to scroll down. You will be shocked at what ad-hominem attacks by a leader such as the President of the United States indicate. (Please note that while Elon Musk eventually dropped out of his association with openai.com (ChatGPT), he was one of the initial investors on the team of its design. You might find the irony that this information comes from this trusted AI source is a bit fascinating.

My First Question:

Psychologically speaking, what kind of person calls one who disagrees with him or has angered him a sleazebag?

ChatGPT’s Answer to Question One:

Calling someone a "sleazebag" in response to disagreement or anger reveals several psychological tendencies or traits, depending on context and personality. Here are a few possibilities:

1. Low Emotional Regulation

• The person may struggle with managing anger or frustration. Instead of expressing disagreement calmly, they lash out with insults.

• This suggests impulsivity or emotional reactivity.

2. Defensiveness & Ego Protection

• Using harsh language like “sleazebag” might be a defense mechanism to protect their ego.

• Rather than addressing the disagreement rationally, they try to discredit the other person to feel superior or in control.

3. Black-and-White Thinking

• This person might see people as either "with me or against me."

• If someone disagrees, they’re quickly labeled negatively, which can signal cognitive rigidity or even narcissistic tendencies.

4. Aggressive Communication Style

• Some individuals naturally lean toward more confrontational or hostile modes of expression, especially if they learned that from family or cultural environment.

• This isn’t necessarily a personality disorder, but rather a maladaptive communication habit.

5. Possible Narcissistic or Antisocial Traits

• If this kind of language is part of a pattern—regularly belittling others when criticized or not getting their way—it might reflect narcissistic traits (e.g., lack of empathy, grandiosity).

• In extreme cases, antisocial tendencies (e.g., manipulativeness, hostility) could be at play.

ChatGPT then asks me:

Want to give more context about the situation or how often this happens? That might help narrow down what's really going on.

My Reply When AI Asked for More Context for My First QuestionThe context is that the President of the United States consistently calls people names like sleazebags, scumbags, losers, low-life, low-energy, and on and on if they disagree with him or who, in his perception, do something to offend him. The most recent incident involves a leak of sensitive information to a journalist. He then accused the person who, through no apparent fault of his own received the information, of being a "sleazebag" in front of the whole world.

Chat GPT:

Thank you for that context—it sharpens the psychological picture significantly. When the President of the United States publicly and consistently uses derogatory labels like sleazebag, scumbag, loser, low-life, etc., particularly in response to perceived slights or disagreement, several deeper psychological patterns are likely in play:

🔹 1. Narcissistic Personality Traits or Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD)

While it’s not ethical to diagnose from afar, this kind of behavior strongly aligns with traits seen in narcissism:

• Fragile ego masked by grandiosity: Extreme sensitivity to criticism or perceived disloyalty, often met with retaliatory name-calling.

• Need to dominate narratives: Insulting or demeaning others is a way to maintain a position of perceived power or moral superiority.

• Lack of empathy: The use of dehumanizing labels suggests a disregard for the emotional or reputational impact on others.

• Projection: Projecting undesirable traits onto others as a way of deflecting from one’s own flaws.

🔹 2. Authoritarian Personality Style

Authoritarian leaders often:

• Divide the world into loyal allies and enemies.

• Use emotionally charged language to rally supporters and polarize public opinion.

• Discredit dissenters through ad hominem attacks (attacking the person rather than the argument or situation).

• Rely on scapegoating: finding someone to blame for problems to deflect accountability.

🔹 3. Insecurity and Fear of Weakness

Oddly, this kind of bombastic language can stem from deep insecurity:

• The stronger the fear of being perceived as weak, the more aggressive the response to any threat—real or imagined.

• Calling someone a "sleazebag" for receiving a leak (especially if they did nothing wrong) is an overreaction that says more about the speaker's internal state than the situation.

🔹 4. Populist Communication Strategy

There’s also a calculated element that shouldn’t be ignored:

• Using coarse, emotionally charged language can appeal to certain segments of a population who feel alienated by traditional political discourse.

• In this way, name-calling becomes a branding tool: “I say what others are too afraid to say.”

But this doesn’t negate the psychological patterns—it just adds a strategic overlay to them.

In Summary

From a psychological perspective, the behavior reflects:

• A low tolerance for dissent

• A need to dominate and control narratives

• Poor impulse control or deliberate manipulation

• A worldview divided into allies vs. enemies

• An undercurrent of insecurity masked by aggression

It’s an unfortunate style of leadership that can erode trust, stoke division, and model toxic conflict resolution at the highest level.

So there you have it, my dear readers. The question that weighs heavily on this grandma’s mind is, “What do we do now?” At the very least, how do we shield the children of the future from such a lack of civility that can slip farther and father away from what seems like humankind’s mandate to bring about peace through cooperation?  In my own opinion, it’s more important for us to not be so critical of four-letter words that are merely expressions and focus on the ad hominem slurs that directly attack our fellow “homimens.” 😊