> What we call imposter syndrome was originally termed imposter phenomena, a term that makes plain that it is something that can be observed, not merely felt. The transformation into a syndrome shifted the experience of being impostered by a patriarchal, white supremacist society into a medicalized disorder, something for which the impostered person must be treated. That’s a neat trick: to shift the locus of treatment to the mistreated person, rather than the system that caused her harm. But perhaps there’s even another, more diabolical move here.

I have no idea what this is saying. What does “being impostered” mean? As far as I know, “Imposter Syndrome” is all about personal insecurities. It’s not something imposed.

▲

bee_rider 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I think they agree with you about what “imposter syndrome” means, but think the shift from “imposter phenomenon” to “imposter syndrome” turned it from something that would be understood as imposed, to something that would be understood as personal. I have no idea about the history of the term, or whether their description is true or not. Just, I’m pretty sure that is what they are saying.

	▲	pigpop an hour ago \| parent [-]
		It's minutia they dug up that almost no one knows or cares about and they're using it to put their own spin on it for the sake of whatever argument they're making. Ask them to explain how they expect syndrome to have displaced phenomenon when "imposter phenomenon" is practically non-existent in common usage and knowledge. If we can judge by the trend alone it would seem the reverse may become true. https://trends.google.com/explore?q=imposter%2520syndrome%2C...