Why people reclaim words meant to insult them – and how this has become a powerful tool for protest

In 2013, a wave of protests began in Turkey in opposition to the planned demolition of Gezi Park in Istanbul. The protests soon evolved into mass anti-government demonstrations, and a landmark moment in the country’s history of resistance.

At the time, the country’s prime minister publicly insulted demonstrators, calling them çapulcu – a derogatory Turkish word meaning “looters” or “vandals”. Instead of retreating in shame, protesters quickly embraced the label. They wore it proudly on t-shirts, painted it on banners and sang it in chants. “Every day I’m çapuling” became a rallying cry, a meme and a slogan for a movement.

People took a slur meant to discredit them and turned it into a source of unity, defiance and pride. In social psychology, this practice is known as reappropriation, and it can transform how people see themselves and one another. Our research shows that when members of marginalised groups reclaim stigmatising labels, it not only fosters self-worth but can also spark political activism.

In other words, saying “yes, I’m a çapulcu” – or “yes, I’m fat” or “yes, I’m queer” – isn’t just resistance, it can be the start of a political identity.

In our study, published in Political Psychology, we explored how reappropriation works as a psychological and political process. We wanted to know: how does taking ownership of a stigmatised identity shift the way people see themselves and their groups? And how does that influence their willingness to take political action?

To answer this, we looked at two powerful case studies: the 2013 Gezi Park protests in Turkey, where protesters embraced the term çapulcu, and the fat liberation movement, where activists have worked to reclaim the word fat as a neutral descriptor.

In both cases, the labels have long been used to stigmatise, devalue or silence. But reappropriating these words allowed people to reframe their identities, from being seen as a “problem” to becoming part of a proud and politicised group.

The psychology behind reappropriation

We combined in-depth interviews and survey research to understand what drives people to reclaim a stigmatising label, and how this shapes their identity. We interviewed 20 activists in Turkey who participated in the Gezi Park protests, and surveyed 479 fat liberation activists in North America.

Our findings suggest that reappropriation helps reduce the personal sting of the insult. When someone proudly adopts a term meant to shame them, they feel it disarms the insult. It flips the power dynamic: what was meant to hurt now becomes a badge of pride. If you wear the word like armour, it can’t be used to hurt you.

It also builds a sense of collective identity. When people publicly embrace a reclaimed label, they signal solidarity with others who share that identity and opposition to the forces that marginalise them. This shift helps move people from private acceptance to public action.

Crucially, we found that this process isn’t about denying the pain of marginalisation – it’s about transforming that pain into purpose. Participants in both movements reported that reclaiming stigmatised labels made them more likely to engage in activism – whether that meant attending protests, speaking out on social media, or supporting campaigns for political change.

Why this matters

Today, reappropriation is happening all around us. We’ve seen it in the embrace of terms like “queer”, “crip”, “fat” and “autistic” – all once used pejoratively, now often reclaimed as proud markers of identity. But despite its visibility, the process remains misunderstood.

Critics sometimes dismiss reappropriation as mere provocation or political correctness. But our research shows it is a deeply meaningful psychological strategy – one that enables people to reclaim power, resist stigma and build collective strength.

And it’s not just about words. Reappropriation can shape the course of social movements. In the case of Gezi, the reclamation of çapulcu helped unify a diverse and fractured protest movement.

In the case of fat liberation, reclaiming “fat” has challenged not only individual shame but the broader societal norms that stigmatise larger bodies. Although it is difficult to claim that fatphobia is declining overall, fat people continue to find spaces and ways to feel empowered, challenging prejudices and, in some social circles, dismantling societal norms about larger bodies.

Of course, not everyone in a marginalised group will agree on whether a label should be reclaimed. For some, the term may carry too much pain. Others may worry that embracing the label reinforces stereotypes. But that tension is part of what makes reappropriation so powerful and so political. It forces a public reckoning with language, power and identity.

In the end, our research offers a simple but profound insight: reclaiming a slur can change more than just language. It can change how people see themselves, how they relate to others, and how they take part in changing the world.

This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Mete Sefa Uysal, University of Exeter and Yasemin Gülsüm Acar, University of St Andrews

Read more:

• Decade of dissent: how protest is shaking the UK and why it’s likely to continue
• Just Stop Oil: do radical protests turn the public away from a cause? Here’s the evidence
• Mexico’s tourism protests are a symptom of longstanding inequality in Latin American cities

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.