Yes, but this is very much part of the Euphemism Treadmill[0]

I would fervently argue that 'sanity' has nothing to do with denigrating persons, merely ensuring that the solution remains "sane" in light of many people pouring time on things in different contexts.

Unless we're saying sanity in of itself is bad?

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Evolution

An interesting tangent is-- "retarded, moron, imbecile" all were relatively neutral medical terms once upon a time.

Labels applied to disadvantaged groups linguistically develop a pejorative connotation over time.

It doesn't really help that a lot of what we used to consider mental illness was mostly just behavior not conforming with the mainstream. US suffragettes hunger-striking were institutionalized and force-fed under the guise of mental illness, and being gay itself used to be classified as a mental illness.

But confidence check can hurt people with low self-esteem. It’s turtles all the way down.

I'm not downvoting you. I just don't see an argument against sanity or coherence. These are things are objectively good. Don't hear a lot of "hey, that's awfully coherent, how about maybe walk that back a little..."

I'm good with the rest of it. I have no need to call anything master/slave. I worry about analysis paralysis though. Primary/secondary has caste connotations, if you ask me...

also the US has a pretty ugly history of throwing up nonconforming people in mental institutions when it's convenient (see: suffragettes, gay people, etc.)