4 ms·

> I can think of no other single word that better describes the behavior of the E-Ink patent holders. This is the central point of this issue. This person use

> I can think of no other single word that better describes the behavior of the E-Ink patent holders. This is the central point of this issue. This person uses a word that used to mean "person with a mental health problem" to describe a situation where a company "lacks intelligence and awareness". People who have been and still are the victims of this insult do not want to be associated with the concept of "lack of intelligence". Write the same sentence without using the slur as a crutch. "The company that holds the patents for electronic ink has an [intellectual disability]". In this format, it is very clear that this wording is problematic. In any case, it is simply bad writing. There are many other ways to describe what this company does without using a word that comes with a heavy medical and social history.

nate_meurer 6y ago
No, the description "lacks intelligence and awareness" is not at all what the poster wanted to convey. Not even close. As I said elsewhere, "extreme, inexplicable, self-destructive foolishness" might be an adequate substitute, but I think simply "retarded" is also effective and concise, uttered not in a spirit of wanton bullying, but rather for the purpose of vivid illustration of behaviour that is, in fact, profoundly stupid. The word is only "problematic" to people like you who want to emphasisze its historical baggage. I suspect that there are a whole lot of other words you place off-limits. The words "stupid" and "dumb", for example, are used just as often to bully people with mental handicaps and illnesses. If all such problematic words are to be policed out of circulation, we might actually be left with such dry descriptions as "lacks intelligence and awareness". I personally appreciate the emphasis and efficiency of the stronger phrasing.
- Karawebnetwork 6y ago
  You are clearly missing the essence of this conversation as "foolishness", "stupid" and "dumb" are all words that are considered ableist. What you are saying is that the use of the word "retarded" is viable because it means "foolishness". However, the word "foolishness" shares the same baggage as "retarded". You use another synonym to mean that the company does not have the intelligence and awareness required to monetize its invention properly. Reread this sentence that you wrote: "I think simply "retarded" is also effective and concise, uttered not in a spirit of wanton bullying, but rather for the purpose of vivid illustration of behaviour that is, in fact, profoundly stupid." Now ask yourself what the vivid illustration you are painting is. In the end, it boils down to a simple fact. The use of these words will hurt some people and discourage others from interacting with you. Trying to justify their uses does not come off as mature but as resentful and bad-tempered. Especially in a professional setting. Imagine talking to a business leader who has a child with special needs that is called "retarded" on a daily basis. You may be in a job interview where the interviewer happens to be on the austim spectrum and regularly has to deal with people who call them "retarded". What about a CEO who is struggling with bipolar disorder and whose actions are described as "foolish"? In all of these cases, you are hurting or discouraging someone with your choice of words. It may not be in the spirit of gratuitous bullying, but the words still carry meanings. They stigmatize an already marginalized population. They carry meanings you may not be familiar with yourself but that others are very intimate with.
  - nate_meurer 6y ago
    You know what, I actually agree, and I should note that I myself would never use such words outside of theoretical discussions. However, by using the phrase "lacks intelligence", you have shown that you also have issues with ableism. Are you aware of how offensive that phrase could be to someone who has struggled with a learning disability, or to someone whose child is mentally disabled? I know you mean well, but by saying that a person or group of people are unintelligent or that they "lack intelligence" (as you did in your previous comment), you are using hurt language that is perhaps only marginally less offensive and hurtful than "stupid" or the r-word. For example, take the bipolar CEO from your comment above... imagine how hurt they might be if you described their actions as "lacking intelligence". I suggest you take some time to understand and address your latent ableism. Ask yourself this question: "how can I use only positive language in every situation, so as to completely eliminate the possibility of ever offending anyone?"
    - Karawebnetwork 6y ago
      > You know what, I actually agree, and I should note that I myself would never use such words outside of theoretical discussions. Good.

nate_meurer 6y ago

No, the description "lacks intelligence and awareness" is not at all what the poster wanted to convey. Not even close. As I said elsewhere, "extreme, inexplicable, self-destructive foolishness" might be an adequate substitute, but I think simply "retarded" is also effective and concise, uttered not in a spirit of wanton bullying, but rather for the purpose of vivid illustration of behaviour that is, in fact, profoundly stupid. The word is only "problematic" to people like you who want to emphasisze its historical baggage. I suspect that there are a whole lot of other words you place off-limits. The words "stupid" and "dumb", for example, are used just as often to bully people with mental handicaps and illnesses. If all such problematic words are to be policed out of circulation, we might actually be left with such dry descriptions as "lacks intelligence and awareness". I personally appreciate the emphasis and efficiency of the stronger phrasing.

Karawebnetwork 6y ago
You are clearly missing the essence of this conversation as "foolishness", "stupid" and "dumb" are all words that are considered ableist. What you are saying is that the use of the word "retarded" is viable because it means "foolishness". However, the word "foolishness" shares the same baggage as "retarded". You use another synonym to mean that the company does not have the intelligence and awareness required to monetize its invention properly. Reread this sentence that you wrote: "I think simply "retarded" is also effective and concise, uttered not in a spirit of wanton bullying, but rather for the purpose of vivid illustration of behaviour that is, in fact, profoundly stupid." Now ask yourself what the vivid illustration you are painting is. In the end, it boils down to a simple fact. The use of these words will hurt some people and discourage others from interacting with you. Trying to justify their uses does not come off as mature but as resentful and bad-tempered. Especially in a professional setting. Imagine talking to a business leader who has a child with special needs that is called "retarded" on a daily basis. You may be in a job interview where the interviewer happens to be on the austim spectrum and regularly has to deal with people who call them "retarded". What about a CEO who is struggling with bipolar disorder and whose actions are described as "foolish"? In all of these cases, you are hurting or discouraging someone with your choice of words. It may not be in the spirit of gratuitous bullying, but the words still carry meanings. They stigmatize an already marginalized population. They carry meanings you may not be familiar with yourself but that others are very intimate with.
- nate_meurer 6y ago
  You know what, I actually agree, and I should note that I myself would never use such words outside of theoretical discussions. However, by using the phrase "lacks intelligence", you have shown that you also have issues with ableism. Are you aware of how offensive that phrase could be to someone who has struggled with a learning disability, or to someone whose child is mentally disabled? I know you mean well, but by saying that a person or group of people are unintelligent or that they "lack intelligence" (as you did in your previous comment), you are using hurt language that is perhaps only marginally less offensive and hurtful than "stupid" or the r-word. For example, take the bipolar CEO from your comment above... imagine how hurt they might be if you described their actions as "lacking intelligence". I suggest you take some time to understand and address your latent ableism. Ask yourself this question: "how can I use only positive language in every situation, so as to completely eliminate the possibility of ever offending anyone?"
  - Karawebnetwork 6y ago
    > You know what, I actually agree, and I should note that I myself would never use such words outside of theoretical discussions. Good.