4 ms·

This is probably a bit of a cultural difference. Not every English-speaking country considers the word "retarded" an ableist insult (as in, for many it has noth

This is probably a bit of a cultural difference. Not every English-speaking country considers the word "retarded" an ableist insult (as in, for many it has nothing to do semantically or etymologically with differently abled people). Same as the way Australians use the word "cunt" very differently than Americans.

ZeroGravitas 4y ago
Another related example is "spaz" which in UK English is basically synonymous with "retard" as used in US English. As wiktionary notes, the offensiveness even within countries is variable: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/spaz https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/spaz But if you're writing for the wider english-speaking/reading internet, you probably want to be aware of these things to avoid unintentional offence, just as I assume Australians modulate their usage of 'cunt' for different audiences online.
corrral 4y ago
It's a pretty damn recent shift even in the US. Tons of movies from the 00s up to the early part of the 20-teens still used it freely and there was no major uproar over it—in general, no-one thought anything of it. Practically no-one bothered to write "r-word" when discussing it rather than just using the term. It can be jarring to hear in otherwise tame movies, now that we're conditioned to shun the word, but I'm pretty sure that conditioning is something that only a minority of people in the US have been exposed to, even today. Mostly those of us who are online too much, probably. Outside that sort of bubble I'm not sure how "problematic" it's actually considered to be, by the average person.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- cptskippy 4y ago
  I struggle with using it and frankly struggle with understanding why people are so offended by it. People seem to be orders of magnitude more offended by using it than calling someone an idiot, moron, mentally challenged, developmentally delayed, or saying they have an IDD. The outrage honestly just comes off as white knighting.
  - dwringer 4y ago
    I think "idiot" and "moron" have lost their edge because they've been so ubiquitous for so long they don't mean anything more than, basically, a euphemism for "dumbass".* The other terms you mentioned are just as offensive as the "r-word" in that context IMHO. Same for people who use "autism"/"autist" as a jokey insult. Using terms like that as insults in a public forum is in bad taste and unnecessarily likely to hurt someone's feelings over something over which they have absolutely no control. *I'm aware these terms used to be more in line with the others, but frankly I'd also question the wisdom of using them in a public forum.
    - cptskippy 4y ago
      > I think "idiot" and "moron" have lost their edge because they've been so ubiquitous for so long they don't mean anything more than, basically, a euphemism for "dumbass".* The other terms you mentioned are just as offensive as the "r-word" in that context IMHO. A dumbass is someone who is stupid or foolish. Stupid, fool, idiot, and moron are all terms that at one point or another were used to describe those with an IDD. They're all still acceptable insults AFAIK, but now not the "r-word". For the longest time it was a fairly tepid insult but suddenly has, for reasons unclear to be, become outrageous and objectionable on par with the "n-word". > I'm aware these terms used to be more in line with the others, but frankly I'd also question the wisdom of using them in a public forum. It goes beyond insults though, the term has become completely unacceptable as a witticism or in a self deprecating manner. It just seems arbitrary to me and feels like an arbitrary change to give someone the opportunity to seize the moral high ground in a disagreement by labeling you ableist. Idk, I guess I'm just old an can't keep up. The day someone labels me an "ist" for saying "I'm an idiot" is the day I'm burning it all down.
      - masukomi 4y ago
        > It just seems arbitrary to me and feels like an arbitrary change to give someone the opportunity to seize the moral high ground in a disagreement by labeling you ableist. It is 100% arbitrary. Languages evolve arbitrarily. they're not planned. The word was a medical term that if you think about the literal meaning is simply descriptive. But that doesn't matter. What matters is usage. It has changed from a descriptive term to a significant insult for many. It is, by definition, 100% abelist. Its current usage is to demean someone for their limited / different mental ability. There's no difference between making fun of someone for their mental ability or making fun of someone for their physical ability. No one argues that calling someone in a wheelchair a "cripple" is abelist. Why would you argue that calling someone with mental disability "retarted" isn't?
- masukomi 4y ago
  > Outside that sort of bubble I'm not sure how "problematic" it's actually considered to be, by the average person. to be clear, i'm not trying to call you out with the following. I'm just using that sentence as an example because it's... such a _good_ example. It's not clear that you were even defending that sentiment so much as pointing it out, so please don't take this as me attacking you. Statements like that are precisely the problem of abelist thinking, and precisely why we need to be active about speaking up for the minorities amongst us. It basically boils down to "it doesn't affect me or folks around me so it doesn't seem like much of a problem". Most people aren't effected by stairs either, but they really suck for anyone in a wheelchair. > Tons of movies from the 00s up to the early part of the 20-teens still used it freely and there was no major uproar over it—in general Calling someone a "fag" wasn't problematic for the same time period too, except for all the people who it was problematic for. I will agree that "retarted" is a word that a lot of Americans (most?) still think is fine to use, except for anyone with a family member or friend who people disparage with that word. Does that mean we should continue to be "well, not a problem for anyone I know"? Or should we recognize that it hurts some people, helps no people, and stop using it.

ZeroGravitas 4y ago

Another related example is "spaz" which in UK English is basically synonymous with "retard" as used in US English. As wiktionary notes, the offensiveness even within countries is variable: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/spaz https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/spaz But if you're writing for the wider english-speaking/reading internet, you probably want to be aware of these things to avoid unintentional offence, just as I assume Australians modulate their usage of 'cunt' for different audiences online.

corrral 4y ago

It's a pretty damn recent shift even in the US. Tons of movies from the 00s up to the early part of the 20-teens still used it freely and there was no major uproar over it—in general, no-one thought anything of it. Practically no-one bothered to write "r-word" when discussing it rather than just using the term. It can be jarring to hear in otherwise tame movies, now that we're conditioned to shun the word, but I'm pretty sure that conditioning is something that only a minority of people in the US have been exposed to, even today. Mostly those of us who are online too much, probably. Outside that sort of bubble I'm not sure how "problematic" it's actually considered to be, by the average person.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
cptskippy 4y ago
I struggle with using it and frankly struggle with understanding why people are so offended by it. People seem to be orders of magnitude more offended by using it than calling someone an idiot, moron, mentally challenged, developmentally delayed, or saying they have an IDD. The outrage honestly just comes off as white knighting.
- dwringer 4y ago
  I think "idiot" and "moron" have lost their edge because they've been so ubiquitous for so long they don't mean anything more than, basically, a euphemism for "dumbass".* The other terms you mentioned are just as offensive as the "r-word" in that context IMHO. Same for people who use "autism"/"autist" as a jokey insult. Using terms like that as insults in a public forum is in bad taste and unnecessarily likely to hurt someone's feelings over something over which they have absolutely no control. *I'm aware these terms used to be more in line with the others, but frankly I'd also question the wisdom of using them in a public forum.
  - cptskippy 4y ago
    > I think "idiot" and "moron" have lost their edge because they've been so ubiquitous for so long they don't mean anything more than, basically, a euphemism for "dumbass".* The other terms you mentioned are just as offensive as the "r-word" in that context IMHO. A dumbass is someone who is stupid or foolish. Stupid, fool, idiot, and moron are all terms that at one point or another were used to describe those with an IDD. They're all still acceptable insults AFAIK, but now not the "r-word". For the longest time it was a fairly tepid insult but suddenly has, for reasons unclear to be, become outrageous and objectionable on par with the "n-word". > I'm aware these terms used to be more in line with the others, but frankly I'd also question the wisdom of using them in a public forum. It goes beyond insults though, the term has become completely unacceptable as a witticism or in a self deprecating manner. It just seems arbitrary to me and feels like an arbitrary change to give someone the opportunity to seize the moral high ground in a disagreement by labeling you ableist. Idk, I guess I'm just old an can't keep up. The day someone labels me an "ist" for saying "I'm an idiot" is the day I'm burning it all down.
    - masukomi 4y ago
      > It just seems arbitrary to me and feels like an arbitrary change to give someone the opportunity to seize the moral high ground in a disagreement by labeling you ableist. It is 100% arbitrary. Languages evolve arbitrarily. they're not planned. The word was a medical term that if you think about the literal meaning is simply descriptive. But that doesn't matter. What matters is usage. It has changed from a descriptive term to a significant insult for many. It is, by definition, 100% abelist. Its current usage is to demean someone for their limited / different mental ability. There's no difference between making fun of someone for their mental ability or making fun of someone for their physical ability. No one argues that calling someone in a wheelchair a "cripple" is abelist. Why would you argue that calling someone with mental disability "retarted" isn't?
masukomi 4y ago
> Outside that sort of bubble I'm not sure how "problematic" it's actually considered to be, by the average person. to be clear, i'm not trying to call you out with the following. I'm just using that sentence as an example because it's... such a _good_ example. It's not clear that you were even defending that sentiment so much as pointing it out, so please don't take this as me attacking you. Statements like that are precisely the problem of abelist thinking, and precisely why we need to be active about speaking up for the minorities amongst us. It basically boils down to "it doesn't affect me or folks around me so it doesn't seem like much of a problem". Most people aren't effected by stairs either, but they really suck for anyone in a wheelchair. > Tons of movies from the 00s up to the early part of the 20-teens still used it freely and there was no major uproar over it—in general Calling someone a "fag" wasn't problematic for the same time period too, except for all the people who it was problematic for. I will agree that "retarted" is a word that a lot of Americans (most?) still think is fine to use, except for anyone with a family member or friend who people disparage with that word. Does that mean we should continue to be "well, not a problem for anyone I know"? Or should we recognize that it hurts some people, helps no people, and stop using it.