• Ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    shield
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    18 days ago

    Blahaj.zone admin here. Let me make this simple and clear. I don’t care what specific word you use, if you are using intellectual disability or neurodivergence as an insult, you’re going to get moderated.

  • DumbAceDragon@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    17 days ago

    I think it’s fine in its original contexts (i.e. “retardant”, or to “retard” something), but could maybe be avoided in 80% of cases.

    It is inexcusable to apply it to people though.

    • NιƙƙιDιɱҽʂ@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      17 days ago

      I used it yesterday and feel kinda bad. Having said that, the guy I said it to was in an online lobby and I’d said one word on mic and he immediately asked if I was a baddie and told me to rate myself out of 10 for him.

      I said some not okay things…

    • spujb@lemmy.cafeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 days ago

      those are entirely different words; different parts of speech, etc :) fully agree but it’s helpful to think of it that way instead

  • daltotron@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    18 days ago

    buh-buh-buh but what about when I refer to mechanical engineering! what about when I need to adjust my cam timing! oh no!

    I dunno, I would broadly agree and I think that it’s probably not a good thing to be calling people, but I do have two complaints I would like to file with the official board that governs this sort of thing. Neither of them relate to the word’s banned usage, however. Of course, it’s still gonna be a little weird.

    One is that I like -tard as a suffix, I think it has a kind of satisfying mouthfeel in pronunciation, I think potentially we need some more words that use it, and I don’t think that as a kind of, like, workaround, or way to say the slur more. I kind of wish the suffix was dissociated from the slur, so this was more possible. The only other word I can think of that does this is mustard, which apparently arrived at a similar pronunciation through a different etymological route. I dunno, I find it to be a kind of like, inherently hilarious word, or satisfying word to say. Unusual, maybe, maybe like an unusual morpheme pairing. Maybe I have some level of just like unprocessed shitheadery though, that’s very possible. I also kind of wish there was a way that actually worked to de-escalate the weight of a slur, to rob it of it’s weight. Obviously, taking it back doesn’t do much, because it’s just going to be subject to the same in-ground out-ground dynamic, a la the n-word, right. It’s okay if gay people call each other or themselves the f-slur, it’s not okay if some straight guy walks in and does it. More positive associations might work but then, you know, doubtful that would work in the first place, and also you’d probably not see a lot of people wanting to take the L and push it on that one because everyone would hate them for it, both the people insulted and those who would use it as a insult.

    Also, I don’t like this kind of mentality more broadly of “oh you gotta be more creative when you insult people.”. Some people are so boring and uninterestingly fucked, that they aren’t worth the creativity you expend upon insulting them. I think it just kind of shadows the problem here. No, you don’t want to say the word because it denigrates an entire group of people when you use it in an insulting manner. There’s not really anything there about creativity, or lack thereof, that makes it a moral problem. Sometimes you do need a low-rent insult, it should just be one that isn’t a slur. Call someone a shitheel, or something, it’s easier than this, there are plenty to choose from.

    Okay, thirdly, I think there’s also a broader, and interesting question here, of, how an insult being based on like, unchangeable characteristics makes it more mean or more of a slur, right. But then that sort of, leaves out things we might consider as being changeable, like, say, body weight, which I would also say is a dick move, to insult someone on the basis of their weight, or to constantly bring it up, or anything like that. On the other hand, insulting someone on the basis of their eye color is maybe like, very antiquated, still potentially mean, and potentially very mean in like, maybe india? But I dunno so much if it would be considered a slur, really, as much as just kind of a very weird thing to bring up. Insulting someone on the curliness of their hair, maybe, but then that could be seen as a proxy for other things, just like most traits. It’s hard to do this with something too obvious because most of them have been historically associated with like, eugenics and shit like that. Maybe if you were to insult someone based on how big their feet are or something, that might be a more socially acceptable or lighthearted insult, even if it’s still mean.

    We also have, like, technically all characteristics are unchangeable, if we live in a deterministic universe, right? Insulting someone’s intelligence, even if they don’t have autism or down syndrome or what have you, is still insulting a deterministic aspect of their character, which was sort of unavoidable for them to stumble into. If you insult someone for even, their choice of boots, right, you are just insulting a characteristic about them which was ultimately inevitable, the result of many dominoes falling into place. I think perhaps when we attempt to understand the purpose of insulting someone, we give it this guise of free will and agency which I think ultimately makes it more mean than it would otherwise be. It robs it of its whimsy.

    We view insults as some sort of like, vehicle for tough love, vehicle for change, perhaps, or we view it as maybe righteous, because you’re insulting someone on something they can change and by implication I think, should change. I think we have to be honest, though. Insults are not for the people who are being insulted. They are for the people saying them, they have always been. If that’s the case, it doesn’t even need to be really related to the person you’re insulting at all, or even necessarily directed at them. It doesn’t need to be such a mean thing, if it’s just for you. And if it is just for you, then I think it’s more valuable to do that assessment and figure out why you’re actually doing it, instead of just like, giving into mindless frustration and calling someone a mean name, like a child.

    • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 days ago

      I appreciate the perspective here. You’re thinking about this from a different angle than basically anyone else here, I feel.

  • ealoe@ani.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    18 days ago

    I understand not calling disabled people the word, because mocking people for something about themselves they didn’t choose (like a disability) is cruel, I am totally on board with never using words in this way to target disabled people.

    I don’t understand why I can’t use the word to mock someone who is not intellectually disabled for choosing not to use their perfectly well-functioning brain, it seems like a very apt analogy. It communicates “you aren’t disabled, you have no excuse for acting like it, start choosing to use the fully functional brain you have”.

    Additionally, only the “r-word” seems to be the bad one, despite there being many other words in our language that originally began as a medical descriptor for intellectually disabled folks. If I call someone a moron for running a red light because they’re playing with their phone nobody bats an eye, but if I call them the “r-word” I’m a terrible person?

    • juliebean@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      18 days ago

      words do area-of-effect damage, friend.

      if you use the r-slur around me, even if its not directed at me, it hurts, and it makes me feel less safe with you, because of the way that word has been used to specifically target me for hatred based on my neurotype. plus there’s the fact that you acknowledge it to be a mean word for disabled people, and if you’re using it as a weapon against non-disabled people, you’re really saying ‘haha, you’re like those disabled people, and that’s terrible.’ i hope you can see how this probably doesn’t feel so good to a lot of us?

    • Xtallll@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      18 days ago

      Using a slur to insult someone, regardless of if they are a member of that group, shows that you view it as an inherently negative trait, and that people should be ashamed of being a part of, or associated with, the group.

    • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      18 days ago

      I agree completely with this. This campaign to make this word just as bad as the “n word” is absolutely ridiculous. I’ve brought this up with a lot of people, and I’ve yet to meet someone in real life who genuinely thinks this word should be censored in this manner.

    • industrialdeerfluff@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      18 days ago

      Look I usually only lurk because im too anxious but I have to say something.

      Your logic is the exact logic my neo nazi family use. (not an exaggeration, I grew up around the klan)

      “If they act like an N word, why cant I call them an N word, its not like im racist, i call stupid/criminal/bad whites N words too.”

      So i think anyone who uses this logic to justify a slurs usage should take a moment for self reflection.

      (This is coming from someone who is queer and will use queer slurs only in certain company, in private, where everyone involved is aware and into it. (and even then I get uncomfy, especially when im in a new group and I don’t know people and they start throwing words around.))

      (Also to add I was one of those “slow” kids who has alot of history with the cruel things my family and others called me.

    • pyre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      18 days ago

      what annoys me is that no one cared about this until Sarah Palin made a big deal out of someone calling her that and she pretended to get offended for her baby with down syndrome as if it was targeted on them.

      but I’m also ok with never saying it again. not a big loss who cares. at least we got a legendary Linus clip out of it.

        • pyre@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          18 days ago

          that’s not what we’re talking about. as the original commenter said, using the r word to refer to any mentally challenged person was already a no-no. that law changed official use of the word, not the r word itself used as an insult.

          • spujb@lemmy.cafeOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            18 days ago

            law reflects society. just providing a timeline for things, the word as an insult was a problem starting well into the 70s so it’s absolutely absurd to blame it on sarah palin in 2013.

    • Fedizen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      18 days ago

      nobody is going to arrest you for using the word, and many people will celebrate you using it. The problem is those people are mostly assholes. The word you should be thinking about is “audience”.

    • Anvil Lavigne@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      18 days ago

      It communicates “you aren’t disabled, you have no excuse for acting like it, start choosing to use the fully functional brain you have”.

      look, if this doesn’t make you see how it’s a shitty thing to say, i don’t think anyone else can help you understand.

      • spujb@lemmy.cafeOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        18 days ago

        i appreciate how they admitted it out loud: “but how can i harrass people and call them unintelligent if the r-slur is unacceptable?”

        what about dont call people unintelligent. hm?

        • ealoe@ani.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          18 days ago

          What is wrong with calling people unintelligent when they are doing unintelligent things that are directly causing me problems (for example, people on their phones blowing through red lights?) If someone tries to change lanes into me and I say “are you blind? You almost hit me!” is that similarly bad?

            • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              18 days ago

              I’ve been called dyslexic before as a slur a few times. I laughed every time and explained that I am dyslexic.

              Zero times have I ever, EVER cared that someone used this word like this. Why? Because they are human beings that saw symptoms and thought it was funny.

              Is dyslexia funny? Yeah, sometimes. In the same way, there are some hilarious characters that are blind. Our differences don’t have to be something we’re constantly defensive about. Humor is a very human reaction to coming to terms with such things.

              Some people just need to take a step back and realize it’s okay to inject these things into humor, IF you do it tactfully, and with a measure of compassion.

            • ealoe@ani.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              18 days ago

              Well I guess that’s where we disagree. It’s clearly offensive to make fun of a blind person for being blind, no one should do that. But I do not see how it is offensive to actual blind people to call a sighted person “blind” for refusing to use their eyes. It is of course not polite to the person I’m speaking to, but that is the point, there are plenty of times it is ok to be rude to people, such as when they’re harming you. Offending purposely harmful people like bigots, racists; and negligently harmful people like inattentive drivers, people who leave knives pointing up in the dishwasher, etc presents me with no moral quandary.

              I’m not sure if you’re saying it’s offensive to disabled people to make the comparison, offensive to the abled person you are speaking to, or both.

              • Ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                18 days ago

                Your submission in “lemmy user(ule)s: “this sign won’t stop me because i can’t read”” was removed for Using disability as an insult is not ok, end of story.

              • exothermic@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                18 days ago

                By comparing people to these slurs, you enforce societal norms that indicate that the said group has less value in society.

                Since humans are social creatures by nature, you are essentially dehumanizing an entire class/group of people because you can’t come up with something more clever to say.

                To err is human, we all make mistakes, intelligence/sight/etc. has nothing to do with it.

                • ealoe@ani.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  18 days ago

                  It’s not stating that group has less value, it is stating that that group has less ability to think which is just as true as blind people have less ability to see, or physically disabled people like me have less ability to walk than people with normal feet.

                  That doesn’t inherently make someone less valuable, and my point when using such a term as blind or retarded directed towards a non-disabled person isn’t to attack their value but instead to attack their behavior, specifically to point out that they aren’t utilizing their abilities to their full extent. If you hear the word retarded and think that means the person is less valuable, maybe check your assumptions about disabled people’s value.

              • Maven (famous)@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                18 days ago

                The main issue that seems to be the disconnect is simply that you are using the word as an insult.

                Calling someone unintelligent is fine (I feel at least) but specifically using words that are associated with disabled people as an insult towards abled people is blatantly putting one group on top of the other.

                The insult in that case cuts both ways. The person you are directly talking to is insulted because they are acting like a “lower group” and you’re also insulting the entire group by saying they are inherently lesser.

                You can not use a group of people as an insult without inherently viewing that group as insult worthy.

                • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  18 days ago

                  This really focuses on the darkest possible aspects of people. I think I finally get why I’m not offended by the same things folks like you are.

                  I hear someone use a word like this, and I think “they are using an obvious example they saw, and applying it here in a deliberately facetious manner”. You hear the same word, and you think “that person is deliberately denegrating an entire group of people.”

                  You’re not going to like my saying so, but neither approach is always right or wrong here. There are people that absolutely are doing what you think they are. What your stance doesn’t seem to accept, however, is that others are not.

                  You can live your life any way you wish, but I think people who think this way may want to take a step back, and maybe put their swords down. White Knights don’t always do well in a grey world.

              • criitz@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                18 days ago

                I don’t agree with OP that you should never be allowed to call someone names… But I do think the r word is potentially hurtful to actually mentally disabled people, so I wouldn’t use it for that reason.

                In general its better to use words that represent choices people make and not unchangable aspects. I wouldn’t use terms “black”, “retarded”, or “gay” as insults, for example. Someone below suggested “foolish” as a good example since it’s not an inherent trait but a behavior.

                • ealoe@ani.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  18 days ago

                  Foolish seems like a useful word, probably could be substituted and keep the intended meaning intact.

                • spujb@lemmy.cafeOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  18 days ago

                  i don’t think you shouldn’t ever be allowed to call someone names, not sure where you got that lol. for the record i 100% agree with your comment :)

                  sorry if i come across any other way i just personally find it important to sass people who vehemently defend “muh rights” to use established slurs

  • Wilzax@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    16 days ago

    “Retarded” can’t be a slur because it can be used to describe slowed/inhibited things that aren’t people. “Retard” is a slur derived from the adjective “Retarded”. Unlike the F-slur, N-word, and all the other colorful terms hateful people use to show people that they aren’t welcome on the basis of their identity, retarded has OTHER MEANINGS, and it is so much more apt a word than “Dumb” or “Slow” in so many contexts that it’s frankly (choose your adjective here) that we should have to walk on eggshells around it.

    Expressing disrespect for a person for things outside their control is cowardly and close-minded. We should censor people who try to co-opt the group they are speaking in to express their prejudice. But extending the censorship of a slur to its root word, even for innocuous contexts, is an overreach of the social policing of our language. It sets a bad example, since ANY WORD can be made to be an insult to someone if used that way, and we set a bad cultural precedent by doing this for “retarded”

    I understand that there’s no council that decides what is or isn’t acceptable to say, but I really wish people would think about this with a little more nuance than just “R-word detected, speaker shall be shunned” without considering the context. The way I see it, refusal to consider context is a redirection of the same kind of prejudiced thinking that makes slurs bad. But it’s being applied to a person’s speech rather than their identity, so it’s not as bad a thing to do.

    • spujb@lemmy.cafeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      16 days ago

      They are entirely different words. No one is calling for an outright ban on those letters; that’s a sentiment you made up.

      Don’t use it as a slur. If you are using the word in another, legitimate context where it’s not a slur, I don’t give a fuck. But stop arguing that those two uses are somehow indistinguishable because that’s just not true.

      Edit:

      Unlike the F-slur, N-word, and all the other colorful terms…

      This is false. Examples: “cracker,” the b-word, the f-slur (in UK contexts), “queer,” “gay.”

      All of these have other legitimate meanings. So, please reconsider your defense of this specific term, because you’re not even arguing it based on facts.

  • OozingPositron@feddit.cl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    18 days ago

    Fun fact: Abbott sells methylphenidate chlorohydrate with a retardant effect so that it lasts for approximately 16 hours instead of 4, and they called it Aradix Retard lmao. I know why they called it that but I can’t help but laugh every time I see it.

  • Squirrel@thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    17 days ago

    I don’t think I’ve used the word once since high school. Had it been generally unacceptable back then, I wouldn’t have done so. I graduated high school in 2004, and it was at least an acceptable insult back then (though not to call a disabled person), I think. I was a jackass in high school, though, so I could be wrong.

    Either way, it offends people now, so we shouldn’t say it. It’s that simple. Deliberately offending people just makes you an asshole.

    • JackbyDev@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 days ago

      I think saying it was acceptable is a stretch. I agree it was certainly more commonplace and more acceptable than now, but it was still criticized a good bit.

      • Squirrel@thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        17 days ago

        You’re absolutely right. I meant it was “acceptable” – I don’t recall hearing people judged for saying it, but that was among an immature, high school crowd. It was definitely considered offensive to use as a label, rather than an insult (which was on the same level as f*g; not acceptable, but commonplace).

  • RogueBanana@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    17 days ago

    As someone who learned English through internet, I just thought it had the same meaning as idiot. Took me a long time to actually know the correct meaning.

  • moonburster@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    17 days ago

    I guess I’m getting too old. Is everyone these days offended by crumbs? And don’t come in with your vocabulary evolves, works both ways. Were I live everyone uses a multitude of slurs and nobody is hurt in the process, but if they do. Then they open their mouth and we have a civilized discussion about it. We’re nearing a point of a privacy invaded society by the people and not the governments at this rate, everyone is opinionated about everything and hurt in the feelings if someone doesn’t adhere to their vision on reality.

    • buttfarts@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 days ago

      Me and my friends were all the 1980’s definition of retarded. We all informed each other of this fact constantly. You know who was never ever called retarded??? The kids with learning disabilities. They never got that label because it was always used to refer to hyperactive dumbass sugar junkies causing needless mayhem while hurting themselves in the process. Those were the “retards” as per the common usage at the time.

      • Jennykichu@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        17 days ago

        How would you feel if something you couldn’t change about yourself was used by your peers as an insult? You really don’t see how using the word “retarded” as a stand-in for “stupid” is still an insult to people with mental disabilities? If someone was acting stupid and you said they were acting “like a Chinese person” that’s still insulting to Chinese people even if the person you’re targeting isn’t Chinese.

        Also I’m calling shenanigans on “the 1980s definition”. I am the same age as you and I was taught it was cruel to use the word that way back then.

    • TheHarpyEagle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      17 days ago

      The issue is, though you may make a distinction between “I’m using this slur as an insult and not against its targeted oppressed minority”, bigots make no such distinction. Hearing others use the slur and normalize it emboldens these bigots to use it against vulnerable minorities, backing up to “I didn’t mean it that way” when they get called out. The word’s legacy also tangles with a fair bit of racism, as children of minority races were often labeled “mentally retarded” for poor English skills or just so they could be shuffled out of class after school segregation was ended. It’s just a word, yes, but one with a lot of ugly history in the US at the very least.

      Plus, the dislike of the word really isn’t new, it just has more support these days. We have lots of other words to choose from, what’s the harm in avoiding this one?

      • MentorKitten@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        17 days ago

        Is it okay if I direct it towards myself even if I’m not the targeted oppressed minority. Like “damn I’m a retard”, since that’s basically the only way I use the word anyhow.

      • moonburster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        17 days ago

        I think that’s why I also don’t have this understanding for it, I’m not a native English speaker and our language has a ton of curse words. Cursing with disease is frowned upon more than other words

    • spujb@lemmy.cafeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 days ago

      this post is literally the definition of me opening my mouth and having a civilized discussion about it. pls respect that. :)