Judge Dredd Scott posted:

yeah theres definitely a generation gap here. i'm a Late 20s Something and everybody i know was taught it was just a word you don't say

a new study bible! posted:

Have we considered the fact that the word has been successfully repurposed and it no longer is used to insult the disabled but rather the brokebrained libs who want to keep their families below the poverty line?

C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity posted:

People ask: "Who are you, to lay down who is, and who is not a Christian?": or "May not many a man who cannot believe these doctrines be far more truly a Christian, far closer to the spirit of Christ, than some who do?" Now this objection is in one sense very right, very charitable, very spiritual, very sensitive. It has every available quality except that of being useful. We simply cannot, without disaster, use language as these objectors want us to use it. I will try to make this clear by the history of another, and very much less important, word.

The word gentleman originally meant something recognisable; one who had a coat of arms and some landed property. When you called someone "a gentleman" you were not paying him a compliment, but merely stating a fact. If you said he was not "a gentleman" you were not insulting him, but giving information. There was no contradiction in saying that John was a liar and a gentleman; any more than there now is in saying that James is a fool and an M.A. But then there came people who said - so rightly, charitably, spiritually, sensitively, so anything but usefully - "Ah but surely the important thing about a gentleman is not the coat of arms and the land, but the behaviour? Surely he is the true gentleman who behaves as a gentleman should? Surely in that sense Edward is far more truly a gentleman than John?" They meant well. To be honourable and courteous and brave is of course a far better thing than to have a coat of arms. But it is not the same thing. Worse still, it is not a thing everyone will agree about. To call a man "a gentleman" in this new, refined sense, becomes, in fact, not a way of giving information about him, but a way of praising him: to deny that he is "a gentleman" becomes simply a way of insulting him. When a word ceases to be a term of description and becomes merely a term of praise, it no longer tells you facts about the object: it only tells you about the speaker's attitude to that object. (A 'nice' meal only means a meal the speaker likes.) A gentleman, once it has been spiritualised and refined out of its old coarse, objective sense, means hardly more than a man whom the speaker likes. As a result, gentleman is now a useless word. We had lots of terms of approval already, so it was not needed for that use; on the other hand if anyone (say, in a historical work) wants to use it in its old sense, he cannot do so without explanations. It has been spoiled for that purpose.

Now if once we allow people to start spiritualising and refining, or as they might say 'deepening', the sense of the word Christian, it too will speedily become a useless word. In the first place, Christians themselves will never be able to apply it to anyone. It is not for us to say who, in the deepest sense, is or is not close to the spirit of Christ. We do not see into men's hearts. We cannot judge, and are indeed forbidden to judge. It would be wicked arrogance for us to say that any man is, or is not, a Christian in this refined sense. And obviously a word which we can never apply is not going to he a very useful word. As for the unbelievers, they will no doubt cheerfully use the word in the refined sense. It will become in their mouths simply a term of praise. In calling anyone a Christian they will mean that they think him a good man. But that way of using the word will be no enrichment of the language, for we already have the word good. Meanwhile, the word Christian will have been spoiled for any really useful purpose it might have served.

Dustcat posted:

instead of inventing concepts like "euphemism treadmill" to explain your inability to stop using ableist insults, why not try growing out of the habit

[url posted:

https://thebodyisnotanapology.com/magazine/stupid-is-an-ableist-slur-breaking-down-defenses-around-ableist-language-liberating-our-words/[/url]]
�Stupid� is an Ableist Slur: Breaking Down Defenses Around Ableist Language & Liberating Our Words

August 28, 2018 by Mihran Nersesyan Leave a Comment

During the course of 2016 I saw more ableist slurs tossed around than ever before. From casual conversation to mass media broadcasts, people are referring to one another in the most dehumanizing ways possible � and throwing disabled people under the bus in the process.

I feel exhausted because it seems like no one is above it. Some of the most consistent advocates I know have regularly referred to current events as �crazy� and whatever else have you. It hurts because it feels like a betrayal every time.

That said, I understand how difficult it can be to change the way you speak. It�s extremely difficult for me personally as a neuroatypical person. I still make mistakes in instances where I know better. What�s upsetting to me is when people defend the ableist language that they use, or refuse to fully consider the possibility that they should change.

One word in particular that I have encountered some resistance around is the word �stupid�. Numerous people either don�t understand why this word is ableist or think that the value of the word supersedes the harm it causes to disabled communities.

This resistance is oddly pervasive. People who wouldn�t use the word �dumb� because it is offensive to Deaf people and people who cannot speak, or the r-word because it is offensive to people with developmental disabilities, are still willing to describe something or someone as �stupid�.

In my view, the fact that this word is a slur is self-evident. People don�t call you �stupid� unless they�re trying to put you down or undermine you. It�s an insult, and that�s reason enough to stop using it.

However, most people see the term as a legitimate expression conveying unintelligence, ignorance, foolishness, and so on. Even though other words are available, people feel that they need this one. I think it encapsulates the anger, frustration, and exasperation that they feel toward people who are behaving harmfully.

Many of us are feeling these things toward the illogical, destructive, and cruel people who endanger our safety and security. Calling those people �stupid� may be cathartic, but it doesn�t communicate as much about the problem as the other words that are available. Compared to words like �bigoted�, �belligerent�, or �thoughtless�, its only strength is that it�s demeaning.

So it�s an insult. But what makes the term ableist?

First of all, it�s used to insult people with cognitive impairments, autism, Down�s syndrome, ADD, and other developmental disabilities. That�s a good enough reason right there. Its use harms and triggers disabled people, which makes it a source of mass psychological harm for an already marginalized group.

If something is likely to upset the members of a marginalized group, just let it go. If community members and activists ask you not to use a word for this reason, just don�t use it. Listen to those people and don�t make excuses. Ignoring those requests is also ableist.

Secondly, �stupid� is ableist because it creates and enforces systemic and institutional bias. The history of disability in our society is rife with injustices based on intelligence. During the 20th century, the United States government sterilized approximately 70,000 people, starting with women who were deemed to be �imbeciles�. That�s just one example.

Here�s another: children with intellectual disabilities are at extremely high risk for abuse, including sexual assault. Women with intellectual disabilities are also at high risk for abuse, sexual assault, and domestic violence � and are underserved by inaccessible support programs.

Our culture promotes a climate of toxicity toward intellectually disabled people, and part of that is in the words we use. By condoning the casual use of ableist slurs, we tacitly permit more severe abuses. Because we undermine the people, we also undermine accountability for their abusers. We fail to construct a healing path forward.

The frustration that we feel over bigotry can be expressed in so many ways. We don�t need to rely on ableist slurs. Alternative phrases are more descriptive, and more accurate; unintelligence is not the prevailing problem with right wing extremists, for instance, nor is it the cause of their actions. Ignorance, prejudice, and disregard for the rights of others are.

Conflating harmful actions with lack of intelligence does everyone a disservice. To suggest that �stupidity� that is what makes people act badly undermines any real accountability. The causes of problematic behavior rarely have anything to do with mental acuity, and we can�t properly address harmful behavior while being so reductive about its causes. Carelessness, bias, hatred, greed, closed-mindedness, indifference � these are the traits that lead to oppression. Our intelligence is not the issue so much as our sense of compassion and justice.

A person can be unintelligent and still know right from wrong. There are people with cognitive disabilities who I respect a thousand times more than those who are supposedly more abled. They have stronger principles, seek to better themselves, and are committed to being good people. They are just capable of being sensitive and caring as everyone else. To imply that they aren�t is outrageous.

I get it. Changing the way we speak is really tough. Words are the fabric of our thoughts. Re-forming the words that we use means reshaping our minds. But that�s exactly why it�s so necessary and so potent. Just as we cannot shape a new society without fully deconstructing the old, we cannot liberate our minds without dismantling the ways we think and communicate.

It�s genuinely an enormous undertaking. But, it�s more than achievable, and it doesn�t require sacrificing anything that isn�t better left behind anyway. The most important thing is mindfulness. Actually noticing it every time we use those words is the biggest and hardest step. We�re so used to hearing them that they don�t even register.

Thinking of something different to say is also hard because the first alternatives that come to mind are often just as problematic. For instance, it�s not so uncommon for me to stop myself from saying �stupid� only to defer to �crazy� instead.

That really just drives home the point that our entire way of thinking needs to be reevaluated. So much of it is built on dehumanization. We shouldn�t put people down as a mode of criticism; that�s something we need to develop a sensitivity toward.

Throughout the course of this article, I�ve tried to use numerous different words that describe bigots truthfully and unoppressively. They are many and varied, and in my opinion, they convey much more than the word �stupid�, which is so overused that it actually conveys very little. I can�t think of a good reason why you wouldn�t use all of these other words instead. They are more impactful, and more accurate, if you care to invest in them.

Try these words on for yourself. Challenge yourself to criticize your opponents without demeaning their intelligence. Even if their actions are ridiculous, offensive, senseless, or malevolent. Pause, think about what is actually upsetting you about their behavior, and choose a different descriptor. You�ll be in solidarity with the disability community if you do.

gay_crimes posted:

why do the baby zoomers use binch, when it quite clearly is a swap in for the much feared b word? reminds me of Christians technically keeping their virginity by rear end loving

Toph Bei Fong posted:

Stereotype posted:

People say the R word all the time. This word is a derogatory and historically negative term to describe people with mental illness or for exhibiting non-conforming behavior. I think it is bad when people use it, and I think there are a lot of people who share that opinion.

Let's talk about it.

samantonio posted:

I've noticed if you discuss this with people who use slurs against others it usually starts with them not wanting to live in a world with canceled words. Then it becomes others are snowflakes. Them if you suggest just being a bigger person and not tearing down others, they bring up how the past used to allow these words. If you suggest that society grows over time and we become less accepting of hurting others they get really defensive because as it turns out they themselves are hurting. And the only way they know to make themselves feel better is to tear down others with words. So if you can work on making someone feel like they're worthwhile they can stop bullying others. It's just, at the root, a lack of self worth driving those words.

Homeless Friend posted:

i use retard because idgaf. im an rear end in a top hat, and i'll never stop being one. just that simple folks. its in vogue to argue about it recently so ive been using it more. its really weird stuff tho. like for people didn't talk about retard this long when they ate 30 day probes in that cumtown thread lol.

samantonio posted:

I've noticed if you discuss this with people who use slurs against others it usually starts with them not wanting to live in a world with canceled words. Then it becomes others are snowflakes. Them if you suggest just being a bigger person and not tearing down others, they bring up how the past used to allow these words. If you suggest that society grows over time and we become less accepting of hurting others they get really defensive because as it turns out they themselves are hurting. And the only way they know to make themselves feel better is to tear down others with words. So if you can work on making someone feel like they're worthwhile they can stop bullying others. It's just, at the root, a lack of self worth driving those words.

samantonio posted:

You're worthwhile.

Homeless Friend posted:

see but thats the thing. if your banningt he word because the most obnoxious goony fucks use it, you should just directly say so. theres a split purpose here. 1. using retard is indicative of your character 2. it violates community standards 3. you use it as a carte blanche to get rid of people who are goony fuckers u hate. might as well just be honest about which this is imo.

bird. posted:

im agitating against the self-invopved narcicissism created by society thru unabating my use of a generic insult << thats me channel8ng the spirit of louis ck using my keyboard as a oujia