lemmy user(ule)s: "this sign won't stop me because i can't read"
lemmy user(ule)s: "this sign won't stop me because i can't read"
You're viewing a single thread.
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?
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.
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?
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?
yes haha
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.
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.
correct
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.
Intent doesn't really matter if the entire butt of the joke is that this person is asking like a "lesser" group.
Even if intent did matter... How would a passive observer be able to tell if the person meant it or not? You really can't without knowing both parties involved, their history together, and if that person regularly does similar styles of joke.
It's easier to just pick a different word to insult someone's intelligence instead of one that's designed to hurt a specific group of people.
When someone uses this word in the pejorative out of an abundance of ignorance, and they are met with a response that is equal to that of someone saying it deliberately to denigrate all mentally challenged individuals, well, then we have a problem. I would argue that intent very much matters here in this situation, and I'll tell you why...
When any of us treats another human being as the sum of our own fears (collective or personal) for the words they have selected, then we project something far worse than reality on that individual. By doing so, we risk weaponizing political correctness into a tribal position. What I mean by this is that you radicalize someone, rather than educate them. They become offended, rather than enlightened.
In today's society, one's chastisement in this manner could literally push someone on the fence into voting for someone like Donald Trump. This is because there's a serious counter-culture push going on in response to campaigns like this one. You don't have to like what I'm saying, but I do implore everyone to understand this reality.
It's better to tolerate words like this one to a degree, and to do good where and when you can. It is a moderate approach to a society that is becoming ever-more polarized and radicalized. If we can't start here, then I'm not sure where we can start. We need to treat people with more compassion - we need to accept that intent is very important, and we need to a give people the benefit of the doubt (to a degree, of course).
There are two types of people that use slurs to talk about other folk.
The first group is made up of folk who don't give a fuck if they're hurting others.
The second group is made up of folk who don't realise the slur is a slur or don't understand why the slur is harmful.
The second group appreciates being informed about the consequences of their words so they can change course.
People in the first group that are pretending they're in the second group get angry when called out. But they were always the first group.
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.
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.
Your submission in "lemmy user(ule)s: "this sign won't stop me because i can't read"" was removed - Using disability as an insult is not ok, end of story.
fuck off, you don't get to hop on a high horse here. you don't get to turn it around when you're straight up refusing to reflect on your own behaviour. i'm sure you think you're being very clever, but i can guarantee what you're doing right now is such common bigot behaviour that the people in this thread see right through it.
you feel like you should be allowed to use a slur. extremely weird, but alright. the people around you will, however, react accordingly. you're not special.
We probably wont convince you in these comments, but using someone's condition as an insult to someone else can definitely hurt them. It can seem like an unimportant issue when it doesn't directly affect you. I remember as a kid, I had friends with disabled family members who got really upset when others used the r-word. When it affects you directly it becomes a lot more clear.
based
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.
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
It's only an "established slur" to some people (mostly in online niche communities), to a lot of people it's just everyday speech. Words such as retarded, special needs, intellectually disabled, moron, imbecile and more are all terms used to describe a disability, just like "blind". I'm tired of this artificially accelerated pejoration sped along by people who just want to correct others to feel good about themselves, the euphemism treadmill for people with intellectual disabilities in particular spins faster than for any other topic. We haven't invented 15 different phrases for blind in the last 50 years, there's no reason to do it for disabled brains any more than for disabled eyeballs.
Instead that energy should be focused on ensuring people don't use someone's disability to put the disabled person down. Those people are the real problem, not normal folks criticizing people for their shitty behaviors they can control, not immutable characteristics about themselves.
It’s only an “established slur” to some people
false. 🥰 blocked for continuing to vehemently defend your right to say slurs.
Foolish seems like a useful word, probably could be substituted and keep the intended meaning intact.
gets cut off
FOOL OF A TOOK
That is infinitely funnier, using solely LoTR quotes would make road rage much more humorous
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.
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.
i’m glad you can find humor in it but it’s also important that you shouldn’t tell others when to not feel offended
which you are doing with the phrase “some people need to take a step back.” that’s a really unkind thing to say.
(edited for clarity because i misspoke 🙂)
I could not agree more! I hope you re-read what you just wrote.
Edit: Wow... that was a really dishonest edit you just made. You literally edited your comment so it looks like I'm conceding my position, and you didn't even put "Edit" in there. I think we're done here... if you're doing things like this, then nobody on this platform should be conversing with you seriously.
i edited my comment because i misspoke, which you accurately called out, and i thanked you for. please be kind.
edited, thank you
I've reported you for that. No person on Lemmy should be permitted to edit their comment to make the person they are having a cordial exchange with seem like they agreed to something they didn't agree to.
I saw you block others in this thread purely because they disagreed with you, so this isn't too shocking... but still, shame on you.
bro i literally just misspoke and fixed my error please stop being mean
I prefer to tell people they're being foolish. Foolish is something we all do, and one can snap out of it.
I've come to use this more as well. There's never a real need to insult someone's intelligence, but there is often a need to point out when someone is acting like a fool.
Seems like a good word, I like that
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.
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".
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.
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?
I like area-of-effect damage as a framing device.
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.
Edit: This needs more context... please refer to my expansive explanation here: https://sh.itjust.works/comment/12210243
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.
no one cared until
literally misinformation. rosa’s law was passed in 2009, four years before the incident you cite.
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.
law reflects society. just providing a timeline for things, the word as an insult was a problem starting well into the 90s so it’s absolutely absurd to blame it on sarah palin in 2013.
if you think people started saying r-word in the 70s you're out of your mind
sorry *90s that was a typo
ok, but the r word was very much acceptable through the early 2000s. it was even casually used on tv.
ok, but so was the n-word with a slightly different timeline. none of this invalidates my statement that sarah palin has nothing to do with it.
That clip is so funny
This is my take on it. Moron evolved to be a more general term associated with anyone acting foolish. It evolved to the point that nobody really associates it as a word targeted directly at intellectualy disabled folks. The r-word was always more commonly understood as "the word you would say to a disabled person if you wanted to hurt them the most". Because of this people who use it weren't/aren't given the benefit of the doubt that they're just being hyperbolic and not actually a bigot directly to disabled people. Why did one evolve to be more hurtful than the other? I'm not sure. There's probably a parallel universe out there where the reverse scenario exists.
Edit: nvm, disregard. just realized this post is 10d old and people already articulated what I intended much better than me.