Maybe an unpopular opinion:
It would be nice if the r word was not a medical condition and just a word, the word has a good sound to it in my language. I would trade easily the r word for dumb or something like that. Dumb in Portuguese is awful
No i feel you. Honestly we do need a woke slur that isn’t homophobic, racist, sexist, ableist, etc.
Piece of shit. Simple and to the point. Shit’s pretty gross and it’s universal human instinct to avoid it. Maybe even shithead if you want a single word.
Asshole. Gender neutral and not tied to ethnicity since we all have one. Maybe even going further and calling someone an asshole related condition like prolapsed rectum or hemorrhoid, things that can happen to anyone, are pretty painful and definitely to be avoided, but AFAIK were never conditions that were heavily marginalized or shamed.
Clown or fool. Clowns/fools are types of characters people played historically (and still do?), IMO it doesn’t imply anything about a person’s actual intelligence or mental state, only their actions. You’re not born a clown or fool, but you can definitely act like one. Also lends itself to a snarky 🤡 emoji I’ve seen some people here use instead of typing out an insult.
Though there could be additional context or history to any of these terms I’m not aware of that push them into one of the -ist categories, IDK I’m not a linguist.
was not a medical condition and just a word
It is just a word. It means to delay or the opposite of “advance” and is still used like that in industries like aviation and terms like fire removedant.
But when you use it to call someone stupid, that’s when you’re using it in the context of ablism and as a slur.
Similar to the term for a female dog, which is still used in veterinary medicine and research to mean an actual dog that is female. Though like the R word, the context as a slur is gradually discouraging its use even as its original meaning because people don’t want to risk having it misunderstood.
I still have such dissonance about this. I want to say “Look at this idiot” and point out something unintelligent that an objectively evil person does. But because intelligence is an inherited trait, we can only use negative language when referring to a person for evil that they do by choice? Or something? So, evil people bumbling can only be mocked for the evil intent and not for their inability to be evil with skill and intelligence?
I dunno. Trump is a numpty and if that offends the numps or whatever group that term was originally a slur for then I apologize.
edit: to be clear, the r word seems objectively shitty to use and I don’t. I just have yet to find an objective litmus test for where the line is between that and “silly” cuz I swear there’s always someone there to explain the etymology of “silly” and how it’s origins were shitty in some way
But because intelligence is an inherited trait
I don’t think this is true, practically speaking. Intelligence is like endurance running speed in that there are heritable components to it, but at the end of the day environmental factors dominate on who is or isn’t faster than another.
I can make fun of someone for being dumb in the same way that I can make fun of someone for being a slow runner. It’s only problematic when their slowness is actually caused by something out of their control, like some kind of health issue.
By this logic fat shaming is acceptable? Some people naturally have faster or slower metabolisms. But anybody can have healthy or unhealthy body weights. Some just have to work harder at it. So if somebody has a naturally fast metabolism but chooses to eat and exercise like Trump does, it’s ok to make fun of them for their weight?
By this logic fat shaming is acceptable?
I mean, yeah, in many contexts. For example, when a professional athlete shows up to training camp after putting on a bunch of fat in the off-season, that’s fair game. It’s literally their job to maintain their bodies and if we’re allowed to criticize their job performance then we’re certainly allowed to criticize their maintenance of their physical fitness. There’s obviously a clear parallel here between that and other public figures where their intelligence may be fair game for criticism.
More broadly, when people are engaged in unhealthy habits of any kind (from smoking to sleep deprivation to overwork/stress to terrible relationship decisions to unhealthy eating/exercise habits), I think it’s fair game for loved ones to point that out and encourage steering their lives back towards healthier choices. I’m not advocating that we go and make fun of strangers, the range of acceptable conversation in our day to day relationships is going to be different.
No, that’s not OK to mock people’s medical conditions, and it’s always a good idea to exercise some empathy and humility to know that things might not always be as easy for others as for yourself. But I’ve never been on board with the idea that fatness is somehow off limits, in large part that I don’t believe that most people’s fatness is inherently innate. Correlations between moving to or away from high obesity areas (most notably between countries or between significant changes of altitude, but also apparent in moves between city centers and suburban car-based communities) make that obvious that fatness is often environmental.
TLDR: I make fun of Trump’s fat ass all the time.
I know this is distilling your well stated point down too far, but I’ve always enjoyed the Forest Gump philosophy:
Stupid is as stupid does.
I don’t even believe in free will, I can’t talk shit to anyone
I agree. Furthermore, I see no difference between the “r word” and any other word that denigrates someone for their intelligence. That’s because there is effectively no difference other than a well monied campaign against that one, single word.
I accept all of those words as valid as a result. I don’t conflate them with actual horrible words with actual history, such as the n word. I’m actually quite offended that people are suggesting these are equally offensive.
People who are offended by this “r word” are idiots in my book. If the only thing that offends you about that last sentence is the “r word” bit, then you’re probably a hypocrite.
Idiot, imbecile, stupid. These are all offensive if you yell them at a neurodivergent person. So, why is only one word not okay to ever say? Why must I censor myself here in this very conversation?
The answer is money. Lots and lots of money went into a campaign against it. Also, virtue signaling. Lots of that, too. Have some moral integrity, stop this assault on semantics. It’s meant to divide people who would otherwise be united.
It’s meant to divide people who would otherwise by united.
“I want to avoid using language that offends others in order to be more inclusive and reduce division.”
“Stop being divisive!”
When Musk started using this word earlier this year, he knew what he was doing. This is a weakness to all of us who actually care about other people, and vulnerable groups. You do you, though.
To expand upon this, the reason I defend the use of this word within the context of using it to replace “stupid”, or other denigratory language targeted at intelligence, is because the majority of people alive today were raised with it not being an insult. I think it’s despicable to label people “ablest” when all they are likely doing is trying to call someone “stupid” - something that everyone seems to still agree is totally fine.
This was a common, clinical term before 10-15 years ago. It’s wrong to use against neurodivergent individuals because it over-simplifies the many different different complexities that exist within the neurodivergent community. This said, the idea it is so horrible we can’t ever utter it again is absurd. If you go back into the roots and origins of other words, such as the n-word, there is no moral justification for it’s existence. This word, however, has a justification… a strong justification.
Punishing people for using a word they don’t see as divisive is immoral, and in itself divisive.
This is complete nonsense, it was already an insult 10-15 years ago and was largely phased out because most people agreed it was problematic and offensive. Now, the right is trying to bring it back and sow division by introducing the idea that it isn’t, an effort which you are choosing to be complicit in, god knows why.
This. I think this is where that line is that I’m still trying to dial in on. To some extent, intelligence is under our control (this is why “you’re being ignorant” is legit. Some idiocy (or lack of education?) is by choice). So, maybe it’s fine to mock somebody for remaining willfully ignorant. But not ok if they’re intellectually less capable due medical/biological factors?
No wonder it’s a blurry line. This shit is ambiguous af.
I hate that this response lead with “I agree”. To me, the r word is repulsive. I hear what you’re saying about “it didn’t used to mean what it’s come to mean”. But folks use the same argument to fly the swastika and use the n word. I get where you’re coming from. But word of advice: try taking arguments that you want to use to defend one thing and see what kinds of things you don’t agree with you could use the same argument for. Legitimately a fun mental exercise and amazing way to pre-check your arguments.
Also goes for body shaming
???
Lemmy has a weird issue with being super restrictive of ableist language, beyond reasonable, in some spaces and completely ambivalent in others.
I had someone say I was as useless as accessibility kitchen items, which mostly just means I’m extremely useful to specific people and viewed as a joke by intolerant people who don’t care about others…
Weirdly good compliment. Really telling in the idiot using it.
I don’t really understand this meme. If I wanna insult someone, obviously I’m gonna use insulting language. At least that’s the easiest of a thousands possible ways to insult someone. What’s your point?
My point is that it’s not necessary to use language that puts down entire groups of people in order to offend someone. The phrase, “bigoted piece of shit,” is obviously ‘insulting language,’ but it is categorically different from calling someone a slur.
I see people going around saying that the only way they can possibly offend people with their insults is by calling them slurs. That’s nonsense. And it’s very ironic that these same people get really, really mad at me when I call them something like “bigoted piece of shit,” which just proves my point - if it were actually true that slurs are necessary to get that ‘sting,’ then they wouldn’t get so upset when I call them out for being the bigoted pieces of shit they are.
Saying that you need slurs in order to insult people is basically an invitation for people to lay into you as harshly as they like, short of using slurs. And I am more than happy to accept that invitation by calling such people what they are.
