What’s the next euphemism we should switch to?
For a while there in the 90’s, “differently abled” looked like it was next on the treadmill.
Words for stupid or crazy are always going to be used as insults.
What’s the next euphemism we should switch to?
For a while there in the 90’s, “differently abled” looked like it was next on the treadmill.
Words for stupid or crazy are always going to be used as insults.
There's a historical cycle where the helping professions rotate the terminology out, as the wider culture overloads the old terms with insulting usage. Eventually the new vernacular leaks out into general parlance and the cycle cycles. "Retarded" was once acceptable clinical terminology because "idiot, "moron", and "imbecile" had accumulated cultural baggage. The latter terms were, themselves, once politically correct alternatives to even older terms.
I think it's naive to think that THIS time is special, and today's politically correct terminology won't ever leak out into common usage as a slur too.
If a group of people are telling me this word was and continues to be used as a dehumanizing slur, that’s enough for me to look into a vocabulary change. More importantly, the very existence of a euphemism treadmill shows that you can’t stop at language change, and that disabled people need to be much more fully accepted in society.
I got a lot of hate in this thread but I agree with you. We need to much more accepting of people in society disabled or just different. A word change makes you feel good but doesn't actually do anything. A business with a curb should be required to have a ramp also, for wheelchairs. I wish there was a some sort of option for drive-thru for deaf people. A person with autism who gets overly stimulated by people close should be allowed to ask for personal distance.
Placing bets. 30 years from now "Autistic" is going to be on the same chopping block. It's already making it's rounds as a general insult with the kids, just like retarded did when I was growing up.
If anything isn't using the currently still correct medical term as an insult more offensive than using the outdated one that has become a generic insult? At least as far as being offensive to people with the condition, rather than those offended on their behalf.
Which gets to the larger problem - the dehumanization of people with intellectual and cognitive disabilities. Being such a person is considered such a bad thing that it can be used as an insult. Whatever terminology we use, people with cognitive delays are just as human, just as valuable as anyone else.
Being such a person is considered such a bad thing that it can be used as an insult.
I mean, yes? Ultimately that's exactly what an insult is. Think of the other words we use as curses and insults. Asshole. Mother fucker. Bitch. Cunt. Dick. Shit(head). Dumbass. Pendejo. Cabron.
Do you want to be something stinky (asshole, cunt, dick, shit), or something disliked (bitch, mother fucker)? Do you want to be like the people who the terms moron, idiot, imbecile, retarded, handicapped, or disabled are describing? Hell, extend it to other things. If someone 6 feet tall was calling you, a 5'4" man, a midget, it's not like your height suddenly will change if the term is accepted for you, it's because you don't want to be perceived as someone short enough to be termed appropriately as such.
And as much as we can all consider everyone human to be just as valuable as any other human, people aren't suddenly going to want to be short, or have low intelligence / ability to learn/comprehend/adapt. This is why I ultimately have given up on policing the language in general. We are forever locked into the cycle of words becoming inappropriate, because the vast majority of folks genuinely abhor the idea of becoming something like those words are describing, whether its mental ability, height, likeability, worth, etc. You're not going to change that, ever.
People with cognitive delays are just as human and just as valuable as anyone else
Precisely! 100% agree.
I also want to add that I don't disagree with people who say that there's a cyclical pattern with words becoming taboo and being replaced. That's obviously a fact. But the fact that language evolves doesn't give us license to be assholes.
Ultimately, the only thing that will improve things is educating the average person about the topic. But calling out ableist language - whether the person using such language intends that meaning or not - is often a good starting point for education (for those willing to learn.)
Also, what most people don't understand is that developmental delays and cognitive deficiencies are a spectrum and can occur across different types of cognition. For example, I'm what today you might call "doubly special" - I was far ahead in some areas but far behind in others. I still am, to a degree.
So should people use the names for people like me to refer to assholes who intentionally hurt other people's feelings? I certainly wouldn't like it if they did. Regardless of how much I might accidentally piss people off or hurt their feelings, it's rarely my intention to make people feel that way and and I'd rather not have someone else's moral failing conflated with my struggle to communicate in ways most people understand.
I think it's naive to think that THIS time is special, and today's politically correct terminology won't ever leak out into common usage as a slur too.
I think it's naive to think that at those times in the past the people who used clinical terms as insults weren't doing something bad so that we shouldn't worry about it happening today.
Right, so then we rotate words again. This isn't hard. We're not trying to find the One True Politically Correct Term; we're arguing that one (1) specific word has a negative bias and we need to stop using it.
Ironically, the term "mental retardation" was introduced by medical and educational professionals as a less derogatory and more objective replacement for older, highly stigmatizing terms like idiot, moron, and imbecile, which themselves were previous medical classifications.
I think about this a lot. I feel like it essentially means the middle school bullies of today drive the slurs of tomorrow.
I think we should go back to learning the old adage "sticks and stones can break my bones but words can never hurt me"
Hell, anymore I chuckle inwardly when someone in-person resorts to any subtle sophistry like ad-hom.
Now I'm free to play games with you rather than stay on the subject in front of us.
I have siblings, we were like wolves growing up. Don't dare show a weak spot, or that button will get pushed, repeatedly.
Someone tries to shame me, or goad me, oh what fun I shall have with them!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retard_(pejorative)
For context, until the 1960s, the terms moron, idiot, cretin, and imbecile were all genuine, non-offensive terms used, including by psychiatrists, to refer to people with mental intellectual disabilities and low intelligence. These words were discontinued in that form when concerns arose that they had developed negative meanings, with "retard" and "retarded" replacing them.[6][7] After that, the terms "handicapped" (United States) and "disabled" (United Kingdom) replaced "retard" and "retarded". Disabled is now considered a more polite term than handicapped in the United States as well.
And then in a decade or two people will have started to use the word disabled with a derogatory meaning and we can no longer use that word either.
The same with "mentally challenged"
It has already started. It will start immediately with whatever word they come up with to replace it. If someone is being particularly stupid, someone else will find the strongest word they can to insult them. This will never change.
Already happening, and already being railed against. You can read a great many arguments from certain communities that decry anyone calling them disabled or handicapped.
It’s already started with sped
i'm austistic and love the word retard, really don't understand peoples need to be offended for others. it's not remotely close to the n-word, saying "r-word" just makes you seem like a tool imo
Look we can't call each other retards because other people will get triggered for us...
Besides every sane person knows that in common speech this is just means "extremely stupid" with no derogatory intent.
"extremely stupid" with no derogatory intent.
I think you should look up the definition of derogatory. Calling someone stupid is derogatory.
How else would you refer to people with below average critical thinking skills who perform actions without understanding or considering the consequences.
Please keep your answer non-derogatory.
I meant derogatory towards disabled people.
Riiiiight, in the same way people used to pair it with motions mimicking cerebral palsy? Do you also believe that didn't have derogatory intent towards people with disabilities and only meant "extremely stupid"? 🙄
motions mimicking cerebral palsy
I've no idea what that even is. Sounds like some pseudo science
You don't remember when people used to imitate spasticity by curling their hands and whacking their chests while changing their voice? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spastic_cerebral_palsy It was extremely common to do when calling people that word.
You don't remember when people used to imitate spasticity
I don't. Never even heard about that disease.
BTW: People over internet don't know who you are, what race you are, and what disabilities you have. If you get called a brain dead retard, it because some dumb shit you wrote. Nothing less, nothing more
I'm 33 years old and grew up in the southeast US. Maybe it's a generational or regional thing or maybe I just grew up around some genuinely hateful people, but calling people that word was very commonly paired with other things you can't just explain away. Terms like "sped" (short for special education which was the term for the special courses people with disabilities went through in school), "short bus" (referring to the school buses that were shorter and used for children with special needs), and others were used. Actions like mimicking the voice impairments or movement impairments of people with disabilities was common. All of these things were, just like the one word this thread is about, just like people are saying it's used today, "just" meant to insult people for being stupid.
You should look up context clues
But OP worked with "intellectually challenged" ???
Jfc can't even call myself retarded without offending an unrelated neuro-typical "standing up" for us.
I've stopped using it as people have pointed out it's hurtful, but I've never fully understood why. To me it's in the same group as idiot, fool, lunatic, imbecile and cretin. Words that aren't used to describe conditions anymore, only used as insults. While they can be used with hatred, they can also be used in a teasing way with friends. To me it doesn't reach the level of racist, sexist and homophobic slurs.
I wanted to learn more and found a paper that makes the case that ableist insults are slurs. Download it here
I think it's more about the idea that it's shameful to be less able than someone else. The core idea here is that there's nothing wrong with being less intelligent than average, and calling out people's choice of words is only one part of that.
It's like when people make fun of Trump's weight/diet or RFK Jr.'s voice. I dislike those two just as much as the next person, but there's nothing immoral or shameful about having a vocal condition, being overweight, or having a monotonous diet. And any health concerns (e.g. weight) should be left between a person and their doctor.
If you choose to make those things a subject of your ridicule, all it does is mark you as a shallow person, and I'm probably going to tune you out as someone who doesn't have anything of substance to say.
I think it's more about the idea that it's shameful to be less able than someone else. The core idea here is that there's nothing wrong with being less intelligent than average, and calling out people's choice of words is only one part of that.
That argument isn't specific to any particular word though. You could say it about any word that insults intelligence, not just the one in question here.
To me it’s in the same group as idiot, fool, lunatic, imbecile and cretin.
Because it is: look up the origins of those words.
So the solution to mean people co-opting medical language to be bullies is to ....move to another term and change the vernacular we accept from doctors so they use different words the bullies can then co-opt?
Have you tried an approach that isn't running and hiding?
Hi, healthcare worker here. The r-slur hasn't been used in the medical profession for decades. But hey, feel free to come up with more justifications for why it's totally fine for you to call people slurs.
Have you tried an approach that isn’t running and hiding?
How brave and courageous of you to checks notes use slurs.
These stupid wars on words IMHO is the reason why "liberals" were regarded as a joke prior to trump election
Like banning "master" in github as well as dumb, regex based words filters in chats. Oh you want to mention the "beta version"? Too bad, a social justice warrior decided that "beta" is now offensive, you have to change your language so that you wont affect the hypothetic easily offendable persons
Like banning "master" in github as well as dumb
Master wasn't banned. The default name was changed from master to main. Literally nothing is stopping you from choosing to use master.
While this is technically correct, when you say "we're switching the default branch name from master to main to be less culturally insensitive", you kind of imply that people who continue using master are culturally insensitive. And nobody likes being called that (generally), so it still feels like a ban to people.
That implication is correct?
Look, if it's pointed out that "x" makes some minorty uncomfortable, but you keep using "x", you are culturally insensitive to that minority. You can choose to be, nobody would care if you're not a person/company with milliona of followers.
That's entirely assuming that there indeed is a sizeable minority that have reason to be offended and indeed are offended. In the cited example above, that wasn't the case so there was significant controversy surrounding what was perceived as "performative activism" that benefitted noone.
"We're switching from master to main" was controversial? My god, people must've been bored out of their fucking minds.
You know how a normal person would react to this? 'k.'
That's entirely assuming that there indeed is a sizeable minority that have reason to be offended and indeed are offended. In the cited example above, that wasn't the case
A 1s websearch says this is false. BLM movement is definitely a "sizable minority" whatever that means.
You know how a normal person would react to this? 'k.'
I reacted like this too. But you I don't think the opponents had invalid arguments to be honest. It was mostly:
Lack of an actual outcry to change it.
'Master' in git did not have any connotations to slavery, so there was no reason to be offended by it (different from eg master/slave databases or something).
The change was hamfisted through without the community actually finding consensus and agreeing with the change.
It invalidates 15 years of git tutorials, which is confusing for newbies.
The defaults for git mismatched with the default in github, which as a very large player put undue corporate pressure on the git project to go along with the change.
Changing the branch name does have impact on users, which without a good reason to change it is unnecessary.
And the big one: the rename is just performative. If you want to address inequality in tech, make sure people of colour get the same access and opportunities that white people get. Github in particular was ridiculed because they pretended to be so socially conscious, but as it turns out despite having black employees, not one of them had managed to promote into a management function at the time. They put up a smokescreen but did not make any actually impactful changes that improved the position of people of colour, and in doing so abused the BLM movement for PR purposes.
A 1s websearch says this is false. BLM movement is definitely a "sizable minority" whatever that means.
BLM didn't advocate for this though! Microsoft/Github sort of assumed they would, so decided to change it. But I can't find any actual outcry that it should be changed from those who were supposedly offended by the term.
Fair points.
Weirdly, that BLM source in wikipedia led nowhere. My fault for not checking.
However performative it may have seen at the time, I'm glad the terms are gone. Master/slave was particularly uncomfortable to use for me personally (I mainly associate it with BDSM)
Yeah I don't mind it changing either, but unfortunately people who disagreed with the process here were imo unfairly criticised.
I certainly hope Big Tech will get properly scrutinized in future for this stuff, so that they take proper meaningful action instead of causing a ruckus like this.
While they are incorrect about the specific term, their main point is correct. "Slave" was removed from the terminology. Same with Blacklist and Whitelist. They are no longer the preferred terms.
Wait, you're not supposed to say blacklist and whitelist anymore? Shit.
Now it's CaucasianList and AfricanAmericanList.
Nope. Blocklist and Allowlist I believe. Because despite having no racist origins, "black" being the "bad" list and "white" being the "good" list made some people uncomfortable. It's the perfect example of meaningless surface level changes imo
I used to have a word for how ridiculous this is but the op said I shouldn’t use it anymore
Yeah I mean if that's the standard I'm fine with it. But as I mentioned in a reply to somebody else, to make something black you don't add darkness, you subtract light. So inherently black is subtraction and white is addition. Saying that addition is good and subtraction is bad is like a weird byproduct of "positive" meaning good and "negative" meaning bad, when they are just numbers on either side of zero.
Colors are additive or subtractive depending on the medium, so you are entirely wrong here and just spouting nonsense, fyi. Paints are additive, light is subtractive. All colors of light makes white and all colors of paint makes black.
Why does one automatically associate black with bad and white with good? Think about it.
Remember that we also do things subliminally. So black = bad rubs off on people who can be called "black".
It's almost like it's a common theme that dark, dingy, places are associated with danger and bright warm areas are associated with safety, life, purity, truth, etc. and when you simplify that to a basic theme, you end up with black = bad and white = good. It's a theme that springs up from nature itself.
Which further goes to my point: the words are just placeholders for feelings and emotions. So to change the words does nothing to change the feelings. If you remove all the hateful words, you won't remove hate. You'll just end up with "I hope you unalive yourself you bottom of the bell curve" instead.
Dark places aren't inherently more dangerous. Light, bright areas aren't inherently positive.
These are the subliminal ideas that were put into your head by literature, religion, popular culture, etc (that was often seeped in racism).
Just like numbers aren't inherently good or bad, but certain numbers rise associations with "good" or "bad" 3, 7, 13, 666, 777, Etc.
"Nature itself" argument is completely BS, as many animals hunt and spring to life at night, while daytime and light means danger to them.
Dark cave vs open meadow.
Clear skies vs stormy clouds.
Clear still water vs murky turbulent water.
Death and decay vs life.
But nah, I'm just making up literary themes that have existed for centuries. For fucks sake, the vast majority of horror movies rely on darkness.
The fucking yin yang is literally the fusion of light and darkness, good and evil.
You're just being intentionally obtuse or you're really that dumb that you don't get any of these themes.
Dark cave vs open meadow.
When you're a rodent?
Clear skies vs stormy clouds.
When you're stranded in the desert?
Clear still water vs murky turbulent water.
When you're a fish?
Death and decay vs life.
How does that have anything to do with black/white?
But nah, I'm just making up literary themes that have existed for centuries. For fucks sake, the vast majority of horror movies rely on darkness.
The fucking yin yang is literally the fusion of light and darkness, good and evil.
You're trying to disprove that it a subliminal bias induced by other people who lived a while ago by... giving me examples of it?
You're just being intentionally obtuse or you're really that dumb that you don't get any of these themes.
Oh the irony...
Additionally:
Pink is not "feminine"
Blue is not "masculine"
Since we've drifted so far from the point, let me bring us back.
You are an imbecile. A low intelligent, dimwitted individual. Someone who lacks understanding of subtext or really any basic reading comprehension. You are an overall drain on society. A moron. A few fries short of a happy meal. Your elevator doesn't go to the top floor. Lights are on, no one's home.
Now, you see how I was able to easily insult your lack of intelligence without once calling you retarded? So pray tell me, how would removing that word have changed this interaction at all? I'd still be calling you shit for brains without using the dreaded "R-word". Do you maybe see now how it's not the language, but the emotions of the person uttering them that matters? That you need to change my emotional state, not just restrict my use of words. Because as I've clearly pointed out, I can still call you a fucktard without using "retarded".
I haven't drifted from the point at all. You were confused why blacklist/whitelist were changed to blocklist/allowlist.
It seems it went over your head.
I wasn't confused. I'm the one who stated and clarified it happened. So yes, you do need reading comprehension, retard.
You replied to my my black/white comment that wasn't even a reply to you, with your astrology-or-whatever-based "black is spooky = bad :(" nonsense, you knobhead.
Jesus, some explain to this dickhead how a threaded conversation works lmao.
I mean I get it, but I never thought of it that way. Like black is the absence light or color. You don't add darkness to something to make it black, you subtract light, color, energy etc. So black is "negative". White is the opposite of black. On a color slider, it's all of everything all the way, it's "positive", and I don't mean "positive = good" way, I mean like mathematically positive, like a "+" sign. Like do electricians need to stop using black cables for negative? It just seems like a reach unless it originally had some racist etymology. Like if the term" blacklist"was originally used by restaurant owners during segregation and they didn't allow black people in, or anybody on the "blacklist" because anybody on that list should be treated as if they were black then I would be like "Oh yeah holy shit, we should definitely not use that term". But I think saying black is negative and white is positive has both scientific and mathematical origins.
I'm fine with using blocklist and allowlist. I guess I just never got the memo that we weren't supposed to use blacklist and whitelist.
You don't add darkness to something to make it black, you subtract light, color, energy etc.
Except you do, when you're using additive mixing (I.e paint)
I'm not saying it's that it's inherently racist. I'm saying that black people rightfully dislike that "black" is associated with "negative"
But I think saying black is negative and white is positive has both scientific and mathematical origins.
It has neither.
Also man in the middle changing to "on path"
New preferred term for MitM attacks is "on path" attacks, in pretty much every updated cert doctrine that discusses the concept.
Now that is dumb, way dumber than "blacklist/whitelist", "master/slave controllers". You could make it gender-neutral without even changing the acronym!
Man in the middle --> Monkey in the middle, Moron in the middle, Maggot in the middle, etc
If you want to be bureaucratic, you could just say "Attacker in the middle".
The new term is more obscure and less specific, since it does not have the "middle" component.
"X in the middle" = there's something between two points, in the middle of them.
WTF does "on path" mean? Something is on a path?
top 100 comments