main
side
curve
  1. In Memory of LAJ_FETT: Please share your remembrances and condolences HERE

Use of the word "retarded" as a put down.

Discussion in 'Communications' started by Queen_Pixie, Apr 5, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. BobTheGoon

    BobTheGoon Moderator Emeritus star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Sep 21, 2000
    If they can't PM a mod, they probably aren't reading the boards anyway.

    And thus don't require respect or consideration. Gotcha.

    It isn't as if by saying "that's retarded" everyone is saying "that has the same worth as someone with a mental handicap," they're just saying "that's dumb." There's a difference between retardation and mental retardation, and it sounds like a lot of people are automatically assuming that everyone is out to offend mentally retarded people.

    I doubt that's the case.


    Ignorance is no excuse. And would you mind explaining the difference between retardation and mental retardation? I'm assuming you mean "retardation" has some meaning in the context in which it is most used and which was not likely to have evolved from the association with mental retardation. Because I'm sure mental retardation never enters anyone's heads when they hear the word retard. Not anymore, at least!
     
  2. BobTheGoon

    BobTheGoon Moderator Emeritus star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Sep 21, 2000
    To those of you who have claimed that the actual MEANING of retraded has changed int he vernacular, to those who claim that it is no longer associated with the mentally handicapped when spoken jovially and between friends and not in a slur aimed towards actual mentally retarded individuals, I ask you....what would be the best way to PROVE that the word has lost all connection with the mentally handicapped when used in popular vernacular?

    I would submit that popular Hollywood films are the most diverse but most accurate way of judging the accessibility, connotation and spread of popular words, terms and phrases. I'll invite you to take a look at IMDb's list of popular quotes that contain the word "retarded". We decided earlier that calling someone a retard is akin to calling them an idiot, and so must be considered a flame, but here is that list anyway.

    Looking over them I'm sure you'll see plenty of evidence that calling someone or something "retarded" has no connotations of or connections with mentalretardation.
     
  3. RogueScribner

    RogueScribner Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jan 17, 2004
    "Retarded" is not an insult in and of itself. There is a context that must be considered. English is an ever evolving language. Words change and lose their meaning. This word should be treated like any other. If it's used in a flaming fashion against another user, send a warning or ban. If it's simply a statement of opinion ("That movie was retarded."), while it may not be in the best taste, it is not profane so it should be tolerated.

    This word is not against the TOS or ROC. I don't think it should be either. It's in common usage among many people nowadays. It might be considered slang, but since when has slang been wholly offensive? Why shouldn't the word be stripped of meaning? Isn't it more appropriate to refer to "the retarded" as "mentally challenged," "mentally disabled," or "handicapped?" I work in the service industry, and my company would have my head on a stick if I used the word "retarded" to refer to a disabled person. It's viewed as an insult. So if it's deemed offensive to use the term in reference to them, why should it also be offensive to use the term in reference to someone or something else in a differing context? Is the word itself bad? Is it the N-word for disabled people? If so, outlaw it now in all contexts. But I don't believe that to be true.

    People can choose to be offended for any number of reasons. They can also choose not to let a word have power of them. Who is getting offended here? Not the people supposedly being defended. You can't dictate taste (especially on these boards!). All you can do is be the best poster you can and encourage others to follow suit. Everything else simply has to be tolerated. The PC police should have no place on these boards.

    L8r
     
  4. RogueScribner

    RogueScribner Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jan 17, 2004
    Bob, I perused that list and found the contexts and intents behind those quotes varying. Some used the word in proper context, whether they referenced actual mentally challenged people or not. Some used it offensively in proper context (for comedic purposes). Some used it to mean "dumb" or "stupid."

    Is the argument that offensive proper context is more desirable than generalizing the term? Seriously, I want to know. I don't understand how generalization is a bad thing, especially considering that the term is being phased out in polite circles. At least where I live.

    L8r
     
  5. BobTheGoon

    BobTheGoon Moderator Emeritus star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Sep 21, 2000
    I work in the service industry, and my company would have my head on a stick if I used the word "retarded" to refer to a disabled person. It's viewed as an insult.

    But you would feel comfortable putting it on a memo or using it when giving a company meeting or speech? Do you use the word around clients?

    So if it's deemed offensive to use the term in reference to them, why should it also be offensive to use the term in reference to someone or something else in a differing context?

    So by your logic I should be able to refer to my n***er computer acting stupid and you won't get offended, right?

    Bob, I perused that list and found the contexts and intents behind those quotes varying. Some used the word in proper context, whether they referenced actual mentally challenged people or not. Some used it offensively in proper context (for comedic purposes). Some used it to mean "dumb" or "stupid."


    Exactly. So obviously it must still have some offensive meaning. It hasn't been stripped of it's offensive connotations as so many have claimed.

    Is the argument that offensive proper context is more desirable than generalizing the term?Seriously, I want to know. I don't understand how generalization is a bad thing,


    No, offensive proper context is often more offensive. If I went around calling everyone who did something stupid "Down syndrome Boy" I'd get punched in the face. And generalizing the word is just lazyness and ignorance. Why should that be encouraged?

    especially considering that the term is being phased out in polite circles. At least where I live

    And like I asked before, if the word is being phased out in polite circles do you feel comfortable reassociating it with stupid? Do you use the word around your clients or customers at work?
     
  6. Darth_Ignant

    Darth_Ignant Jedi Grand Master star 7

    Registered:
    Oct 24, 2001
    "So obviously we must start allowing "gay" to be used negatively, right? 98% of the population uses it, who cares what the other 2% think? "

    Absolutely. Those 2% are being overly sensitive. I agree with Sapient, who says:

    I consider the use of the word 'gay' in a derogatory manner no different than a user choosing to use the word 'retarded' in a derogatory manner.


    And as I think retarded is okay, I think gay is too.
     
  7. RogueScribner

    RogueScribner Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jan 17, 2004
    I work in the service industry, and my company would have my head on a stick if I used the word "retarded" to refer to a disabled person. It's viewed as an insult.

    But you would feel comfortable putting it on a memo or using it when giving a company meeting or speech? Do you use the word around clients?

    I feel comfortable using it in casual conversation with friends and coworkers. I don't generally call people "retarded," but I may say that something is retarded. It's really not a word I use often, except in reference to my brother because he begs for it. :p

    Seriously, in a formal capacity it is not a word I would ever write or say. But I don't consider myself in a formal capacity when I come to these boards. It's really hard to keep that illusion after visiting some threads in 3SA or YJCC.

    So if it's deemed offensive to use the term in reference to them, why should it also be offensive to use the term in reference to someone or something else in a differing context?

    So by your logic I should be able to refer to my n***er computer acting stupid and you won't get offended, right?

    I would find that statement to be in poor taste, but I wouldn't be offended, no. But isn't that the crux of this debate? Some people think it's a matter of taste while others find it to be akin to profanity. I don't think anyone here is going to convince anyone else to think differently. The real issue is whether or not the slang version of the word should be used on these boards. I'm not bothered by it, but some are. How serious is the issue? Is it serious enough to amend the rules? Or do we simply tolerate it and try to encourage more thoughtful posting? Ideally, I'd say the latter, but, again, after reading portions of the 3SA and YJCC, that may be a tall order indeed.

    L8r
     
  8. BobTheGoon

    BobTheGoon Moderator Emeritus star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Sep 21, 2000
    Well, I appreciate you thinking it out and providing a thoughtful answer. I'm a bleeding heart on social issues, but I promise a libertarian fire burns just beneath the surface. I prefer to boycott rather than sue establishments that are intolerant or discriminate. Which is why I'm arguing so strongly about this. I don't want to leave :p

    Seriously, in a formal capacity it is not a word I would ever write or say. But I don't consider myself in a formal capacity when I come to these boards.


    That's understandable that you feel like you're in a more relaxed environment, but I must ask why you don't use it in a more formal capacity. If it's so harmless, or you don't care about offending people, shouldn't they get used to people saying it especially when not referring to people? Of course not. Because it's in poor taste, like you said. But why is it in poor taste if it doesn't carry the connotations I've been mentioning all along?
     
  9. Darth_Ignant

    Darth_Ignant Jedi Grand Master star 7

    Registered:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Okay, there are a lot of thigns not done in a formal or professional capacity that are okay informally. That goes for language, dress and behaviour in general.

    There is nothign wrong with drinking, but I don't have a bear while processing a loan application.

     
  10. -Lord-Vader-

    -Lord-Vader- Jedi Knight star 5

    Registered:
    Jan 15, 2003
  11. Darth Attorney

    Darth Attorney Jedi Master star 2

    Registered:
    Oct 24, 1999
    "We can't extend basic courtesy and human respect unless there's a squeaky wheel from someone who is personally affected?"

    Until someone with "retarded" mental capacity makes a serious and heartfelt complaint about feeling discriminated against, this entire discussion is a hypothetical one. I think that if someone complains, the administration should react. You shouldn't react prematurely to cover the remote possibility that someone might complain one day. That seems totally backwards to me.
     
  12. RogueScribner

    RogueScribner Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jan 17, 2004
    But why is it in poor taste if it doesn't carry the connotations I've been mentioning all along?

    I wouldn't say it in a formal setting because it's crude. Also, after reading this thread, I'm not sure I'll say it out of fear of offending someone now (Good job! /obi-wan). For me, there are two connotations of the word "retarded": to refer to something dumb or idiotic, and to refer to a mentally challenged person. The first meaning falls into my common usage in casual conversation and writings. The second I restrict myself from implementing.

    So you may ask, "Isn't that a double-standard?" To which I may reply, "Probably, yeah." Hey, I'm human. Not everything I do makes sense. I just know how the word falls in my vocabulary, and to use it to actually refer to a disabled person would be offensive to them and their loved ones. So I don't do it. I don't even think it. It's not a word I would use in their presence, which means I recognize the negative meaning associated with it, but that still would not stop me from using the slang otherwise.

    I believe you posted some links to how the word was still being used in official capacities in reference to the mentally challenged. If the word has such negative implications, why is it still being used in official circles? No one calls blacks (or African Americans) colored anymore, but the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) is a vital establishment to this day. Does that make it okay to refer to a black person as colored? It would be inappropriate. Out of taste, but not necessarily profane. So doesn't the same apply here? "Retarded" could be distasteful, but not profane?

    So if referring to the mentally challenged as retarded is offensive, and referring to the non-mentally challenged as retarded is offensive, where are we? Which topic would you rather see in the YJCC: "A retard hit on my sister today" or "Don't see SIN CITY: it was so Retarded!!!"? Reading the first would make me cringe a little. I'd think the second a bit crude, but that's it. Where do we want to be as a society? Do we want to be a people that refers to our less fortunate as "retarded," or a people who crudely use the slang to refer to the dumb or idiotic?

    I realize people are perhaps misappropriating the word, but there are, in my opinion, far better terms for the mentally challenged and the sooner we phase this word out of common usage in reference to them the better. Let's let this transition become the fodder for etymologists in the near future!

    Thank you. :)

    L8r

    P.S. I really liked Sin City. ;)

     
  13. BobTheGoon

    BobTheGoon Moderator Emeritus star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Sep 21, 2000
    I believe you posted some links to how the word was still being used in official capacities in reference to the mentally challenged. If the word has such negative implications, why is it still being used in official circles? No one calls blacks (or African Americans) colored anymore, but the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) is a vital establishment to this day. Does that make it okay to refer to a black person as colored? It would be inappropriate. Out of taste, but not necessarily profane. So doesn't the same apply here? "Retarded" could be distasteful, but not profane?

    It has nothing to do with that. "Retarded" is not a slur, it's a medical term. There is nothing wrong with the word retarded. It is the intent behind the use of the word. "That kid on 'Life Goes On' is a freakin retard" would be offensive. For many, the word has become a source of derision and disgust. It would be the same if everyone started using "African American" or "Jewish" to describe everything they dislike. Is that fair to Jews or black americans?

    So if referring to the mentally challenged as retarded is offensive, and referring to the non-mentally challenged as retarded is offensive, where are we?

    Using retarded when discussing mentally retarded people is not offensive in and of itself. You have to use discretion to infer the meaning behidn the words. If someone says "The mentally retarded are unfairly discriminated against" that would be fine. Saying " There are moves within the medical community to move towards more specific language, but I would hazard a guess that its because of the negative connotations associated with the word.

    Which topic would you rather see in the YJCC: "A retard hit on my sister today" or "Don't see SIN CITY: it was so Retarded!!!"? Reading the first would make me cringe a little. I'd think the second a bit crude, but that's it. Where do we want to be as a society? Do we want to be a people that refers to our less fortunate as "retarded," or a people who crudely use the slang to refer to the dumb or idiotic?

    I'd like neither, but like I said "retarded" is an accepted medical term. I'm protesting its reappropriation to represent everything that is bad when there is no possible way to reconcile it's slang use with it's definition whether one is referring to the mentally handicapped or not. Last I checked, Sin City was the full two hours it said it was in the paper. It was not cut short or delayed.

    I realize people are perhaps misappropriating the word, but there are, in my opinion, far better terms for the mentally challenged and the sooner we phase this word out of common usage in reference to them the better. Let's let this transition become the fodder for etymologists in the near future!

    The only reason you consider the word bad when referring to the mentally retarded because of the massive effort by pop culture to reappropriate the word to mean "bad" or "stupid". The trend was started by people who wanted to feel better about themselves by putting down the disabled. I'm not saying that that is what people who use the word now are feeling, but there are some, and that IS how it started. People were annoyed or felt threatened by the prospect of mental retardation, people who had it were different and "weird", and so it became synonymous with everything we hate or want to ostracize.

    But you're right, it's a good idea to encourage these things. Or at least stand by and let them happen.
     
  14. Darth Attorney

    Darth Attorney Jedi Master star 2

    Registered:
    Oct 24, 1999
    So hey, Bob, are you arguing because you feel passionatley about the plight of the retarded and their subjugation by this vicious and disturbing social practice?

    Or are you arguing for arguement's sake?

    Either way, I think this is the point that y'all take this into MS and sort it out.
    Pop in the next hot, fresh MS update and let us go on with our lives.

    :)
     
  15. Kimball_Kinnison

    Kimball_Kinnison Jedi Grand Master star 6

    Registered:
    Oct 28, 2001
    BobTheGoon posted on 4/10/05 10:42pm
    [b]If they can't PM a mod, they probably aren't reading the boards anyway. [/b]

    And thus don't require respect or consideration. Gotcha. [hr][/blockquote]

    Actually, it is a very clear board policy that we only protect registered users from flames. We don't protect anyone else. That means that a person can flame many SW authors ("Zhan [sic] is an idiot"), actors ("Jake Lloyd is stupid"), the person down the street ("My neighbor is the dumbest person I ever met"), political figures (see also, election threads in the Senate, Bush jokes) or anyone else who is not a registered user here.

    So, quite frankly, according to the rules, it doesn't matter whether it is considered flaming people who are not on the boards. Registered users is where we draw the line.

    Kimball Kinnison
     
  16. BobTheGoon

    BobTheGoon Moderator Emeritus star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Sep 21, 2000
    So hey, Bob, are you arguing because you feel passionatley about the plight of the retarded and their subjugation by this vicious and disturbing social practice?

    Quite frankly, yes. It disturbs the hell out of me. The same with suing "gay" to describe everything people hate. It's dehumanizing, and amazingly disrespectful. The last time I checked one did not have to be personally affected by things to feel passionately about them, but in this case I do have a mentally retarded aunt and I'm keenly aware of how she is treated when in public.

    So, quite frankly, according to the rules, it doesn't matter whether it is considered flaming people who are not on the boards. Registered users is where we draw the line.

    So if someone were to say "Kimball Kinnison's mother is an idiot" you'd have no grounds for recourse?
     
  17. Darth Attorney

    Darth Attorney Jedi Master star 2

    Registered:
    Oct 24, 1999
    Where's the connection with retards here?
     
  18. BobTheGoon

    BobTheGoon Moderator Emeritus star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Sep 21, 2000
    Darth Attorney posted on 4/11/05 9:40am
    Where's the connection with retards here?
    [hr][/blockquote]

    KK is saying politics stops at the waters edge. Apparently we don't protect anyone who isn't a registered member here. So, if 7 months ago both President Bush and John Kerry registered on these boards and their identities were verified all political flamewars would have to stop. It also means, apparently, that an actual mentally retarded person will have to register and lodge a complaint before any action is considered. Since I don't see that happening any time soon I guess we're at an impasse.
     
  19. DarthSapient

    DarthSapient Jedi Youngling star 10

    Registered:
    Jun 26, 2001
    I guess I've lost track of the intent and direction of the thread. I know at least once I've said how we handle this and will continue to handle this in very simple, plain English. Now we're in some sort of never-ending political and philosophical debate. What is it we're working on at this point? You guys are writing tomes here. The regular users in this thread have basically bowed out last week and now it's the mods debating it. The thread would sink, you know, if it weren't for us.
     
  20. Kimball_Kinnison

    Kimball_Kinnison Jedi Grand Master star 6

    Registered:
    Oct 28, 2001
    So if someone were to say "Kimball Kinnison's mother is an idiot" you'd have no grounds for recourse?

    That would be allowable under the rules for flaming. Whether it would consittute baiting or not would be a different matter, and would depend on the context.

    KK is saying politics stops at the waters edge. Apparently we don't protect anyone who isn't a registered member here. So, if 7 months ago both President Bush and John Kerry registered on these boards and their identities were verified all political flamewars would have to stop.

    That is exactly what the policy is. Our job is only to protect registered users against flaming. It's not our job to protect everyone else.

    That's why we still allow people to go around with "Bush is an idiot" sigs, and similar statements. Those are clearly flames, but they aren't directed at registered users, and so they are permitted. Anything else would be unworkable, from a moderation standpoint.

    Kimball Kinnison
     
  21. Darth Attorney

    Darth Attorney Jedi Master star 2

    Registered:
    Oct 24, 1999
    No, he's saying that you can only flame registered users. How that impacts on "retarded" being used as a put down I don't understand.

    Either "retarded" goes on the naughty word list (along with **** and ****) or we lock this thread and go on with our very serious interweb business.
     
  22. DarthSapient

    DarthSapient Jedi Youngling star 10

    Registered:
    Jun 26, 2001
    True to a point. If someone goes beyond 'idiot' about Bush or threatens him, we have responsibilities. Regarding the word 'retarded', aren't we done? Or do we have 200 more pages of beating it into the ground?
     
  23. Darth Attorney

    Darth Attorney Jedi Master star 2

    Registered:
    Oct 24, 1999
    I vote ground beating but I'm not really fussed.
     
  24. EagleIFilms

    EagleIFilms Jedi Grand Master star 5

    Registered:
    Apr 6, 2001
    Conclusion:

    We can put 'Bush is a retarded tranny bitch' in our sig, unless George Bush, a mentally retarded person, transgendered person, or a female dog sign up and then lodge a complaint.

    K. As long as we've got that clear.

    Lock 'er up, Sape.
     
  25. BobTheGoon

    BobTheGoon Moderator Emeritus star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Sep 21, 2000
    I've made my argument. I've made it about two dozen times. I'll follow the judgment of the administration and simply ask for a clarification of policy in the next modsquad update.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.