Well, then I believe you are a very smart bird!
Ok, let’s say you (generic “you”…which is kinda the opposite of the Queen’s “we”) call me an idiot [don’t do it, it’s an ad hominem trap]. What is my takeaway from that? What do I infer? Do I think you think I said or did something dumb? Or do I think you think I have organic brain pathology? I think you think I said or did something dumb is the correct answer, don’t you think? (That wasn’t confusing, was it?)
I think some people like to white knight for self-glorification, with little thought toward actually helping or solving a problem that exists in reality. For example, WK shames you for using the word “idiot”, claiming Person X with cognitive disability will take offense to that word. While, in reality Person X uses the word “idiot” on a regular basis himself, because he, like the rest of us learned the word to mean “saying or doing something dumb.”
To be fair, when you call me “retarded”, i don’t think you think I have an organic brain pathology, either. What i do think is that you are comparing that me to people with an organic brain pathology, and you deem that condition reprehensible.
That is, the issue isn’t that you are insulting me. The issue is that you are insulting everyone who has an organic brain pathology. That’s why it’s an offensive slur, and not just an insult.
I think what you’re missing here is when the target of dehumanization is not the person to whom the insult is directed. [ETA: I see @puzzlegal just posted something similar above]
Suppose you have a low opinion of me, and want to insult me. Consider the potential insults troglodyte and retard. In terms of what you’re saying about me, there’s no qualitative difference between the two insults. I would not take either of them literally, obviously they are hyperbolic metaphors. And unless there were a broader context in which you were systematically bullying and persecuting me, these insults does not rise to a level of severity that I would feel dehumanized. Sure you’re insulting me, and I don’t feel great about that. But you’re just calling me some flavor of stupid. I certainly would not infer that you (for example) think I should be forcibly sterilized.
The problem with retard is that this word has an association with actual systematic dehumanization of intellectually disabled people. When used to insult me, it was a hyperbolic metaphor, so it was not dehumanizing to me. But how does that metaphor work? The metaphor references an archetype of stupidity. Troglodytes don’t care if they are used as an archetype for a negative trait, because they don’t exist. Non-human animals used as archetypes also don’t care. But intellectually disabled people sure care, as does anyone with any compassion and respect for their human dignity. And what’s far worse is that you’re referencing them as a negative archetype using a word that has a recent historical association with systematically dehumanizing them.
Ignorance fought; much obliged.
I should add, the word is also used for a Dungeons and Dragons monster that is nonhuman, but that’s not the origin of the use as an insult - it’s definitely of a piece with “caveman”, “Neanderthal”, etc. Although I think also used for more recent cave-dwelling hermits, so carries connotations of “basement dweller” stereotypes as well.
Come to think of it, would “Neanderthal” be objectionable or unobjectionable on grounds that it’s dehumanizing?
I’m of the “Neanderthals are a subspecies of Homo sapiens” school of thought, so not to me.
Also;
Pan troglodytes verus
Pan troglodytes ellioti
Pan troglodytes troglodytes
Pan troglodytes schweinfurthii
If I remember correctly, Joni Mitchell lived in a cave for a while. That makes her a troglodyte in my book.
We can start (well, in this thread, repeat) by noting that one is a born condition, while the other is a choice.
I personally thing “troglodyte” is a bit strong in most contexts but it’s not like “retard.”
Another difference is that “retarded” refers, literally, only to a type of human — it’s not making an implicit reference to something non-human, as “troglodyte” does. Strangely but truly, for me this makes “retarded” MORE dehumanizing, because no one would really believe that anyone thinks Trump supporters are LITERALLY Neanderthals — it’s just a metaphor for a full human with certain values or interests.
Exactly. That’s why those GEICO Caveman commercials were funny (at first)…we all knew they no longer exist, so it’s amusing to ponder how they’d be miffed if they did.
But I can see how YMMV.
Again, it’s not about dehumanizing the target of your invective. That’s a topic for another thread. It’s about the insult to the actually mentally retarded people implicit in your statement. That’s what makes “retard” a slur, and not just a random insult.
Yes, I agree. I was editing my post to insert a partial quote of yours with this reminder. 
We overlapped
All good.
I agree that “retarded” can be regarded a slur, as mentioned above, because people may still associate that word with people who have medical cognitive disability. So yes, if you call me a retard, it can be interpreted as comparing me unfavorably to someone with a disability, hence it’s offensive to that marginalized group. That’s why “retarded” should not be used in this board.
However, as also discussed above, moron, idiot and imbecile are not words that people associate with cognitive disability any longer (at least I don’t believe they do. I don’t). Most people don’t even know the origin of those words. I was aware of their origins, but in today’s usage, I never associate them to mean cognitive disability. I associate them with people who do or say dumb things. It’s attacking someones actions or words, not an ad hominem attack on any person’s mental faculties.
Poor example, but it would be like me getting mad because you gave me a generic tissue when I asked for a kleenex. Sure you could get mad 98 years ago when kleenex meant Kleenex®. But the meaning of the word evolved and changed over the intervening years. Take words for what they mean now, not their obscure archaic past.
Even “mental retardation” is no longer considered a polite term.
Yes, but I thought I needed to say it in that sentence to make the point clear. It’s not a word I would ordinarily use. I hope it’s not too horrible. 
I agree with those pushing to remove “retard”, “retarded”, “Republitard”, “Libtard”, etc., from our vernacular here on this board. As others said, it’s a slur that insults a whole class of people, and it has a recent association with the insulted people, unlike idiot and imbecile.
In my view, “lame” has also lost its association with the physically handicapped population, and I would prefer to keep it. It has a unique meaning that isn’t easily substituted in my mind. “That song is lame” conveys that it’s a bad song, with extra contempt for it, and a side of uncool.
“Lame” and “crazy” are in a weird space. There are definitely disability activists who are pushing to get rid of both of them, and I’m sympathetic. On the one hand, for me they don’t have the emotional punch of “retard.” On the other hand, it’s not the emotional punch to me that’s the issue.
“Crazy” is especially tricky, since it gets used in my vernacular to mean “chaotic, unpredictable, and high-energy.” It can be a positive or a negative descriptor: “Man, that concert was crazy!” is a good thing, as is, “My kids are writing crazy sentences and giggling up a storm.” But again, it’s not the emotional punch to me that’s the issue. I’ve started using “bananas” and “wild” instead, and they work equally well to convey the meaning.