Yes, but often the point of a debate in this context is not to change the mind of your opponent, in fact, that’s rarely productive, but to convince an audience of spectators that may or may not exist.
And insulting is an attempt to get these hypothetical peanut gallery denizens on your side, rather than on the side of that blargedy-blarg.
I’m not saying that this is a tactic that is conducive to informed debate, just pointing out the usual motive in employing it.
I thought that this was a ridiculous load to unpack:
But then I read this:
Jesus fuck, are you even serious?
Whoa… And there is something objectively bad as having a learning disorder?! WTF?
And this is why people think it’s fine to use. Because who cares about those retards, right? FFS.
Being a marginalized person is objectively bad, because society makes it that way. That’s the problem.
Absolutely good advice for the people who want the right to keep using the word “retard”. Grow a thicker skin. Recognize that people don’t want to put up with ugly nonsense like that, and that you’ll face consequences for engaging in it. Stop fluttering hands about the terrible possibility that you might have to remove a word from your vocabulary.
Telling folks suffering from general societal disdain to grow a thicker skin is contemptible.
And here is a perfect example of someone completely missing context.
I rest my case.
The context is simply this: people with Down Syndrome do not need to grow a thicker skin just so that you won’t have to keep current with which terms are offensive.
Are people with Down Syndrome regular users of this message board? Are they being called names here?
I don’t have the data on that, but I do know that members here have family and friends who are.
As to “seeing their true character”, I have to wonder that if someone is fine with those terms being bandied about on a message board, then where else in this great, wide world are they fine with bandying them about.
There’s nothing objectively bad about not being the smartest person in the room either. People are born with different amounts of intelligence.
If an argument fails on its merits, point out how it fails. Pointing out the failures of the mental capabilities of its proponent is simply ad-hoc at best.
If someone is ignorant about something, then that doesn’t mean they are mentally deficient either, and the two are often unjustly linked along with the ad-hoc insult. As an anime I recently saw poignantly said, “Ignorance is not a sin, but being content with ignorance can be harmful.”
So, I don’t really think that we need any words to describe the mental capabilities of others, outside of a medical or academic context where it is relevant.
There is a world of difference between not wanting to censor speech and thinking any speech is ok.
BIG difference.
They are certainly welcome here, assuming they aren’t scared away by the language they encounter.
Ad hominem, I think you meant.
Love it.
Yes, yes.
I will leave it, even though I have time to edit, to demonstrate that anyone can make a mistake.
Nah. The first part of this sentence is fine, but the second part should be, “and kick 'em out.” This is a private messageboard, and it doesn’t actually benefit from keeping creeps around.
As a compromise: what if we don’t redesign the forum software to keep the word from ever appearing in posts, but once people identify themselves as “creeps” (or, to use a similar word, “jerks”), we activate the board’s #1 rule? Can we all be happy with that?
Would you advocate for the SDMB removing the BBQ Pit forum so no one can say mean things to another poster?
The rest of the message board is already moderated against most slurs and those using them are told to take it to The Pit (at the least).
I’ve never found that even the pit is a good place to just call names.
It’s a place where I can more fully explain my concerns with the moral positions of a poster, but using it to heap on the mental capabilities of a poster just seems as though you are doing it to make yourself feel better by putting someone else down.
And while “morally deficient” is an insult, it is an insult to what someone chooses to be, not how they were born to be.
I think we should be very circumspect about establishing:
Many/most of these things ‘leak.’ They permeate our culture. They marginalize and dehumanize, and – incrementally – diminish the stature, status, and worth of people who are at least our equals, and – in any case – deserve to be treated as such.
This board comprises a whole lot of really smart people, and me. Take five extra seconds and find another word. It’s just not that difficult.
I can’t say that I’ve noticed “retard” used on this board all that often. I DID notice “lame” being used very often; most recently in the Will Smith/Chris Rock thread. Personally, I think they are both to be avoided, but “lame” seems to get a free pass here.
I find it’s allowance useful. Any poster who uses the word “retard” in this day and age has conveniently labeled themselves as someone too immature and socially inept to have any worthwhile interaction with.