By defining feature, I mean that it’s the only place where insults are allowed. That defines it. If the insult posts are so few, then perhaps the forum is not needed. The rest of the threads could be placed in other forums. I’m not advocating for this, but the purpose for the forum is to have a place to insult people because you can’t do that in other forums. If not for that, the rest of the threads could go in other forums. And yes, swearing is allowed in all the other forums, just not as an insult to other members.
Are you really not familiar with “slurs” in the sense that I’ve been using the word? I find this…incredibly surprising, and having already described what I mean, I don’t know what more I can do to clarify. I’m not going to type out a bunch of slurs. But no, it’s not “words that happen to describe me”.
In general, the idea is that if you are insulting someone by saying they are a member of group that might be described in neutral terms, and by doing so, also implying that there’s something inherently wrong with being a member of that group, then you are using a slur. Especially if you are using a group that isn’t even related to the topic at hand. So, for instance, if you are arguing with a poster about how much to tip a taxi driver, and you call them a kike, you are using a slur.
In general, I Miller doesn’t allow racial or ethnic slurs even in the pit.
I would agree with those who would include “lard ass”, for example, as a slur. If you call someone a lard ass while disagreeing vehemently about tipping, you are using a slur, and I will think less of you. If you just say the person is “cheap” you may be insulting them, but it’s not a slur.
(I did pick words that might be used to describe me, but only because I feel less bad using those slurs than other ones.)
I don’t think this distinction is at all unusual on my part.
I recognize these as anachronistic stereotypes. The western society in which we live values knowledge, even the appearance of knowledge, far more than acting dumb to get along. Even Trump’s beloved “poorly educated” are busy pretending they know shit that those “ivory tower” liberals don’t know.
I wish they were. But they still exist if in an only slightly more attenuated form.
Lol yes. The ‘ivory tower liberals’ are all sheep engaging in group-think according to them.
has me laughing. I used to love reading Slate Star Codex. Thanks for the link.
This is going full circle. Back to the conservatives. If someone insults someone for being a conservative in a derogatory manner, that’s a slur and you’ll think less of them?
Anachronistic? I saw them every day just a few years ago when I went to school. I see these attitudes in the kids my wife teaches today. I see the related attitude, “you, my child, want to be more educated than me, your parent? Does that mean you think you’re better than me?” In parents of the kids my wife teaches, again, to this very day. If you think these attitudes are anachronistic, you aren’t paying attention.
Is being a “conservative” an innate part of who someone is, or is it a set of shared beliefs that a person holds?
Here’s a question: if you can’t judge people based on their words or actions, what CAN you judge them on?
Martin Luther King said he wanted his children to be judged based on the content of their character, not that they shouldn’t be judged at all.
If someone criticizes conservatives for their ideas, beliefs, or actions, that’s “content of their character”. If someone criticizes gay people for being homosexual, that’s akin to “color of their skin”.
Stupidity, when it isn’t being caused by an actual disability, is much closer to “content of their character” than “color of their skin”; ymmv, but that’s why all these cries of “but what about discrimination against stupid people” ring hollow, even aside from the fact that it’s not at all clear that smart people are the ones society privileges.
Will you sponsor me to live in the UK? Please? I’ll beg, if necessary.
Let’s look at some of the parts you left out of my quote:
Bolding added. Insulting sometime for being “a conservative” in a discussion where they are, or claim to be, taking a conservative position is akin to saying your opponent is “cheap”, not to saying they are “kike” or a “lard ass”.
Usually, I see this coming from guys that inherited wealth, like Bush the lesser or Donald Trump.
Probably partially:
There’s a big difference between words and actions, and beliefs. We choose our words and actions, but we don’t choose our beliefs. Someone religious might think you’re a bad person for not believing in god, and therefore deserve to be insulted, but you can’t just choose to believe differently. Perhaps if they show you evidence, you might change your mind, and become a good person in their view… but it seems odd to link morality to empirical evidence like that.
Intelligence is quite strongly heritable, and in any case not under the control of the individual; much like skin colour. And as for privilege, would you choose to be less intelligent? Hardly. It’s one of the biggest advantages there is in western society.
You could just come live in Seattle, too.
I referred to missing out on employment opportunities as a societal harm, which were also mentioned.
Most of those do have terms that are considered slurs. The few that aren’t are choices, or at least quasi-choices.
-
There are tons of classist slurs. As someone who lives in northwestern Arkansas, I face face certain slurs about my class and economic status all the time. Don’t you dare call me a redneck or a hick or a hillbilly. Those are our terms. We may let you use them in an affectionate way, but not in a disparaging one. And do note that the word “cracker” got someone a Warning in the Pit, so it’s clearly a slur.
-
Accent: it’s generally considered racist to make fun of someone’s accent. I am also not aware of any slurs for having the wrong accent.
-
height and weight: there is a growing movement not to attack people for those. However, since at least the latter can be a choice, it is not considered quite so bad.
-
hair color: You haven’t heard the slurs about gingers?
-
religion: also at least partly a choice. That said, slurs against someone for their religion are pretty plainly bigoted.
-
politics: entirely a choice.
-
mental capacity: the r-word is indeed considered a slur. Calling someone “stupid” is not saying they have low mental capacity–it is saying they are willfully ignorant, which is a choice.
-
skill proficiency: I can’t really think of any slurs for that. But, in general, the things that are acceptable are the ones that are a choice, like things you could have learned and become better at.
-
nationality: Come on. Surely you know about this one. There have been several slurs that have been banned here hat attack someone for their nationality. You have ones against Irish people, Italian people, and so on.
-
dress: nearly always a choice. And, when it isn’t, it’s generally a form of classism.
-
artistic taste: A quasi-choice, and not something I can think of that people face slurs for. Simply saying your taste is bad is just itself a form of artistic taste.
For something to be a slur, it must attack a class of people. It’s not just criticism. There are slurs about most of the topics you asked about.
There’s a reason the insults that get thrown around in the Pit tend to be words like asshole, racist, shithead, and stuff that are not about any of those things you mentioned. Those are insults, but not slurs.
And, for fuck’s sake, remember that language is messy, and there’s not always an exact rule for everything. That doesn’t somehow negate the whole concept.
Some fat people eat less than many thin people. So if you’re insulting the specific person for their actual greedy behavior, that’s one thing; but if you’re assuming they’re greedy just because they’re fat, that’s ignorance. And if you choose to insult them for greediness, even if that’s the actual behavior, by using the word “fat” as an insult, then you’re randomly insulting a lot of other people on the basis of their body shape (and contributing, if minutely, to eating disorders.)
IME they’re mainly insulted due to espousing specific political beliefs, most of which have little if anything to do with what until recently was called “conservatism.” And no, I don’t think insulting people for, for instance, supporting overthrowing the electoral system of their country, or willfully encouraging the spread of disease, is “little different” to insulting them based on their religion.
I’ve objected to the first portions of those on these boards, and I’ve seen others do it also. There are plenty of Trump supporters who are well paid, well educated, and live in cities or suburbs. And I and others are here objecting, in significant part, to insulting anyone for being “stupid”.
People who are supporting bigoted policies will indeed be assumed by some others to be bigots. That kind of goes with supporting bigoted policies. I acknowledge that there are people who see themselves as holding their noses on that and supporting Trump on other grounds. I also acknowledge that in some cases there are people who don’t recognize a particular policy as bigoted when that seems entirely clear to others.
Then you should be glad puzzlegal and ilk are willing to talk with them. It keeps them from bugging you.
Some people like to talk to strangers in public places. Others don’t. (Many of us are in one category some of the time and in the other at other times, depending on our mood at the moment, and/or the place, and/or the topic.) The first kind should pay attention to the signals of the second, and not try to insist on bothering them. But there’s nothing wrong with the first kind talking with each other.
QuickSilver, you’ve never known anybody to hide curiosity or knowledge in order not to annoy others? I’ve both done it and seen it in others.
And IME both insightfulness and introspectiveness are enhanced by checking one’s insights and the results of one’s introspectiveness with others; plus which, depending on the results of the thinking, many people wind up with information that’s useful to share.
And becomes worth functioning due to variety. Balance is very useful.
Ah. That’s true enough.
Seems to me that’s been explained multiple times in this thread; even before @puzzlegal does it again in post #845.
Already was. And promptly apologized.
I think you have misunderstood. I agree that there are insults and slurs for most of the things Ilisted. What I was challenging was the need to have a special category for the others slurs mentioned in the post I was replying to (i.e. race, ethnicity, gender etc.)
I personally don’t see a substantial difference (or its practically a distinction without a difference)
If the rule is that we can’t complain about moderation in the Pit, we shouldn’t be permitted to praise it, either.
The rules apparently permit you to praise Miller’s moderation, but prohibit me from disagreeing with you. That doesn’t seem right.
Absolutely. But would a member of the “out-group” have been given the opportunity to apologize, or would it have been curtains for that poster?
Fair question.