Mine are the same. Don’t cut out chunks of *my *vocabulary because you’re not as tolerant as you’d like to be.
Here’s my (obviously WAG) take on why some people get all up in arms about “retarded”: They’re ashamed of retarded people. On some level, they view that retardation as a terrible blemish, and they can’t stand the thought of anyone else feeling the same way, and they’re ashamed of their own attitudes. So in a huge overreaction to their own prejudice, they desperately scramble to block anyone else from being simply frank about the nature of being retarded. IMO, the only reason to prevent people from calling a spade a spade is when you’re ashamed that it is one.
I can assure you that I am in no way ashamed of my brother, nor do I view him or his condition as a terrible blemish. Indeed, I am quite proud of what he has been able to accomplish given his limited mental faculties. IMO, you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.
Here’s what it comes down to, for me: if you’re not ashamed of him, then you should be able to recognize and acknowledge that he does have different cognitive abilities from the average person. And you shouldn’t be offended by anyone else recognizing those same cognitive restrictions, nor with them analogizing those restrictions onto other situations.
This ties back into your physical/metal disability distinction. *You *think that people are judging your brother and people like him for being mentally disabled in a way that they don’t judge people with physical disabilities, which is why you find *blind/deaf/lame/dumb/whatever *to be acceptable while *retarded *is not. The only distinction I see is the one in *your *head. And all protestations about being proud of your brother aside, you’ve already admitted that you view mental and physical problems differently; so pardon me if I take it with a grain of salt when you tell me you’re not trying to cover for being ashamed of being ashamed of your brother’s disability.
Let’s leave smilies out of this discussion please, I’m trying to work up some outrage here.
I do.
I don’t.
This is where we differ. You’re saying that I shouldn’t mind people saying something to the effect of “That I idea is so fucking stupid, I’m surprised Nars’ brother didn’t think of it.” To me, that seems patently offensive on its face but YMMV.
I believe that you’ve offered me a false dichotomy. Either I view mental and physical impairments in the same light or I admit to feeling ashamed of my brother’s disability. Why is shame the only emotional response? Perhaps I’m more sympathetic to mental disabilities because I’ve been intimately involved with them for the past 35 years. Perhaps it is because that it is much more difficult for those with mental difficulties to adapt to their environment than the blind or deaf. Perhaps it is, like Stratocaster, I have seen years of violence inflicted upon those who are mentally challenged who were unable to defend themselves. Why am I limited to shame?
Well, there are some ideas that are so poorly thought-out that it would be seemingly impossible for someone with unimpaired congnition to come up with them or espouse them. So, can you think of a way to indicate that *without *being offensive to the mentally disabled?
you realize this is totally a different situation, right?
can you not see the difference here:
“that idea is fucking retarded”
“that idea sounds like it came from that fucking retard Nars’ brother”
both are insults to the person who came up with the idea
only one is an insult to a third party.
and no, when you say “that idea is fucking retarded” you aren’t saying in any effect, way, implication, subtle way “that idea sounds like it came from that fucking retard Nars’ brother”
Not all inappropriate (in a given situation) comments are inappropriate for the same reasons, so your analogy falls flat. If you wouldn’t use such comments in a front of a retarded person, it’s because you would be using retarded people as a reference point for ridicule, and like most people, your sense of propriety is at least advanced enough to know that only a real shithead would do such a thing. There is no setting where using such comments would not do exactly the same–i.e., use the mentally retarded as the mental image for contempt. None. That’s why the comments make sense to you. Retarded people are always an easily understood point of comparison when you want to express contempt or ridicule of a certain variety. The circumstance doesn’t change that. “Retard” and “nigger” (as another example) are offensive terms regardless of who is in the room.
I’m assuming you don’t say dick jokes in front of your grandma because she wouldn’t appreciate them (the jokes, that is; perhaps she still appreciates a good dick now and then). A dick joke with someone with different sensibilities is a different matter. The situation makes all the difference.
And, by the way, I don’t see anyone arguing that the mentally retarded don’t, by definition, have cognitive challenges (though the fact that you think it provides a good reference point to express “lacking the ability to comprehend fucking anything” is a bit telling). The question is not whether anyone understands why they’re a convenient source of ridicule. The question is why people feel the need to use such an abused, dehumanized group as a source for contemptuous hyperbole when such usage is hurtful to them, and they’ve already suffered a world of hurt. Why people feel the need to lecture on the cognitive capacity of the mentally retarded is beyond me. It misses the point.
Now you’re being a piece of shit, referring to them as retards, and you know it, too. You’re pushing buttons for the cheap little thrill. You’re not using them as a point of comparison–you’re referring to them specifically, and using a derisive term. As I said earlier, I ain’t going to lose sleep over it, but that’s what you’re doing.
Here, try this on for size. Suppose you and I lived in one of many areas where the black population was largely restricted to an impoverished section. If I described somebody as “poor as a nigger,” would you take exception? It’s the trifecta of comparisons: it marginalizes an entire group of people, it provides a clear comparison that everyone would get, and it refers to them by a hateful term. Hat trick. Why would anyone object? They’re just words, get over them.
Not exactly analogous, though a given situation could be. You have a talent for presenting faulty comparisons. If I call the umpire blind, I don’t know if I would be embarrassed at all to discover a blind person sitting in my row. Would it be awkward? I don’t know, maybe. I could picture everyone laughing it off. Because in this instance the frame of reference isn’t to make blind people a source of ridicule. There is no implied insult in the comment beyond the fact that blind people are, well, blind; the insult there is directed only at the ump.
Let’s switch the scene. You call someone “fucking retarded” or a “retard,” only to discover a mentally retarded person and his family in the room. Think anyone is going to laugh this one off? Can you see any sort of difference? Probably not. Whatever.
For the love of all that is holy, they aren’t the source of the ridicule. Their affliction/problem/issue/condition is the source of ridicule.
Look, if we could cure mental retardation tomorrow, you would still be able to insult anyone by calling them or their ideas retarded. Because the insult stands separate and apart from the people that have the condition.
It would be nice to be able to be dispassionate about the use of “retarded” but my life history prevents that. Whenever I hear the word, I immediately think of my brother and how insulting its use is to him and those like him. I’ve asked my kids to not use it. Tim Shriver is asking the world to not use it. Why do you think that is? If you don’t know, let me explain. It’s because it’s needlessly hurtful. You may not mean it to be, but it is.
Is this really that difficult? How you react to it aside, using such terms is hurtful to the mentally retarded and their families, except for that thick-skinned tribe that Diogenes runs around with.
Does every other phrase pale in comparison to the simple elegance of “fucking retarded”? Why is there such passionate devotion to this wording? It hurts a group of people who don’t need any more hurt. Why does it need more explanation than that?
No, it’s needlessly hurtful to certain groups of people. Namely, those who are afflicted by the condition or people affected by people that have the condition. It’s needlessly hurtful because of your particular perspective on the issue, which, frankly, has no bearing to how most people intend the term to be used.
Look, my grandfather was killed in World War II, the Battle of Britain. He was running to a shelter when a bomb struck and blew out a building. He was killed by falling bricks and debris. I find the term “dumber than a sack of bricks” to be quite needlessly hurtful, so everyone should just stop it.*
It didn’t really come out right. What I’m trying to say is that if “crazy” was only used describe people with a certain mental condition, then it would be insulting to use its application to bad ideas.
But it’s still not conveying the actual meaning you’re intending: it’s not just a bad idea, it’s an idea so terrible that no one with at least average cognitive ability could possibly agree with it. You’re removing all nuance from language.
It’s not saying the mentally disabled are contemptible–it’s saying that their ideas aren’t always going to be the best, and that they aren’t going to comprehend things easily or quickly. Now, it’s neither polite nor tactful to bring it up in front of them, but that doesn’t mean that it’s not true, and it doesn’t mean that it’s not a valid point of comparison. The truth hurts, but it’s still the truth, and we shouldn’t have to stop using truthful language just because you, personally, find it offensive.
She’s a widowed conservative Lutheran, so, sadly, I doubt it.
I think the fact that you don’t understand hyperbole to be a bit telling. News flash: severe forms of mental retardation would, in fact, make you incapable of comprehending fucking anything. Now, a lot of people with mental disabilities aren’t nearly that far down the scale, but it still does happen. And yes, I have known people with mental disabilities–some of whom I’d happily spent time conversing with rather than their non-disabled relatives. Not my autistic cousin, though, but only because he doesn’t really talk.
Every time I say “retard,” a developmentally disabled baby somewhere starts crying for no apparent reason? Get over yourself.
Terrible analogy. All retarded people are retarded by definition (to varying degrees), but there’s nothing inherent to being Black that causes poverty.
Now, if you were to say “ugly as a retard” or “worthless as a retard,” *that *would equivalent, and I’d agree that it’s offensive, inappropriate, and inaccurate.
Wow. I can’t believe that you don’t see how completely, 100% parallel the situation is. THERE IS NO IMPLIED INSULT IN THE COMMENT BEYOND THE FACT THAT RETARDED PEOPLE ARE, WELL, RETARDED; THE INSULT THERE IS DIRECTED ONLY AT THE IDEA.
So can you see how perhaps you’re trying to impose your own issues on other peoples’ use of language?
If it’s hurtful to me, my brother and millions of others, why do you want to use it? Is your vocabulary so limited that the only means you have to criticize an idea is to belittle others or their condition?
