Meh. When I was a kid there were stern prohibitions against using words like “gay” or “retarded” in a derogatory fashion, as they were rightly seen as being discriminatory against large groups of people, but no such prohibition against spaz. There’s honestly not a strong association in the United States between clumsy/klutzy person = spaz = spastic = person with cerebral palsy. (I recall having read once that the Brits kept using “spastic” in a medical sense for a goodly number of years after we’d largely switched to referring to “cerebral palsy”, hence the greater offensiveness on the other side of the pond…can anyone verify this?) It was only a couple of years ago in adulthood that I learned that this term was offensive to anyone at all, and thus resolved to stop using it…but imho it’s a mistake to ascribe malice or even absentminded non pc-ness to Americans using the word spaz or spastic, as its usage is much closer to the personal ridicule of “klutz” rather than the ridicule of groups of people who are seen as different than the norm, as in derogatory usages of “gay” or “retarded.”
The cigarette analogy fails because, as far as I know, the word “fag” for a cigarette was never derived from any association with homosexuals.
On the other hand, “spaz” almost certainly was derived from the an association with cerebral palsy, even in the U.S.
If no-one associated “nigger” with African Americans any more, would that make the word perfectly fine to use? Or would it be the history of the word that still meant it was offensive?
No, it wasn’t - this is what I’ve been trying to explain. “Spastic”, in its literal (and medical) sense, simply means “of or relating to spasms.” Look at it - it comes from the same root and everything. This is what I was trying to illustrate by saying Tiger might just as well have said “ataxic”, which similarly refers to uncoordinated muscle movements, and yet in the UK has no condition-specific connotations.
“Spastic” was originally (and still is, in the US) a perfectly disease-neutral description of a symptom, not a condition. For example, when I’m very stressed and tired I get spastic motions in my eyelid, and this has nothing to do with CP. The word was used to describe certain symptoms of CP, and in the UK and Australia has become inextricably linked with the condition. This is not the same as “spastic” being invented as a word for people with CP; it is a perfectly useful word that came to be used that way in some countries. But it’s pointless and wrong to try and paint US users of the word as being insensitive, because that association simply doesn’t exist there. It’d be like claiming the phrase “I’m shitting myself” was insensitive to people with irritable bowel syndrome or something.
Latest from telegraphonline (Lewine Mair):
‘Tiger Woods last night apologised for saying he putted like “a spaz” at the US Masters just hours after British Paralympian Tanni Grey Thompson…said he had been “a bit stupid saying something off the cuff in that way. I don’t think he meant to be that offensive but it is something which nobody in his position should be saying.”’
The correspondent goes on to write that Woods ‘is among the most decent men in the game. He has his own programmes to help disadvantaged children, both in golf and education, while he shows extraordinary humility for one who has done so much at such an early age.’
Well, his ignorance has been fought, and life goes on.
What ignorance? In the United States, “spaz” is not at all offensive. It’s an insult, but an incredibly mild one, utterly devoid of connection to any specific medical condition. No one in America associates “spaz” or “spastic” with cerebral palsy. Woods owes no one an apology. If he gave one, I’m sure it was more to avoid the trouble than heartfelt regret.
I don’t know about that, Menocchio. Woods’s apology was presumably based on the premise that he understood that for people in other countries, besides the States, his remark was offensive, and regretted that. He’s always seems a sincere and genuine fellow to me. Why should he feign regret? Perhaps being mixed himself gives him more insight and understanding than the average person.
Or, for good PR.
Seriously, it’s not even remotely thought of as a serious insult in the US. I use it occassionally. “Don’t spaz out!”
Okay, that’s settled then.
Next…
Perhaps the ignorance to be mocked is the deletion of the word in “respected” news sources. It’s obviously a case of being oversensitive and crafting the story to avoid as best they can offending a population of millions that just look for things to be offended by.
Are you aware of Editorial pages and letters to the Editor in the US? Substituting “spaz” with another word will create enough relatively indifferent anger to a message board. Publishing the actual quote (another reason to mistrust what editors are filtering) would result in hundreds of letters calling Woods “insensitive”, “ill-informed” and “ignorant of the plight of those that are spastic”.
Then we’d have to deal with the cries for community outreach programs, social awareness and likely protest marches on the steps of the paper’s headquarters.
It’s easier to use a substitute word. No surprise. They know about as much as we do and argue as much as we do over this shit. The difference is we don’t try to sell the public on our opinions, and we sure as shit don’t try to pass it off on the public as objective reporting.
Don’t be shocked the media is protecting us from ourselves. Just accept what reporting they give you after sanitization, and be happy with it.
If that’s so, then every British smoker owes the American gay community a big apology. Words mean different things in different countries. I think people should recognize it and move on. No apology necessary. I admit that it’s complicated here since the words have dimilar definitions, but vastly different connotations.
Is there any possibility that the LA Times just misquoted the guy, no censorship intended?
Next, roger will demand apologies for our brazen references to fanny packs, or for our cop shows referring to Lieutenants as “loo.” In fact, we’ll have to apologize for calling them Lieutenants instead of Leftenants.
Does “connote” mean the same thing over there? How about “dumbass”?
Not over here buddy. You try that shit over here and Mongo Smash!
Grow the f*** up and stop trying to pick fights with strangers. I’ve said all along it’s an age thing. I’m 50 and when I was a kid they were called spastics and spaz was the same as nigger and that how it still sounnds - TO ME.
JFC, learn to read.
Thankyou. A person who’s lips don’t get tired when reading. At last. How it sounds to this 50 year old’s ears because at the time ‘spaz’ was a demeaning and unpleasant term. They wuz fighting words in any playground.
I just noticed we have a poster named “SpazCat”.
Apparently Tiger’s comment has stirred quite the brou-haha elsewhere, my local shock jock DJ’s have taken it and are running it into the ground this morning.
“Communication was outlawed today, when it was realised that somebody somewhere gets offended at something at some time, and the very thought of possibly offending somebody somehow so frightened our world governments, they immediately put through this ruling to prevent the possibility of ever hurting someone’s feelings. This sentence contains the last words anyone will ever speak.”
There’s a new animated movie out called The Wild. It was directed by Steve Williams, known as “Spaz”. All the articles and reviews and official text referring to him call him Spaz Williams, or Steve “Spaz” Williams.
Don’t have a slur name? How about “retard”? That’s probably pretty equivalent to how “spaz” is perceived in England, I’d guess.
Speaking of words that editors take out of papers - last week there was a big fuss because the NY Times crossword had the word “scumbag” as one of its answers. The fuss was because the paper has a policy against using the word itself. Recently when a congressman called a colleague a scumbag, the Times stated that he called him something like “a slang word for a condom.” I’m 44 years old and never knew this was the origin of the word.