I agree with everything you say, however I don’t post often in the Pit, so I don’t know exactly what rules apply, I just try to be civil in my posts anywhere on the board 
. Anyway, as soon as I saw the post questioning it here, I immediately thought of people with Down Syndrome and found it offensive. Idk if people aren’t familiar with that usage, or they are and find it ok. I do know years ago I worked with a teenager who has Down’s and she, to this day still, is one of the sweetest, funniest people I’ve ever known. Sorry, I know that’s off topic but wanted to share. 
I would say that you highlighted the difference in your own post. “Jew” is a noun in civilized discourse. It is sometimes used as a verb, which generally falls between mildly and deeply offensive. When used as an adjective, where “Jewish” is a readily available common alternate, the user paints themself as vulgar, barely fit for civilized society.
It may be of interest that independently of ‘mongoloid’ as a term of abuse, the term ‘Mong’ has evolved in the British military as a deliberate misspelling of (Emperor) Ming (the Merciless) from Flash Gordon.
Arrsepedia article here.
Arrse thread here (SFW on the first page but not for the easily offended).
They are Deaf and they don’t speak. They are only non-verbal if they also do not know any signed language.
The Dr. Down of Down syndrome believed that ontogeny capitulated phylogeny, and that a similar thing had happened with the “races”; that humans had progresses upward from Negroids, who were barely above apes, through Mongoloids, to finally Caucasians, but that sometimes atavistic people were born-- people who looked, and had the intellectual capabilities of “earlier” races. This was why he termed people with Trisomy 21 “Mongoloid.” To be fair, he knew nothing of the double helix, having done his work quite a long time before Watson and Crick, and he did use his work to argue against slavery by arguing that all humans were descended from the same original stock, and there were not “separate creations” (a real argument of some people in favor of slavery).
Still, his whole idea of evolution from imperfect Negroids to the pinnacle of humanity, the Caucasians, is so offensive now, that many people don’t even like to use his name in conjunction with the syndrome he identified, and prefer to call it what it is: trisomy 21, rather than “Down syndrome.”
Just for the sake of accuracy, the correct term is “Down Syndrome.”
I understand all that. It is completely a slur. I’m not sure why you’re implying I’m defending it’s use. My original comment was simply pondering the etymology, and what insight it might give if it also has racist overtones (as well as being a slur).
IOW, was the original use of Mongoloid because:
- It was presumed that those of Mongoloid descent were less intelligent
or
- The syndrome made these individuals resemble people of mongoloid descent
In other words, is this a similar example to German Measles or Asian Flu which are not racist because the ethnic descriptor come from a less questionable reason.
Now, later posters have actually provided specific background on that point, which I found helpful and informative.
God, I know that, and tried to resist writing “Downs”, but it’s like not thinking about an elephant.
Goose. You get down from a goose.
Actually, it wasn’t that Dr. Down believed people with Trisomy 21 resembled Mongols, he thought they literally were Mongoloid people born to Caucasian parents, because in fetal development, humans passed through previous evolutionary phases, and occasionally some people got “stuck” in a previous state. And he had observed another syndrome, although I have no idea what it might have been, that represented Caucasians born in a “Negroid” state. I remember he stated that they had “woolly” hair, no matter what their parents’ hair was like. Again, I have no idea what it was. It was rarer than Trisomy 21, so it may not even have been a syndrome; it may have been a couple of individuals forced into a theory.
He clearly never observed a black person with Trisomy 21.
A rather unexpected corollary to Down’s interpretation of Trisomy 21 as “Mongoloid”:
And a PINK elephant at that. With PURPLE POLKA DOTS.
Well, that does make sense. A late-stage embryo bears a strong resemblance to some sort of small iguana, so, clearly gestation is a perfect analog to evolution. A being within the womb must transit the full scope of evolution, where it might become stuck in an incomplete phase an emerge under-evolved.
It’s interesting that most syndromes seem to want to omit the possessive. (There are about 30 exceptions on this list; Turner’s is the only one I have heard of, and I’ve seen that written both ways.)
Whereas most diseases seem to favor use of the possessive - many well-known examples such as Huntington’s, Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, Crohn’s.
Is this simply because (say) “Smith’s Syndrome” and “Smith Syndrome” are orally identical for most speakers?
I read a reason for it once, but I don’t remember it now. However, there is one. IIRC, it had something to do with the fact that “syndrome” is actually a plural word-- it means a collection of symptoms. If a name exists for a collection of diseases, they are usually called “The Smith diseases,” not “the Smith’s diseases,” and so syndrome followed suit, even though it quickly lost the definite article for some reason.
Don’t quote me on this, though, because my memory is very vague.
ETA: now that I think about it, there may have once been a strict usage where “Smith’s syndrome” meant “the symptoms exhibited by patient Smith.”
I can’t speak for John. But I can give what I think.
It’s because you said it should be allowed in the Pit, when the Pit does not allow slurs. “Nigger” and “faggot” and “tranny” all get moderated.
So all the talk about whether it is racist comes off as a way to make an excuse for it being allowed. It clearly is racist. It is an old term for a supposedly inferior race, being applied as an insult to people with mental disabilities. It is thus both racist and ableist.
And, seeing as the purpose of discussing this in ATMB is to consider moderation, I can see no reason to be bringing up the etymology unless you are doing so to help determine whether the word should be moderated.
I, of course, say it should be. If its ableism isn’t enough, then its racism should be. It doesn’t mean the user has to be banned or even Warned–it can just be a note saying that it’s not acceptable.
It’s not like “retarded,” a term that is actually used in a possibly innocuous context (though I personally do not think it is innocuous). It is more like nigger or faggot, a term specifically used as a slur.
It’s an unequivocal slur that is bigoted towards the mentally disabled and also racist. It should not be allowed in the Pit.
If this is true, then “Mongoloid” should definitely get moderated.
Yes, this. I cannot tell you the amount of times I was surprised at posters who get mad at no action being taken on something just to discover nobody actually had reported it yet.
As a mod, I rely very heavily on reports, because I don’t read or see everything…so by all means, report things if you see something that could use reporting. Better three or four reports come through about the same thing than none coming at all about something.
Of course, there’s always the chance that you may report something you feel may be against the rules or even SHOULD be against the rules, but no action gets taken on it…but IMO, that shouldn’t be used as a reason not to report something.
So, is “Mongoloid” actionable?
A “slur” just means a description of someone that is likely to insult them or damage their reputation. This is not only allowed but encouraged in the Pit.
You’re talking about slurs that have been used to the point they are considered to be hate speech. I agree that mongoloid is a slur, and has become considered to be a racial slur, but it probably doesn’t rate as hate speech like nigger and faggot do.
What makes a slur cross the line into hate speech in general, much less in the judgement of a mod on a message board is not easily defined. The board allows “wetback” and “illegal” in the Pit as slurs toward Mexican Americans, “retard” which is considered a slur against the mentally handicapped, etc.
I would argue that “retard” and “Mongoloid” as well, cross a line, as they first of all, are probably not true descriptors of the person in question, and second of all, are considered off-limits by the community of people with actual mental retardation, their families and friends, and the people who serve their needs. These are very high degrees of insult, and as someone who has worked with disabled people most of my adult life, I can tell you that many people consider “retard” to be up there with “faggot.” Actually, it might even be worse, but it doesn’t even have any use as an in-community word.
I was really shocked by “Mongoloid,” not just because of its intent, but because I thought it had gone the way of the Dodo. I literally have not heard that word in a decade, maybe even two, and before that, it was from people over 60. I see it in expired literature occasionally, but since there is little useful information other than historic in anything that would use the term, I don’t think I’ve even seen it in print in a very long time, except maybe incidentally in fiction.
I think I can make a very good case for putting this word on whatever list “faggot” and the n-word are on.