The hypocrisy of selective anger

[BISCUT]

I need a "safe space" after reading this thread. Can't we all just hug it out?

 

[TiGeo]

I was taught that communication is a function of intent, perception, and context of the moment.
Obviously using the words retarded, moron or idiot can be specific, derogatory and hurtful by intent.
Or those same words can be offered in generic and benign intent.
Much of this comes down to tone.

I didn't mention this, and maybe I should have included it in my first telling of the story, but of the group involved with the conversation, she was the only one who took offense; all the others understand the underlying jest I was poking at the process. My tone was understood and accepted by all others except her; she was the "odd man out" so to speak. (Oh no ... now I've misgendered her ... someone will probably take offense to that also).

What I find fault with is the hypocrisy of "retarded" being offensive but "idiotic" not. In the situation I explained, why is her perception more important than my intent? What makes her position favorable and mine unfavorable, especially when the entire topic is directly related (that of terms used to describe mental disability)? She is welcome to find my comment offensive, and I'm perfectly in my realm to consider her objection silly, ostentatious, and uneducated.

The grand irony is that her solution to resolve my offense was to use yet more terms from the same realm of clinical assessments.
Kind of like saying "Don't you dare use that color called Rose Red. Use only Blood Red or Sunset RedRed.

Please make sure you have a talk with some folks associated with Down's in some way and argue your point with them.

 

[Leo99]

Words evolve. In another 20 or 50 years "disabled" or "special" or whatever euphemisms we use today will be shunned. I hear that "Eskimo" is now a questionable word to use.

 

[dnewton3]

You're still not seeing that this is a pretty common word to bother people in 2023...it's not really strange. Your use of it is antiquated and your defense of it/not at least understanding why someone is offended (didn't say don't say it) is pretty....obtuse and...dare I say...retarded?

Oh, I get it; the times they are a changin' ...

 

[medunko]

My English is not native but pple are different and you should avoid parasitic contacts and forgive their or probably your ignorance. That’s simple.
all is about someone ego….

 

[buster]

I'm offended by this post I'm going to log off and go cry now.

 

[dnewton3]

Social norms change. We're living in a constantly changing society so words and actions that may not have previously seen as offensive can become offensive and vise-versa.

I agree 100%.
The problem is that it's changing so fast, it's hard to know who will be offended at what next.

To a large degree, I don't think these changes are really about true merit, but more of a "hey look at me; I wanna complain and be heard" mentality.

What makes "retarded" objectionable, but not "moronic" or "idiotic"? Seriously; explain it to me.
We would all agree that current social trends make the R word distasteful; I'm not arguing that.
But what underlying basis exists for the outrage?
Why do alternate words not evoke the same response?
Where's the LOGIC in the outrage?
Hint: there is no logic. It's all emotional. And most of the people who are outraged can't even explain WHY some words are offensive and others aren't.

 

[mk378]

The "idiot-imbecile-moron" scale has not been used in clinical practice for many decades, because it is offensive, and deprecation of "retarded" (as a description of mental ability) from professional use followed shortly afterwards.

Moe Howard used those words interchangeably in the 1940s. I don't think he knew the fine distinction.

 

[Oro_O]

I'm offended by this post I'm going to log off and go cry now.

Now this guy’s got it going on. Own his emotions and deals with them himself. A+.

Dnewton3 is not wrong. Here’s a test:

Q: If an engine is not producing rated power and an ignition timing issue is suspect, you should:

A) advance timing
B) retard timing
C) hug it out
D) give up

He is specifically saying he was using the term NOT in reference to a person and in it’s meaning of to be retro-grade. The issue he’s bringing up is the political expropriation of words to attach different meanings to them.

 

[bbhero]

If you know something bothers your friend and you keep doing it...you're not much of a friend.

And that is true…

However…..
They are CHOOSING to be bothered by that.

I am not saying they are wrong in that…

But it is a CHOICE….

And…. By nature of that CHOICE they are giving authority over themselves to another person.

 

[TCL]

Whatever happened to that old saying.. "Stick and stones will break my bones, but names will never hurt me"
Seems like everybody needs to lighten up.

 

[MolaKule]

...Why do alternate words not evoke the same response?
Where's the LOGIC in the outrage?
Hint: there is no logic. It's all emotional. And most of the people who are outraged can't even explain WHY some words are offensive and others aren't.

Bingo!

These types should go to google and examine the on-line Oxford Dictionary more often.

What we seem to have in our current society is this attitude of, "I want to be outraged or insulted" so I can complain.

 

[bbhero]

It’s funny… I remember times when the “ speech police “ has been those on the other side of the pendulum….

And I thought they were wrong too.

 

[SeaJay]

I was having a conversation with someone recently and was told I was being rude and insensitive. My lingual crime? I referred to something as "retarded" in the conversation. In fact, when I was confronted, the phrase the young woman said to me was "You shouldn't use the R word", in a condescending tone. What the everloving heck? The "R word"?

My response to that young women would have been, "don't be retarded"

 

[gathermewool]

Anyone else and this would be locked in minutes.

Edit: I’m not disagreeing with the context and conclusions, but REALLY?!

 

[dnewton3]

The "idiot-imbecile-moron" scale has not been used in clinical practice for many decades, because it is offensive, and deprecation of "retarded" (as a description of mental ability) from professional use followed shortly afterwards.

Moe Howard used those words interchangeably in the 1940s. I don't think he knew the fine distinction.

OMG !!! Someone actually stumbled onto the underlying answer!
This is what I'm trying to get across !!!!

The terms moron, imbecile and idiot haven't had reasonable use in clinical terms for decades.
But socially we accept them to describe things we find objectionable in some manner.
"Dan - you're being an idiot for doing that."
"Sally - you're a moron for thinking that."
"That is the most imbecilic thing I've ever run across; who would buy that product?"
Etc ...
No one blinks an eye at these terms, whether they are applied to a person or a thing. Sure, they are meant to be derogatory, but no one says we can't use them. Sometimes they are used in jest; one friend playfully teasing another. At times they are meant to be hurtful. When these words are used, they are combined and considered with the INTENT and CONTEXT of the message, and not solely on the words themselves.

But not the word "retarded". No sir. That's considered heinous all the way around. Whether you describe a person or a thing, in jest or in hate, it's completely vulgar to use this word. The context and intent don't matter when the R word is used. Despite the fact that it's really referring to the exact same topic conceptually as all those other words.


It just REEKS of hypocrisy; selective anger as I put in the thread title. Typically exuded by those who want to gain attention with their outrage. Outrage which has not basis in fact or logic. And that makes it VERY hard to understand what we can or cannot say, now or in the future.

 

[skyactiv]

The song "Fat Bottomed Girls" was recently cut from the Queen Greatest hits collection.

 

[Leo99]

Bingo!

These types should go to google and examine the on-line Oxford Dictionary more often.

What we seem to have in our current society is this attitude of, "I want to be outraged or insulted" so I can complain.

BITOG chooses to be outraged and insulted over a lot of words that are banned here.

 

[Nick1994]

Here’s the biggest problem with this situation. You are unwilling to see other’s side to it. You’re right about everything and unwilling to self reflect at all. You come on here to strike your own ego parading around here.

Honestly it just sounds like narcissism to me.

 

[Oro_O]

Anyone else and this would be locked in minutes.

Edit: I’m not disagreeing with the context and conclusions, but REALLY?!

I think having a reasonably polite conversation about contemporary issues in a side sub-forum like this is wholly appropriate and helpful for members. I would hope and I do think it would be tolerated well. I think a little loser rules (or rather, enforement) about such conversations are a good policy.