There’s a clear campaign against the mentally ill with the global rise of fascism. Lots of it shows up in anti homeless rhetoric, but you can see it in the MAHA and anti vaccination movements.

There’s no reason to use the word “r-tarded” to describe someone. As someone who’s worked with the intellectually challenged, it’s an insult to them to compare them with people who are willfully ignorant.

    • Windex007@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      I think the argument is whizzing over your head too.

      The logical breakdown here is pretty simple:

      Argument #1 (OP): It’s probably not good to use disadvantaged groups as a slur.

      Argument #2 (You and most others): Well if we do that then I don’t have words to degrade people.

      These are completely orthogonal arguments, and I sincerely have sympathy for both. I genuinely do think there is communicative value in having words that illicit the intended response of calling someone’s argument “removeded”. I know what I mean. You know what I mean. It actually has nothing to do with people who are actually handicapped. It’s effective communication… it just has an unfortunate BYPRODUCT.

      But not having slurs isn’t a counter-argument to the thesis that using disadvantaged groups as slurs is bad.

      Strawmanning it as “PC gone mad” is just a convenient way to avoid actually addressing the concern head on.

      Like, just be a fucking man: “Yeah, it probably isn’t good to use disadvantaged groups as slurs, but I’m at a loss for language that satisfies that while also effectively getting the content and TONE of my communication across, so I’m going to use it anyways. Not everythingi do is ideal.”

      As soon as you abandon the ego-sheltering delusion that you don’t do things that are probably not great, you can actually think about things objectively without hitting a mental panic button the second you’re forced to evaluate a legitimate position in which your current behaviors would be evaluated as bad.

    • SuperNovaStar@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      I don’t think anyone is saying that clinical language doesn’t have a use. If anything, it’s the use of these words as general-purpose insults that makes them unfit for clinical use, not the other way around.

            • JackbyDev@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              As someone who grew up with a very close friend with a sister who has down syndrome who really disliked people using the word as an insult I strongly disagree with you.

              • hark@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                So if I, as an ugly person, dislike people using “ugly” as an insult, should that mean everyone is not allowed to use the word?

                • JackbyDev@programming.dev
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  It’s already considered particularly hateful to insult people based on their appearance as opposed to their actions, so I’m not sure what your point is.

                  Also specifically disagreeing with this

                  People like OP, who care too much, are what keep it a slur used to degrade people with an actual clinical condition.

                  Which is unrelated to what you said so I think you may have misunderstood me. I’m saying that people with down syndrome and people with family members with down syndrome telling people to not use that word as an insult are not degrading themselves/their family member by doing so.

                  • hark@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    It’s already considered particularly hateful to insult people based on their appearance as opposed to their actions, so I’m not sure what your point is.

                    Well that’s the thing, the word is not being used to insult people who are actually afflicted with the condition.