re Offensive terminology

[DoJo]

I will confess from the off that this is kind of a thread about a thread, but really didn't want to de-rail/feed the troll depending on how you view it. However, it was mentioned a few times that 'moron' was an offensive term, and as I had never come across someone offended by it, I turn to the mighty google to research its origins. Whilst it turns out that the term was coined by Henry H Goddard to (and I'm quoting directly from wikipedia here)
"denote mild mental retardation" and "to describe a person with a mental age in adulthood of between 8 and 12 on the Binet scale".

'Fair enough' I think to myself, glad I know this as I wouldn't want to use a term which anyone would find offensive. However, the article goes on to describe the other terms used by Goddard on the same scale which include 'idiot' 'imbecile' and 'stupid'. Now, I am pretty sure that I have never seen anyone lambasted for using any of those terms on here, and also reasonably convinced that their move into everyday terminology has softened their impact significantly. So why is moron still considered (by some at least) more offensive than those other terms?

Disclaimer - genuinely not trying to start a bun fight. I just find the origins of words interesting and would be interested to know why some provoke a stronger reaction than others.

Amen to that worra.

Night all.

Just following your lead DoJo

We know it's short for spastic but spastic is a word that's no longer used by the medical profession/on forms etc..

Worra, I have to dispute this fact... my daughter is 7, and one of her many diagnoses is "mixed type spastic diplegic cerebral palsy" so, unless this word has been scrubbed from existence in the last 7 years, you are woefully wrong...

Could some people mistake spaz as short for spasm?

That would be a lot less offensive in their own minds.

i dont like idiot for the same reason. Historically ,for example io census returns ,you will come across people with learning disabilities referred to as idiot

Perhaps im alone but ive always thought idiot to be used when describing a foolish / irrational person? It is very outdated as a form of medical terminology and its meaning has changed. I think the same applies to moron and imbecele.

Mong and spastic arent, however, and shouldnt be used in my opinion.

That whole ricky gervais 'monggate' was outrageous.

I never knew the original meaning of cretin. Ive always thought of it as meaning rascal / scoundrel in the context that it is used nowadays.

Is this a very outdated definition?

Idiot isnt a word i use really but its my go to word when im in company where i feel dickhead or tit would be inappropriate.

So basically just with the inlaws. If ive been inadvertently offensive all this time i may have to just use dickhead as calling someone a fool just isnt my bag

Funny that though how we or just me must always use a word that is OTT? Like if a stranger is a bit rude then they are automatically a nob?

all very good points, but playing devil's advocate here... if everybody would stop being so overly sensitive and trying to be overly PC a lot of debate could be averted

It puzzles me that in this day and age, the term 'bastard' is still used as an insult.

Ah nice memories, walking around the Bayeux tapestry, listening to the English translation and watching the two 8-10 year old children react when William the conqueror was names William the Bastard.

well did zzzz

said. stupid kb

I agree with you OP and I had this very discussion on MN about 18 months ago iirc, when we were talking about the words retarded and spastic etc. I pointed out that they were acceptable, and not only acceptable, but the established term used by HCPs for a time, and only when they became playground insults did is seem necessary to stop using the words. and it has been unacceptable for years in the UK to talk about 'being handicapped' and yet that is still a perfectly acceptable term to describe disability in the US.

I think idiot was used so long ago to describe someone with LDs or very limited intelligence that people seem to have forgotten, and no longer see it as being in the same category as other words now considered offensive. People who burst a blood vessel and some terms will happily say 'idiot' without giving it a second thought.

I think that we feel a need to keep re-labelling and re-defining any kind of disability or inability, mental or physical, in a bid to rid the condition in question of any negative connotation whatsoever, but human nature being what it is, things keep catching up with us and we need to do it all over again by inventing a new term.

A good example is the term 'special needs'. It was originally coined as a catch all 'PC' term to replace outdated phrases such as retarded backwards or crippled etc. But now people get told off for disparagingly using the word 'speshal' to describe someone being particularly high maintenance for any reason.

And now we are moving more towards the term 'Additional Needs.' So it's only a matter of time before 'Special Needs' will get you a slap on the wrist and a raised eyebrow.

oh ffs my autocorrect drives me NUTS.

that should have said 'people who burst a blood vessel at some terms'

Really interesting points here.

I don't think it is true to say the sting has totally been taken out of being illegitimate, therefore 'bastard' is fine as its negative connotations are ancient history.

My MIL is still quite bosom hoiking about children born out of wedlock - as are other women of her age/social background. So it is odd that we are all so blase about 'bastard' and so upset my 'moron' - especially when no one complains about 'idiot'.

I think we have to accept this is about feelings not logic. Therefore those that are offended should extend the same empathy to those that inadvertently offend them - as it is not a straightforward and easy set of rules. Explain, don't judge.

Women as birds is. Derivative of bride.

Language evolves, the meaning of words change. Some of the serially offended really need to get over it and find something better to do.

I have heard young people (under 25) use the terms mong and spaz, and I am not sure they always even know the origins of what they are saying. The words mongol and spastic had long fallen out of official usage years before they were even born, they do not necessarily associate those words with Downs Syndrome or Cerebral Palsy, and they are equally or even more unlikely to know what a Thalidomide affected person is, although they may know the term 'flid' and use it as an casual insult for someone who they find clumsy or awkward. The point is that however unpleasant we may find it, they quite possibly bandy these words around with the same innocence that we say 'idiot' and for similar reasons.

Of course they are still being disparaging when they say it, but only in the loosest terms. I remember when the word 'gay' became a playground insult and my eldest son started using it, to describe anything he thought was lame or unappealing - the wrong sorts of shoes for instance. Obviously the origins of using gay as way to describe something has its roots on homophobia, but when 8 year olds start saying 'those shoes are so gay' I think we can assume that the word has been adopted and given a whole new meaning. Just like it was when homosexual people adopted it and applied it to themselves when previously it just meant happy.

I have just realised I have inadvertently used the word lame to describe something inadequate, substandard or unappealing. But lame is also an outdated term to describe a person with a physical mobility problem. These days it's only used for horses! So should we also not say lame? Are we not implying that people with mobility problems are inadequate or substandard or unappealing ? Where does it stop?

The trouble is that language has to try and keep one step ahead of the wankers but it is nigh on impossible.

I, perhaps understandably, recoil from the words that are used to insult my son - the stuff that gets shouted at him- and are then appropriated when the most insulting thing someone can think of is to compare the someone to a person with learning difficulties or disability.

So someone using 'retard' on here is using a word that has been spat at my son and using it to mean 'someone I find so dreadful that that the very worst thing I can think to call them is a word to describe SN'
Obviously offensive to me.

But as soon as you have a phrase that should just be a catch all, a descriptor for a collective of people who are vulnerable in a particular way it gets turned into an insult by those who will always look to my son as the way to insult 'normal' people..
Special needs is creeping in as an insult. Autistic is too. Friends insults Joey by calling him 'Rainman'. If you change a term then it's replacement Then that will be used.
It's because people fundamentally want to use people like my son as an insult.

I think some words , like idiot, have changed over the years to just mean a person who behaves in a dangerous, foolish or nonsensical way without the implication that they have learning disabilities.
Sometimes people use words like imbecile or mong or cretin and think they are using a word to mean a rational reason behaving foolishly. Sometimes they use them intentionally to liken the person to someone with SN in a horrible derogatory way.
The trouble is its really down to what they intend and that's often hard to judge.

So essentially, if twat heads ddn't think it hilarious to shape insults by using SN as if that is the most insulting thing you can call someone then the language would take care of itself.

All I can do is to object to the ones that actually most of us know are meant to say 'the most scummy insult I can throw at you is that you are just like someone with learning difficulties'
Because people who think that is valid are scum bags.

Interesting discussion. I was just thinking about the word "lame" too, TheRealFellatio. As in, a lame excuse etc. I would generally consider myself quite good at avoiding use of potentially disablist words but that one I would use without thinking.

Slightly off-topic from the SN-related words: why is eg cunt seen as a much more shocking word than twat or fanny? They all mean the same thing, right? So who decides which is more offensive? And why do I feel more shocked by one than the others? Is it just because I've been conditioned by society to have this response?

Part of the problem with "spaz" is that it is a perfectly acceptable term in the US.

Generally, any term that is used to convey an insult will be rooted in something once perceived to be undesirable - that's what makes them insults. It would be impossible to weed them all out. I think there comes a point where you have to accept that a word has moved on (eg idiot, bastard) and that the meaning, or the sentiment behind it, is not quite the same as it may once have been.

'Zzz' you could equally have written that post and replaced 'right to be vile' with 'right to be offended' same argument works both ways.