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.

Funnily enough I heard the term 'I am monged out' on FB for the first time yesterday - it was a comment to a mutual friend from someone I don't know (I think they were swapping hangover stories after the night before) and she looked to be in her 40's. I was shocked and offended. Not only had I never heard it used in that kind of context, but I really thought anyone of my age who was a friend of any friend of mine should have known better.

No I mean when it became a word that would be used as an insult to describe something a bit pathetic. Obviously they wouldn't use a word meaning happy to say that. In fact I bet there is a whole generation of people who do not even realise that gay ever did mean happy.

All this debate is confirming my personal belief that intent is everything - not knowing that a term could potentially be offensive has a kind of moral neutrality, whereas deliberately choosing terminology to marginalise any sector of society is abhorrent. However, my fear is that those who choose to insult can always use 'I didn't know' as a get out clause for any of the words that have come up on here as potentially confusing and a whole raft of others, so I understand why there are those who don't accept that ignorance can be a defence. I do hope that even they would concur that it is more likely that someone didn't realise a term like 'moron' could be considered pejorative than some other more widespread insults however, but I like to think that an apology should suffice in cases where there is doubt.

Mental Health/Ability seems to be a very touchy area on MN, the only word that seems to not have someone popping up and being offended is loon.

I also now feel slightly conflicted as to whether I would now stop using the word moron, when I personally feel as though it has made the transition from what appears to have been a pseudo medical term to one which is fairly harmless in comparison to many others. I think it comes under a category which I would describe as 'theoretically offensive' in as much as I have never actually met anyone who has been offended by it in real life, but I can understand why it could upset someone who knows its origins. I will probably try to stop using it, but not beat myself up about it if I forget and just hope that my general attitude demonstrates my intent not to upset (as seems to have worked on this thread, so far at least!).

Agree with DoJo.
Intent is the thing that matters.

There was a thread on here last week where a few posters took exception to the words "weirdos" and "nutters".

They were new insult words on me, but by the end of the thread I could see why they were getting offended.

They said that weirdos and nutters were real people with feelings.
I understood her point.

I used the word loon quite a lot, and have been told off for it on here.

I refuse to stop though, as I think we need to be able to describe certain actions or states of mind that are irrational or that bewilder and exasperate us in a jokey, casual way.

However I am careful to always think about context. There is a time and place for everything, and I would not use the word loon on a thread about mental health for example.

"I used the word loon quite a lot, and have been told off for it on here"

Oh good lord - what word is acceptable now?

(Wonders how many MNetters find "Daft Punk" offensive.....)

DaftPunk often was offensive on MN :o

I think because of the origins of the word loon (as in lunatic, i.e. someone with a mental illness) some people who have mental illness find it offensive to be hear people described as a loony, or mad or bonkers. Of course it is unkind to describe someone struggling with their mental health as bonkers, or a loon, but surely it cannot be offensive to describe some harmless, low-level daft, irrational behaviour as a 'bit mad' for example. Or even harmful, majorly worrying irrational behaviour for that matter. Sometimes perfectly sane, mentally well people do 'take leave of their senses' and make hugely inadvisable decisions that are quite mad, and I think we should be able to say so, without muddling two distinct issues.

I never set out to deliberately insult or offend an innocent person, but I to think we need to be careful that we do not stifle language and the expression of emotion to a ridiculous degree for fear of treading on a political landline.

Oh good lord - what word is acceptable now?

well, exactly. Do we really have to turn PC language into a sterile wasteland? You have words that are acceptable in one culture but not another (coloured). Or even meaningless in one culture but explosive elsewhere (Paki). Complaints about a too gender specific (Bitch) but other gender-connotated words pass without comment (Bastard, Git, Wanker).

Moron is usually too angry for me, mental, nutter or loon are alright. I have moments when I qualify as a loon. :)

There are plenty of other words to use that don't demean very vulnerable children.

Which words demean only children?

Doesn't loon come from the bird?

Yes I thought loon came from the bird.

But on a slightly different note. I always find it strange what is acceptable and unacceptable as swear words.

In my parents' generation the word 'bugger', something that was considered an unnatural act, was used all the time, both as an insult and general swear word, yet fuck, a regular act between a man and woman, was totally taboo. The first time someone said fuck on TV there was general outrage.

Also the word bugger seems to have pretty much fallen out of used among young people now, and fuck is now in common usage.

I think that loon is from loony which is from lunatic. Which, given the context in which is is used, makes more sense than a diving bird doesn't it? I've always used it as a rather affectionate term though, eg when one of my children is doing something daft

Loon comes from lunatic which comes from full moon behaviour (clearly they had been introduced to ds1).

I don't have an issue with people using words in error, but find it weird that people will defend their right to use words they know other people find offensive. And find it yawnsome when objecting to words such as retard (when you have siblings who have to deal with 'your brother's a retard' type comments) earns you the title of professionally offended, or PC.

The problem is that any words can be used to demean someone. What specifically makes a word offensive? I don't think there is a real answer. In most cases a word is offensive because someone has decided it is, in others it is to do with intent.

zzzzz
"Not knowing you are being offensive is only really a defence if you generally don't think much about what you are saying and you have never had it explained to you."

I think that's unfair - this thread has shown that there are words which have offensive origins but which are in common usage today in contexts which could lead anyone to believe that they are synonymous with other, less offensive terms. It also presupposes that there is an objective definition of what is offensive, whereas the truth is that it is an almost limitless combination of personal experience, cultural norms and independent research. Implying that someone who innocently uses a word which offends someone is generally thoughtless is finding fault where it doesn't necessarily lie.

I agree DoJo

You could be a very thoughtful person and (especially depending on your age) have no idea where certain terms/names have evolved from.

That's been proved on this thread.

I do agree that intent is everything.

I also think that everything is potentially offensive. If you're no longer allowed to call someone an idiot because it's offensive to someone with learning difficulties, then what can you call them? I suppose we all draw our own lines - I would never use the words cretin or mong, but I will say idiot and moron.