For being a bit bored and slightly irritated by people constantly being offended by a word!!

[xlr8]

Why is it that a word used by someone from a different..part of the country, upbringing , culture , education or decade offends so many people? Why do we all make such a big deal about not liking a word that someone has used to describe something?
What ever happened to sticks and stones????????

One of my closest friends has very severe epilepsy as a result of a head injury. He is terribly laid back but he does find the 'term' epi offensive (sorry HedgeWitch, it does refer to an epileptic fit). So I don't use it, I would hate to offend somene who has a life threatening condition. So some people with epilepsy DO find it offensive ergo it is not acceptable imo.

You do what you want, I chose not to use it but I will judge those who do use casually offensive language, I can't help it.

If words cause offence - as surely you can see the words you use as examples do - then isn't not using them the considerate, adult thing to do? Whether you consider them offensive or not, the fact is that people do find them offensive, and that is what makes them offensive.

Young children use naughty words to get a rise out of people; adults should have more intelligence, particularly as there are so many better words which we can choose to use instead.

I have epilepsy and what really pisses me off is people who try to justify their use of this word or other prejudiced terms by pretending they don't really mean what they actually mean or belittling anyone who dares to protest.

The actual use of the word wouldn't wind me up too much - I'd just quietly and calmly ask the person if they knew what it meant and suggest they may want to avoid using it in future. But any attempt to justify it once the meaning is explained is very offensive. There's a big difference between saying something without thinking and insisting on your right to be downright insulting.

"Most people have stopped using racist terms cos they got educated"

really?because as far as i can see the supposed victims of racism use racist terms more than the rest of soceity.

But, but, the words we use shape how we think about people, how we behave towards them, the respect shown, how people feel about themselves, there are huge power struggles in language. Words are used to label and categorize and put down and humiliate groups of people, and if they're offended, then it's important to think about that and take it on board.

However, the woman who was offended when my dd taught her dd that it's not a 'botty pop, it's a FART', well, she can fuck off.

at fart - ds has just discovered the delights of this word (starting school has some wonderful side effects...) and is using it at every opportunity.

"expressions like "spaz", "mong" and "joey""

what's "joey" and how is it offensive? never heard that one before in my life and would have assumed i was being called a baby kangaroo.

I only very cautiously defended the use of offensive terms by a playwrite for versimilitude when representing the (offensive) views of certain characters.

But in RL I think there is no two ways about it: if you use offensive terms you risk offending.

What society considers offensive terms will change from decade to decade. Don't hear many offensive terms about Jews or Italians these days, but they were rife 70 years ago. Someone who still used them today would be seen as trying to make (an offensive) point. Paki is another term that is no longer accepted. Oh yes, and somebody mentioned coon.

Eventually, society will become more aware of disabled people as people: it is already better than it was 30 years ago. And then 'epi' and 'spazz' will go the way of 'coon' and 'wop' and nobody will think to miss them.

The English language is rich enough without these terms. How often do you feel hampered and unable to express yourself because you can't call people coons any more? No, I thought not. We can do without epi!

Joey Deacon was a man with (I think) CP who featured on Blue Peter when I was young (ie a long time ago) which makes me think they must have picked it up from their parents. Given the gestures that usually accompanied it, you wouldn't have thought they were talking about a baby kangaroo .

Well there are plenty of disabled children I know who have had these words aimed at them (which is why I always find the 'people don't know what it means' defense laughable).

If they used one of their choice words at ds2 or ds3 they would be aiming those words at a child who has a brother who could be described in that way. How do they think that would make ds2 or ds3 feel? Knowing that their brother (who they love just as much as they love each other- something that those without experience of LDs really struggle to understand ime) is seen as an offensive derogatory word. An insult.

Personally I think that people who defend the right to use words when its been explained why its offensive (anyone can use a word by mistake) are just twats. But there are a lot out there.

It's all about education and waffling around on here isn't going to solve anything if you see it as such a problem email the scriptwriters as someone did on here when, I think it was the word spaz, was used in the film Love Actually!

But then I am thick because when she said it on Eastenders last night I thought what has an epi pen got to do with anything???

Just wanted to add:

Some words may become accepted into the language if their origins become totally obscured. Who now remembers that 'silly' used to be a positive term, meaning 'blessed' (same word as German 'selig')?

In the same way, the Swedish/German word for 'stupid' is 'dum/dumm'. It is the only fairly neutral non-offensive word there is, and you would have to very educated indeed to know that this is the same root as English 'dumb' and that originally (many hundreds of years ago) it referred to a disability. Virtually the whole Swedish and German nations use this word perfectly innocently.

Other words, like 'idiot' started out innocent (an 'idiot' originally means somebody who is self-educated); at a later stage it was used to refer to learning disabilities; it has now become a derogatory term for NT people. So does that make 'idiot' offensive to disabled people? Depends on whether you're thinking of the 13th century or the 18th. The village idiot is clearly a person with learning disabilities- but when St Francis's 13th century biographers called him an idiot, all they meant was that he hadn't been to university.

So words are funny things, their meanings do change. But this is unlikely to happen to 'spazz'. Such changes presuppose a long period in which people use the term in a non-innocent way. And one would like to think that we are moving away from those attitudes.

I know thay are used against people with those disabilities.

I also said I came down strongly on any use of the words. This isn't a justification of their use in any context.

I'm just saying that the children who were using the words made a distinction between them, and the analogy with racist terms did not make my point to them. That's all.

Twinkie, waffling on on here might actually help to educate some people who weren't aware that terms such as 'epi' are discriminatory - there have been a few posters who didn't know what it meant.

And we are as entitled to discuss this as any other subject.

Well, that's how I put it to them edam. Not really expressions that they tended to use, but it did help. They needed to think about it. As yurt said, relating it to children they knew, and the effect on them, was also useful.

I feel like I'm being interpreted as condoning it. I don't. I'm just interested in the most effective way of making children think about what they say.

The one phrase that was really resistant was "gay". Sadly.

No, no I know you're not condoning it.

I suppose you could ask then whether they would ever use it as a descriptive word - in an essay (do they do those anymore? ) on British colonial history for example? And if not, why not. Is it the word itself that actually offensive no matter who the intended audience is.

Perhaps also tell them that it reflects on them. If I hear someone using mong for example I would either a) assume they didn't know its derivation or b) if it was obvious they did then I would assume they were unpleasant, unintelligent and not the sort of person I would want to know as a friend/promote at work etc etc.

Gay is harder- but perhaps in part because these days there is a lot less prejudice against homosexuality -especially in the younger group- these days (that's how it seems to me- am ready to be corrected).

Sadly I'm not sure that last comment is correct jimjams. There is still a pretty hardcore prejudice, especially ampng some groups.

I am liking the idea of an essay on British colonial history. In fact, I think I shall tell them to write such an essay as a punishment

My eldest uses gay all the time...he knows its wrong...he knows it annoys me. I no longer comment on it but he loses something every time he uses it.

some people are offended by 'grey' and 'brainstorm' you cannot have a 'gingerbread man' anymore .. I think it's all very newspeak .. it's not double plus good if you ask me.

Why can't you have a gingerbread man? And what's offensive about 'grey'? Genuine question.

"you cannot have a 'gingerbread man' anymore"

?