Disablist language and deletions

[BOFtastic]

Sort of on the back of another thread, I've noticed recent deletions of the word 'moron' as disablist.

I''ve done some googling. It was used among a couple of other older terms, idiot and imbecile, by Henry H. Goddard, a psychologist at the turn of the 19th century to grade people of "low intelligence", and it was taken up to justify eugenics. So distasteful, yes.

Is it just that Goddard actually coined 'moron', and the other terms were pre-existing? Goddard himself disavowed it shortly afterwards, and it hasn't been in use medically for a very long time. I very much doubt that people who use the word are directly referring to learning disability- the word in that sense is long-obsolete. Much like the word 'cretin', which has a similar history.

Language changes, we all know that.

The issue gets more clear-cut, I think, when similarly-originated terms are used as insults separate to their initial meaning. It is NOT ok- regardless of the speaker's meaning and motivation- to, for example, use 'gay' to mean 'pathetic', because it is still primarily used to refer to people's sexual orientation, and making the word an insult is demeaning to them. Also words like 'retard', because alongside its general use, it is still used to abuse and insult people with learning disabilities.

That, in my opinion, should be the rule of thumb: if the initial meaning is long obsolete, fine; if it still gets used in a discriminatory sense about actually-existing groups of marginalised and oppressed people, not fine.

So after thinking about it, I don't think I agree that the word 'moron' should be deleted as disablist language.

So what do people think?

Goblinchild- Nope spelling is not my forte Thanks :)

I thought you were going for that pre-Johnson, damm your orthodox spelling rules touch.

haha I wish I had kept it- Damn all those rules of spelling etiquette :)

I have a child with sld and agree with the op and tbqh j have enough shit on my plate day to day to start getting huffy about the use of moron

But your argument was that it was fine to use 'social cripple' because the person you were referring to was NT

In certain circumstances, yes.

I don't find it offensive to refer to someone who is being deliberately socially offensive in that way.

In fact, I find it challenging for them to confront that.

You do find it offensive.

Both our views are allowed.

I'm the only one who keeps explaining my position.

Or 'damn' if we're being picky

I sort of agree with bof. I was concerned about the bit about words which no longer have their original meaning and are only used as insults, because then you would be able to use 'spaz' or 'mong' which are awful words, but I can see that's been covered. Phew. I can go back to agreeing.

For me, socially disabled is a horrible term. Why use 'disabled' as part of an insult, when you could be kind and say 'socially awkward' or unkind and say 'socially inept' ?

What's wrong with damn? Tis a good word :) Unfortunately there are so many words anyone can take offense too its hard as you will never ever please everybody.

Interesting thread. I would really struggle to see the words 'idiot/idiotic' or 'stupid' as disablist - unless addressed directly at someone with learning difficulties perhaps, but then even the mildest insult becomes offensive in that context.

'Speshel' I've often interpreted as being a bit entitled/princessy, as in "they think they're special" rather than special needs.

Nothing wrong with damn! was correcting spelling from post above!

As it happens I did say 'socially inept' on another thread nerf

In the context the person I was talking about knew damn well they were being offensive and I thought I made that clear.

Yet I was pulled up on that as well.

So how would you describe people who transgress social rules either inadvertently or, more importantly, deliberately?

And that's what I suspect is happening here in order to shut down debate.

Yes I do find it offensive. I have a social impairment. I am never 'deliberately socially offensive'

I agree with Nerf - if you use 'disabled' as part of an insult you are pretty much guaranteed to come across as offensive to people with disabilities and those who care about them. The word 'cripple' is nasty whatever the context.

I would delete 'cripple' too, as in that form it is still used as an insulting/offensive description of someone with a disability.

I think I would leave to stand its use as part of a phrase like "cripplingly shy", say. It's a grey area...

Limited - I would use 'socially inept' and wouldn't understand the being pulled up.

Well were they being deliberately offensive or not, limited? It's only in your most recent post you've introduced the idea that it might be 'inadvertent'. Up until then, you were saying it was fine to use 'socially disabled' or 'social cripple' to describe someone who was being deliberately socially offensive.

If someone is obviously being deliberately offensive, I like to use the term 'arsehole'.

So how do I describe the person who giggled and said something very offensive when I told her my mum had died plenty?

Or more importantly, how would you describe her behaviour, seeing as you have a social impairment which isn't deliberate but presumably has caused upset?

I ignored it because I know her and know that she has some difficulties with social interaction, though I don't really know what they are. Neither do I care.

She didn't mean to hurt me. She often responds inappropriately. But I still think that under the circumstances that was mighty big of me.

So, can you can you be big too? Or are you going to carry on playing social impairment top trumps?

It's just getting really difficult now because when someone hijacks a word we've used generally for a while and uses it to offend a certain group of people ie disabled people, it's not always well known

It's like 'cow' being suddenly seen as a disablist slur.

I think you might have missed the point of my post zzzz

It was a hypothetical