Hey, serious question, why is “-tard” still considered to be a slur? It’s no longer used in any professional capacity (at least in the US), so it seems like it’d be more offensive to insist that it still applies to people who are intellectually disabled than to let it become another synonym for stupid, dumb, idiot, etc (which were all professional diagnosis as well btw). I can understand wanting to discourage its use as an insult if it’s a professional diagnosis, but it’s not considered one anymore.
Huh, I’m gonna have to think about this one. My experience growing up was that, despite being neurodivergent, I never felt like I was being called it anymore than anyone else, and that was probably at the height of its informal use (when it was considered just another way of calling someone stupid).
However, it does make me wonder if the declaration of it being a slur backfired. Is it used as a slur against neurodivergent people more often now than it used to be? I’m wondering if the people who were using it as a generic insult stopped using it, which meant the people using it as a slur became the only users, which solidified its status as a slur.
ehhh, it was institutionalized for a long time and that creates an unspeakable amount of trauma. I prefer knowing who’s a bigot and who isn’t straight up.
AKTHUALLY there are non-insulting uses, e.g. to “retard” something or saying something is a “retardant” (like a fire retardant). Yes, those are the same “retard” because if I understand correctly, that’s where the word originated from.
I also want to point out the circular logic you have going on. It’s a slur because it’s considered one, so it’s only use is as a slur, as a result, it only gets used as a slur, so it’s considered a slur, so it only ever gets used as one.
To be clear, that’s not disregarding what you said, but I wanted to point out a flaw in that logic.
Sure, there are related non slur words, but those aren’t applied to people. “To retard” is a verb, not an adjective or noun. “retardent” is an adjective, but describes the action of soemething, not a quality. Using the noun or past tense adjective is the slur.
And language doesn’t have logic. Like, its pretty weird to suggest it does. Why is fuck a curse? Because its a curse. Why do we call blue things blue? Becabse they are blue. Language and logic rarely intersect (except in lojban). Language is determined by usage, and the usage of that word as a noun is as a slur.
Sure, there are related non slur words, but those aren’t applied to people. “To retard” is a verb, not an adjective or noun. “retardent” is an adjective, but describes the action of soemething, not a quality. Using the noun or past tense adjective is the slur.
You’re right, that’s why I started with “AKTHUALLY”. I knew I was being pedantic and wanted to signal that. Nevertheless, I find it interesting that the two uses of the word share the same origin.
And language doesn’t have logic.
I can dream okay? Things make so much more sense when people follow logic. “Fuck” shouldn’t be considered a curse because it isn’t cursing anyone.
Profanity?
Sure I guess.
A curse?
No, dumbass (not you, I’m referring to an imaginary individual), it’s not cursing anyone you fucko.
Why is blue, “blue”?
Because it had to be called something.
I know that you were looking for examples of language being illogical, but I wanna point out that while “fuck” is a good example, “blue” not so much. “Blue” is consistent with the internal logic of English (it’s a name given to an otherwise unnamed color), but “fuck” being defined as a curse word isn’t consistent with English’s internal logic.
To curse something is to invoke some kind of metaphysical or supernatural power against someone as a form of punishment^1. Last I checked, there isn’t a god, demon, angel, or other religious entity called, “fuck”, “fucko”, “fuckhead” or any other variation, and as such, it shouldn’t be considered a curse word. Nor can “fuck” be considered a form of curse by itself. “Get fucked” could be considered a curse, but “fuck” by itself shouldn’t be viewed as a curse.
Could it be considered profane? Sure, I guess, but I feel like that’d be watering down the definition of profane/profanity. However, you are correct it pointing out that it doesn’t follow logic to label it a curse word.
In the future, an alternative to “blue” might be to point out read, read, red. Read and read are pronounced differently, but spelled the same. Read and red are pronounced the same, but spelled differently.
^1 there’s an alternate definition for “curse” which goes:
“a coarse or blasphemous word or phrase used to express anger or other strong emotion.”
However, that’s extremely broad, as blaspheme refers to
“the act or offense of speaking sacrilegiously about God or sacred things; profane talk.”
And profane?
“relating or devoted to that which is not sacred or biblical; secular rather than religious.”
Interestingly, colors don’t have to have distinct names. There are languages without a distinct color name for blue. English didn’t have a distinct word for pink until the 17th century, when the word was borrowed from the name of a flower, or a distinct word for orange until 14th century when it was borrowed from the fruit. Even the word blue didn’t enter english until 13th century (from french), although old english had a word for at least related hues.
I didn’t know that, that’s pretty interesting! Still, I mean, it doesn’t technically go against any rules for the color blue to be called “blue” afaik.
I tend to think of a coarse word as something that feels coarse when it’s spoken, like jerk or shrine; words that have a “ch”, “sh”, “zh” or similar sound. Fuck doesn’t fit the bill though.
Edit: Oh, a good example from a previous reply I made, is “actually”. “Actually” feels coarse to me, but then again, I tend to pronounce actually like “acschually”, where the T makes a “sch” sound.
I also want to point out the circular logic you have going on. It’s a slur because it’s considered one, so it’s only use is as a slur, as a result, it only gets used as a slur, so it’s considered a slur, so it only ever gets used as one.
Yes, that’s exactly how language works. The meaning of words is determined by usage.
Technically, yes, those are all ableist terms due to the way they enforce a hierarchy of cognitive ability. Calling somebody “stupid,” “dumb,” “idiotic,” “moronic,” “insane,” or the r-slur in a pejorative manner is basically telling them that nothing they say is of value to you because you think their brain is less capable than your own of forming a coherent point.
Some of these are just considered stronger than others for one reason or another.
Hey, serious question, why is “-tard” still considered to be a slur? It’s no longer used in any professional capacity (at least in the US), so it seems like it’d be more offensive to insist that it still applies to people who are intellectually disabled than to let it become another synonym for stupid, dumb, idiot, etc (which were all professional diagnosis as well btw). I can understand wanting to discourage its use as an insult if it’s a professional diagnosis, but it’s not considered one anymore.
it gets applied broadly to a variety of neurodivergent and developmentally disabled people and its use against those people has left many with trauma
Huh, I’m gonna have to think about this one. My experience growing up was that, despite being neurodivergent, I never felt like I was being called it anymore than anyone else, and that was probably at the height of its informal use (when it was considered just another way of calling someone stupid).
However, it does make me wonder if the declaration of it being a slur backfired. Is it used as a slur against neurodivergent people more often now than it used to be? I’m wondering if the people who were using it as a generic insult stopped using it, which meant the people using it as a slur became the only users, which solidified its status as a slur.
ehhh, it was institutionalized for a long time and that creates an unspeakable amount of trauma. I prefer knowing who’s a bigot and who isn’t straight up.
Fair enough.
Its no longer used in a proffesional capacity partly because its a slur (its also meaninglessly broad as a diagnosis).
Its considered a slur because the only current use of it is as a slur
AKTHUALLY there are non-insulting uses, e.g. to “retard” something or saying something is a “retardant” (like a fire retardant). Yes, those are the same “retard” because if I understand correctly, that’s where the word originated from.
I also want to point out the circular logic you have going on. It’s a slur because it’s considered one, so it’s only use is as a slur, as a result, it only gets used as a slur, so it’s considered a slur, so it only ever gets used as one.
To be clear, that’s not disregarding what you said, but I wanted to point out a flaw in that logic.
Sure, there are related non slur words, but those aren’t applied to people. “To retard” is a verb, not an adjective or noun. “retardent” is an adjective, but describes the action of soemething, not a quality. Using the noun or past tense adjective is the slur.
And language doesn’t have logic. Like, its pretty weird to suggest it does. Why is fuck a curse? Because its a curse. Why do we call blue things blue? Becabse they are blue. Language and logic rarely intersect (except in lojban). Language is determined by usage, and the usage of that word as a noun is as a slur.
You’re right, that’s why I started with “AKTHUALLY”. I knew I was being pedantic and wanted to signal that. Nevertheless, I find it interesting that the two uses of the word share the same origin.
I can dream okay? Things make so much more sense when people follow logic. “Fuck” shouldn’t be considered a curse because it isn’t cursing anyone.
Profanity?
Sure I guess.
A curse?
No, dumbass (not you, I’m referring to an imaginary individual), it’s not cursing anyone you fucko.
Why is blue, “blue”?
Because it had to be called something.
I know that you were looking for examples of language being illogical, but I wanna point out that while “fuck” is a good example, “blue” not so much. “Blue” is consistent with the internal logic of English (it’s a name given to an otherwise unnamed color), but “fuck” being defined as a curse word isn’t consistent with English’s internal logic.
To curse something is to invoke some kind of metaphysical or supernatural power against someone as a form of punishment^1. Last I checked, there isn’t a god, demon, angel, or other religious entity called, “fuck”, “fucko”, “fuckhead” or any other variation, and as such, it shouldn’t be considered a curse word. Nor can “fuck” be considered a form of curse by itself. “Get fucked” could be considered a curse, but “fuck” by itself shouldn’t be viewed as a curse.
Could it be considered profane? Sure, I guess, but I feel like that’d be watering down the definition of profane/profanity. However, you are correct it pointing out that it doesn’t follow logic to label it a curse word.
In the future, an alternative to “blue” might be to point out read, read, red. Read and read are pronounced differently, but spelled the same. Read and red are pronounced the same, but spelled differently.
^1 there’s an alternate definition for “curse” which goes:
However, that’s extremely broad, as blaspheme refers to
And profane?
…right.
Interestingly, colors don’t have to have distinct names. There are languages without a distinct color name for blue. English didn’t have a distinct word for pink until the 17th century, when the word was borrowed from the name of a flower, or a distinct word for orange until 14th century when it was borrowed from the fruit. Even the word blue didn’t enter english until 13th century (from french), although old english had a word for at least related hues.
I didn’t know that, that’s pretty interesting! Still, I mean, it doesn’t technically go against any rules for the color blue to be called “blue” afaik.
Yeah, its more a “thats just how it is” sort of thing
Also, I think the coarse part of that definition is doing the work when it comes to fuck. And what is a coarse word? I’ll know it when I see it.
I tend to think of a coarse word as something that feels coarse when it’s spoken, like jerk or shrine; words that have a “ch”, “sh”, “zh” or similar sound. Fuck doesn’t fit the bill though.
Edit: Oh, a good example from a previous reply I made, is “actually”. “Actually” feels coarse to me, but then again, I tend to pronounce actually like “acschually”, where the T makes a “sch” sound.
I think, in the definition, its more a social comentary. Coarse language comes from coarse people
Yes, that’s exactly how language works. The meaning of words is determined by usage.
Technically, yes, those are all ableist terms due to the way they enforce a hierarchy of cognitive ability. Calling somebody “stupid,” “dumb,” “idiotic,” “moronic,” “insane,” or the r-slur in a pejorative manner is basically telling them that nothing they say is of value to you because you think their brain is less capable than your own of forming a coherent point. Some of these are just considered stronger than others for one reason or another.