• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Ableist language and substitutes?

Viridian

New member
Joined
Dec 30, 2010
Messages
3,036
MBTI Type
IsFJ
I've browsed Tumblr in the recent past and found quite a lot of stuff on Social Justice subjects. One topic that seems to pop up from time to time is prejudiced language - not just racial slurs, but also gender-specific words and phrases like "bitch", "emasculate", "shrill", "slutty", "like a man", etc. It's a pretty interesting topic, and it made me try not to use these words anymore.

Ableist language is another big issue, especially concerning mental conditions. Insults like "dumb", "lame", "retarded", "psycho", "spazz", "crazy", "insane" and others are variably considered offensive by people who have disabilities. Even phrases like "putting your best foot forward" and "look before you leap" are being condemned by those who believe this kind of language implies that "walking > rolling".

Still, it raises the question: are there any words or phrases that culd be used in place of those, but without the ableist connotations/implications? I'm still struggling to find something with the same "flavor" as "lame"...
 

Randomnity

insert random title here
Joined
May 8, 2007
Messages
9,485
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
The whole fuss about it makes me want to use words like that much more than I would otherwise. I dislike excessive sanitization of the language. (Clearly there are exceptions like the N-word and similar, and I also think racism is a bigger deal than other forms of discrimination both for historical and logical reasons, and racist words should be considered accordingly).

Of course you are free to avoid this language yourself. Nothing has exactly the same connotations, because that's how language works. You could always mix it up with "gay", if you prefer to insult a different group once in a while. :D
 

Coriolis

Si vis pacem, para bellum
Staff member
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
27,230
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Political correctness run amok. That's retarded.

Seriously, though, if you don't want to use words like "dumb", "lame", "crazy", etc. just cut to the chase and state what makes it so. Is it dumb because it overlooked a key imput? Lame because it was poorly executed? Crazy because it was spur-of-the-moment without forethought? Specificity to the rescue; also appropriate when speaking with people who are not native English speakers, and might not understand "lame" or "retarded" in the context used.
 

Randomnity

insert random title here
Joined
May 8, 2007
Messages
9,485
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Completely off-topic posts have been moved to graveyard...
 

CzeCze

RETIRED
Joined
Sep 11, 2007
Messages
8,975
MBTI Type
GONE
Still, it raises the question: are there any words or phrases that culd be used in place of those, but without the ableist connotations/implications? I'm still struggling to find something with the same "flavor" as "lame"...

The savage love guy recommends the use of "leotarded" in lieu of "retarded".

In terms of contemporary use and potential offensiveness, "retarded" is the most inflammatory. Moreso than that is "gay". Some words have gotten so sterilized or more so folded into language that people forget the origins, like "lame" or the term "gyped" which means ripped off. the word supposedly came from "gypsies" who are of course thieves, dontcha know. a decade or so ago a guy went on a hunger strike to protest the term "welsh a bet" which is another way of saying "Indian giver". He was Welsh. I think most people today don't even realize that Welsh people was what tht term referred to. "Indian giver" is racist but people in the states don't really care about being offensive to native Americans for some obvious reasons.

I think it's important to be conscious and more so aware of the words we use. usually when people use "violent speech" they are totally unaware of the origin of the word or how it can be offensive. That's why people use the word "gay" which bugs me on as much if not more of a grammar nazi linguistic level than a conscious person level.
 
Joined
Jun 6, 2007
Messages
7,312
MBTI Type
INTJ
The whole fuss about it makes me want to use words like that much more than I would otherwise. I dislike excessive sanitization of the language.

Despite my white maleness precluding me from having a valuable opinion on the subject, I agree.

In terms of contemporary use and potential offensiveness, "retarded" is the most inflammatory. Moreso than that is "gay". Some words have gotten so sterilized or more so folded into language that people forget the origins, like "lame" or the term "gyped" which means ripped off. the word supposedly came from "gypsies" who are of course thieves, dontcha know. a decade or so ago a guy went on a hunger strike to protest the term "welsh a bet" which is another way of saying "Indian giver". He was Welsh. I think most people today don't even realize that Welsh people was what tht term referred to. "Indian giver" is racist but people in the states don't really care about being offensive to native Americans for some obvious reasons.

To most of this, I think that these words are part of the vernacular and have nothing to do with any ill will towards the offended parties. I think people bend over backwards looking for things to be offended by. They learned it from Abraham Foxman. To the bolded part - I think that's absurd.
 

SilkRoad

Lay the coin on my tongue
Joined
May 26, 2009
Messages
3,932
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
The whole fuss about it makes me want to use words like that much more than I would otherwise. I dislike excessive sanitization of the language. (Clearly there are exceptions like the N-word and similar, and I also think racism is a bigger deal than other forms of discrimination both for historical and logical reasons, and racist words should be considered accordingly).

Of course you are free to avoid this language yourself. Nothing has exactly the same connotations, because that's how language works. You could always mix it up with "gay", if you prefer to insult a different group once in a while. :D


I agree. I know you're Canadian and I think Canada is particularly guilty of this. I mean, taking it to such an extreme that it becomes laughable. I am from the West Coast and probably went to the most PC university in the world. "Ombudsperson", "non-gender-specific language" and "craftspersonlike", anyone?? :dry:

Personally, I think terms such as "Indian giver" are best avoided because they imply that native Americans/Canadians are dishonest...etc. But then, in Canada at least you're not supposed to use "Indian" at all - it's "First Nations", which again I think is a bit OTT. What is wrong with respectfully saying "native Canadian" or something similar? Otherwise you get stuck with something pretentious like "an individual of First Nations origin." !!
 

CzeCze

RETIRED
Joined
Sep 11, 2007
Messages
8,975
MBTI Type
GONE
I agree. I know you're Canadian and I think Canada is particularly guilty of this. I mean, taking it to such an extreme that it becomes laughable. I am from the West Coast and probably went to the most PC university in the world. "Ombudsperson", "non-gender-specific language" and "craftspersonlike", anyone?? :dry:

Personally, I think terms such as "Indian giver" are best avoided because they imply that native Americans/Canadians are dishonest...etc. But then, in Canada at least you're not supposed to use "Indian" at all - it's "First Nations", which again I think is a bit OTT. What is wrong with respectfully saying "native Canadian" or something similar? Otherwise you get stuck with something pretentious like "an individual of First Nations origin." !!

I thought you were British? :Huh:

I doubt the school you went to was that PC. especially if it were Cal. :alttongue:

To most of this, I think that these words are part of the vernacular and have nothing to do with any ill will towards the offended parties. I think people bend over backwards looking for things to be offended by. They learned it from Abraham Foxman. To the bolded part - I think that's absurd.

iMPERIALIST!

The thread is so boring ow with the derails taken out. C'mon FM, let's have a proper rhetorical throw down!!!

On a more serious note I think the point of questions like the OP is simply to be more thoughtful about language use.

Also,the question starts to differ when you're talking about referring to things generally or referring to someone face to face. Or does it? Also I think part of the pushback from questions like the OP is that there's often a gut reaction of irritation at being told "you can't do that". It doesn't matter if youre being told not to smoke indoors (because it exposes others to unhealthy etc) or not to wear miniskirts (because it's indecent and immodest) or not to swear in front of kids, etc. if its something you are use to doing and enjoy doing, you automatically want to rail against the entity telling you "no you can't do that"

Some people might say this is linked to a sense of entitlement and privilege but if you want to take those notions out of the picture you could also say its a matter of expectation and habit. If you are very used to saying something one way you will be resitant to change.

To answer your question Viridian, you could always say:

That's wack!

also, don't you know Portuguese? Isn't there a nice word you can subsitute?
 

SilkRoad

Lay the coin on my tongue
Joined
May 26, 2009
Messages
3,932
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I thought you were British? :Huh:

I doubt the school you went to was that PC. especially if it were Cal. :alttongue:

I'm Canadian, but I live in England now. :)

I went to university on the west coast of Canada, and believe me, the PC-ness is insane out there. Most people either from Europe, or from other parts of Canada, laugh in disbelief when I tell them about how the university paper insisted on the word "craftspersonlike" rather than "craftsmanlike" (and lots of similar things....)
 

Orangey

Blah
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
6,354
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
6w5
I don't think it does any harm to be made aware of the origins of words and how/when/why they are offensive, or at least to be made aware of the fact that they could be offensive. At worst it encourages a fleeting kind of empathy for one's interlocutors, and at best it provides a motivation for critical inspection of one's privilege and how it affects people who don't have that privilege.

The problem is that language policing (which, mind you, is different than being critical of language and raising awareness) can easily become a vehicle for some people's out of control self-righteousness, and at that point it's no longer about educating or changing prejudicial attitudes; rather, it turns into an ego and a power issue, and everybody who can sense it rankles at the idea of somebody setting themselves up on a moral high ground just to sneer down at them from above and justify controlling behavior.
 

Metamorphosis

New member
Joined
May 9, 2007
Messages
3,474
MBTI Type
INTJ
It's a strange thing.

I think it's only the meaning of the word that is really important (not to say that some phrases or word choices aren't inherently racist/hating). That's why I never understood why people can make any real arguments against profanity on moral grounds (without using religion). If I change the letters but the meaning is exactly the same, then nothing has really changed.

With that said, everyone doesn't think about these things and are overly zealous/righteous so a reasonable person is forced to make some concessions and regulate their word use.
 

Randomnity

insert random title here
Joined
May 8, 2007
Messages
9,485
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I agree. I know you're Canadian and I think Canada is particularly guilty of this. I mean, taking it to such an extreme that it becomes laughable. I am from the West Coast and probably went to the most PC university in the world. "Ombudsperson", "non-gender-specific language" and "craftspersonlike", anyone?? :dry:
I'm pretty damn PC overall, I would say. I don't like the awkward names, but I do agree with changing job titles to be non-gender specific, like fireman-->firefighter, policeman-->police officer, stewardess-->flight attendant, etc. Gender discrimination is bad enough without having it implicit in the job title! But sure, it can go overboard.
Personally, I think terms such as "Indian giver" are best avoided because they imply that native Americans/Canadians are dishonest...etc. But then, in Canada at least you're not supposed to use "Indian" at all - it's "First Nations", which again I think is a bit OTT. What is wrong with respectfully saying "native Canadian" or something similar? Otherwise you get stuck with something pretentious like "an individual of First Nations origin." !!
I think native canadian is (or should be) fine, but Indian is objectionable since from my understanding it's only because the landmass was originally misidentified as India. So it's both confusing and maybe a little insulting.

I don't think it does any harm to be made aware of the origins of words and how/when/why they are offensive, or at least to be made aware of the fact that they could be offensive. At worst it encourages a fleeting kind of empathy for one's interlocutors, and at best it provides a motivation for critical inspection of one's privilege and how it affects people who don't have that privilege.

The problem is that language policing (which, mind you, is different than being critical of language and raising awareness) can easily become a vehicle for some people's out of control self-righteousness, and at that point it's no longer about educating or changing prejudicial attitudes; rather, it turns into an ego and a power issue, and everybody who can sense it rankles at the idea of somebody setting themselves up on a moral high ground just to sneer down at them from above and justify controlling behavior.

I agree with all of this.

I also think context is relevant. Calling a person with a mental handicap "retarded" is highly, highly offensive (mostly due to history from what I understand, since the literal meaning is "slower" which doesn't seem that bad to me?). Calling a situation or idea retarded is no different from calling it dumb/lame/crazy/etc. Which is generally accepted, with the exception of a few very sensitive individuals.

I am curious whether the situation might appear differently to someone who is handicapped, or mentally ill, or whatever. I'm sure that each of those subpopulations has its share of oversensitive vs. tactless individuals too, but I'm curious whether the majority of (let's say) schizophrenic people would be insulted by people saying "crazy" or "hearing things" or whatever.
 

Rasofy

royal member
Joined
Mar 7, 2011
Messages
5,881
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
funny-facebook-fails-sucking-it-up.jpg
 

Viridian

New member
Joined
Dec 30, 2010
Messages
3,036
MBTI Type
IsFJ
Also,the question starts to differ when you're talking about referring to things generally or referring to someone face to face. Or does it? Also I think part of the pushback from questions like the OP is that there's often a gut reaction of irritation at being told "you can't do that". It doesn't matter if youre being told not to smoke indoors (because it exposes others to unhealthy etc) or not to wear miniskirts (because it's indecent and immodest) or not to swear in front of kids, etc. if its something you are use to doing and enjoy doing, you automatically want to rail against the entity telling you "no you can't do that"

Some people might say this is linked to a sense of entitlement and privilege but if you want to take those notions out of the picture you could also say its a matter of expectation and habit. If you are very used to saying something one way you will be resitant to change.

Part of the problem, I think, is that there isn't a list or "code" that spells out what is or isn't acceptable. You have no way of knowing for sure what's offensive or not without the damage being done first. I never thought "look before you leap" was offensive, but, since I do not belong to the group of people who that phrase is offensive to, I simply nod and say, "okey dokey!".

To answer your question Viridian, you could always say:

That's wack!

also, don't you know Portuguese? Isn't there a nice word you can subsitute?

Well, Portuguese is another matter. I was talking mostly about English. Although "retarded" is often used as an insult here, FWIW.

Also, isn't "wack" (or "wacko") an insult originally aimed at those with mental illnesses? :thinking:

(I'll miss "lunatic", though - such a funny word!)

I am curious whether the situation might appear differently to someone who is handicapped, or mentally ill, or whatever. I'm sure that each of those subpopulations has its share of oversensitive vs. tactless individuals too, but I'm curious whether the majority of (let's say) schizophrenic people would be insulted by people saying "crazy" or "hearing things" or whatever.

Yeah, I wonder how many of those offended are actual people with disabilities vs. people on the internet who want to feel morally superior to others. ("You know I'm so much purer than / the common, vulgar, weak, licentious crowd!")
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
Enable and Disable

Propagandists seek to substitute pejorative words for positive words in describing their enemies.

And the same propagandists seek to substitute postive words for pejorative words in describing their friends.

And so we know who the friends of the propagandists are by their use of ableist words in describing them.

And so the propagandists enable their friends and disable their enemies.
 
A

Anew Leaf

Guest
Language is expression and voice and reason and laughter and swirling points of soul light. Why would I want to sully the waters with thoughts designed to protect those who have so much time on their hands (OMG WHAT IF THEY HAVE NO HANDS) that they will find offense where none is being given.

My brain is a free range brain and I take the chance of both adoring and offending people with what flutters and flits outside; or perhaps creeps and slithers and dies.

To sum up:

This:
175px-Martian_face_viking_cropped.jpg


This:
265px-Mars_face.png


Done.
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
I've browsed Tumblr in the recent past and found quite a lot of stuff on Social Justice subjects. One topic that seems to pop up from time to time is prejudiced language - not just racial slurs, but also gender-specific words and phrases like "bitch", "emasculate", "shrill", "slutty", "like a man", etc. It's a pretty interesting topic, and it made me try not to use these words anymore.

Ableist language is another big issue, especially concerning mental conditions. Insults like "dumb", "lame", "retarded", "psycho", "spazz", "crazy", "insane" and others are variably considered offensive by people who have disabilities. Even phrases like "putting your best foot forward" and "look before you leap" are being condemned by those who believe this kind of language implies that "walking > rolling".

Still, it raises the question: are there any words or phrases that culd be used in place of those, but without the ableist connotations/implications? I'm still struggling to find something with the same "flavor" as "lame"...

I'm undecided about this sort of thing, it features in Ursula Le Guin's anarchist planet in The Dispossessed as a success but that is an ambivalent utopia and towards its conclusion demonstrates how entropy resulted in it simply becoming political correctness or being corrupted.

Wittgenstein wrote some good stuff about words and meaning too, suggesting that their meaning can be more relative or ambiguous than people imagine and require some definition. For instance games, how do you define games? Fun? Well competition may not always be fun, it could be challenging. Winners and losers? Well some games dont have winners or losers but are still games.

There is a lot of that language, like "spazz" etc. which I would never use, I never use the word "gay" in a prejorative sense and correct people when I hear that too, I never use political labels or definitions in prejorative senses when I'm not angry and can avoid it, so "liberal", "socialist", "libertarian" and "conservative" are neutral until something is tagged on like "scumbag" but I appreciate for some other people those words mean "scumbag" as they are. I dont talk that way because I want to be the change I want to see in the world or others. Which involves less hostility, less aggression, less deriving self-esteem from "othering" processes and put downs.
 

Such Irony

Honor Thy Inferior
Joined
Jul 23, 2010
Messages
5,059
MBTI Type
INtp
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
I think no matter what term you use, someone will be offended by it. There isn't a way around it. You can use a more politically correct term but even some of the politically correct terms someone could find offensive and then what are you going to replace it with?
 

Trunks

I'm not Trunks
Joined
Feb 1, 2012
Messages
333
I don't know how to speak well with other people, but I do keep learning and have a bit improvement for the past few years. I didn't like to talk much, I think before I talk, but sometimes it just went wrong. Maybe I'm too blunt..I think the best way is learn to keep my mouth shut, and only talk when necessary.
 

FunnyDigestion

New member
Joined
Mar 18, 2011
Messages
1,126
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4
Language is expression and voice and reason and laughter and swirling points of soul light. Why would I want to sully the waters with thoughts designed to protect those who have so much time on their hands (OMG WHAT IF THEY HAVE NO HANDS) that they will find offense where none is being given.

Well, if you're standing around some people who are mentally retarded, you wouldn't want to joke around with the word "retard" or something. With unsullied crystalline waters of calling your friends retards without knowing that retardation was an actual condition for people, you wouldn't know better. People would cry, they would beat you with swords.

Thinking about the complexity of language doesn't sully it in my opinion, it thickens it. Makes it dense & rich like black soil.

connotations!!
 
Top