Stuff like "stupid, idiot, moron, dumb," you know the ones. If you’re insulting someone for their shitty garbage beliefs and all you can manage to come up with is ways to insult their intelligence, appearance, or other aspect about them that has nothing to do with their cruelty and shittyness, you should maybe reevaluate.
Just saw a thread on here where a user was stubbornly refusing to adjust their language when another user politely pointed out that it was harmful to our comrades as well, and the person refusing was massively upvoted and the comrade trying to explain why it was harmful was downvoted. Thought we were better than that
I'm not calling anyone out, just wanted to make a post explaining my feelings on it and that when stuff like that happens (not the intelligence based insults, I know its hard to switch, but getting insulted for asking people to avoid them) it hurts and makes me feel less welcome here </3
Using words like “You’re being ignorant” or “That’s a cruel belief” is actually more effective than just going “lmao idiot”.
If those are the words you actually mean to convey I'd say use them instead :)
Edit: if the reception this post got isn't a good proof that this is something this community needs to grapple with, I don't know what is.
No, it absolutely cannot he used as a generic defense of slurs because the argument he made is actually explicitly that these words are not slurs because they do not refer to any specific group of people, which a slur does by definition. And you failed to contend with the argument at all, going so far as to make up a completely different argument, pulled from your own asshole, to refute instead.
my god, do you really want to take this position? how about 'f****t' then? could be gays, could be trans people, could be loud bikers as popularized by that awful South Park episode, could be a 'bundle of sticks' :face vomiting:, could be a guy that shows a hint of anything besides toxic masculinity, could be people that you dislike for seemingly any reason.
if that's how you define slurs, you're gonna get completely lost in semantic bullshit arguments.
here is a multiple dictionary definition does not specify anything like that: https://www.thefreedictionary.com/slur
and this is totally detached from the basic issue: do these words cause unnecessary harm to people?
F word is a slur referring to members of the LGBT community, stupid and moron are nothing of the sort, because unlike that word they do not refer to any group of people. This is getting absolutely ridiculous. You’re being purposely obtuse.
I was not talking about 'stupid' or 'moron' but about the type of argument you are using which is just terrible.
In addition, 'moron' was historically defined as IQ 50-70 and has some history with eugenics, so like, it is not that harmless.
I've agreed in another comment that, unlike most other similar terms, 'stupid' and 'moron' probably should remain acceptable.
But the way you're trying to argue it here is hopeless and not going to convince anyone.
How cliche are the points I made about the F word? Guess why? Because people actually believe that shit and it lets them rationalize it for years on end.
Defining slurs in terms of 'referring to groups' is dictionary incorrect and useless as an argument.
It’s not incorrect, it’s the only way of meaningfully distinguishing a slur from any old insult, which your dictionary definition fails to do. What to you is the distinction between a slur and an insult then?
Any term we use as insult must refer to a property and all properties define subsets. There is no descriptive word of any kind that would not refer to the group of people having that property.
See examples: 'blue eyed', 'hat wearing', 'lonely', 'impoverished', 'elated', these all refer to groups of people having that property.
I don't know how I would define the difference between slur and insult; but I would have to think about that, and is probably much like the definition of a 'game', I'll know it when I see it.
But more than anything, it is a category not worth rigidly defining. Who cares if it is a slur? What matters is the effect these words have on people.
And even if I managed to change your mind that 'stupid' is in fact a slur by definition, that is likely not enough for you to stop using that word anyway, at least it shouldn't be.
TERF is arguably a slur by your definition, it refers to a specific group of people, am I going to stop using it? fuck no.
Again, my argument here is that this whole line of thinking is unproductive.
People born with below average intelligence are inherently less powerful than people born with above average intelligence. Our society values intelligence highly and people with below average intelligence are often made to feel like shit about it while people with above average intelligence are praised for it, especially as children.
Insulting/attacking/tearing people down for being less powerful than other people, especially when there’s not much they can do about that lack of power, is anti-communist.
Insults like “dumb”, “stupid” and “idiot” are essentially saying “you are lesser because you were born with less power” so they’re gross and anti-communist and we shouldn’t use them.
I’m sorry but trying to conflate “stupid” with the f word or the n word or anything like that by specifically taking my argument, which is true about the word stupid, and saying that some other people might try to make that argument about those other words, for which it would not be true, is ridiculous and idiotic. It’s not logically sound to say that because an argument would be wrong about some completely other thing, that it’s also wrong about this. Like if I said that laws against murder are good because they are essential to upholding social order and you chimed in with “that’s a terrible argument because people said the same thing about Jim Crow laws” that would obviously be ridiculous since the thing I said is true, and the people making the “same argument” in defense of some terrible thing are the ones that are wrong, not me for saying it about something to which it actually applies.
It would be rhetorically a "terrible argument because people said the same thing about Jim Crow laws"...
I certainly would not even try defending laws against murder in terms of public order, there are plenty of other much better reasons.
(but that is entirely besides the point)
Perfectly logical when directed at the form of the argument, but that's... ugh this is getting too abstract and pedantic.
Which just proves my point, you're getting nowhere with this, neither of us have even slightly shifted our position.
These kinds of semantic arguments almost never work in practice.
You have to start from definitions that everyone can agree upon if you want to get anywhere.
Obviously the f-word is bad because it harms LGBT people, no sensible person could dispute that.
That is sufficient. There is no need for a further arguments about whether or not it is technically slur.
It would be wrong to use even if the word 'slur' had not been invented yet.
We can certainly agree that it is a slur. But it not a bad word to use only because it is a slur.
I don't know or care if 'stupid' is a slur, it doesn't matter. Even if 'moron' probably is a slur, I'm far too happy using that word, and I just have not seen sufficient evidence that it really hurts bystanders.
Focusing your argument on what defines a slur, that is what I was opposed to, because it goes nowhere.
The argument, which I only had to clarify because somebody was misrepresenting what another user was arguing, was originally made in response to somebody claiming that these words are in fact slurs, which is when you then jumped in with your logically fallacious “that argument is bad because other people say it about things that are slurs!”
Slurs are bad because the reproduce systems of oppression against marginalized groups of people, it’s a useful distinction and I don’t agree with you that it’s unimportant whether a word is a slur or not.
That's a much better definition, and a distinction worth making; although different from what you had mentioned previously.
And it just doesn't exclude words like 'moron', it just doesn't. It was specifically used in relation to eugenics; how could it get more "reproducing systems of oppression" than that?
That wasn't me (edit: or maybe it was, is ambiguous which comment you refer to); and I don't entirely agree about that, but ugh... I'm tired of this whole thread so...
You two play nice or something, cause I'm out.
I’m feeling the same way about this whole thread tbh I regret even reading and commenting in it lol
yeah well...
Also nice use of free dictionary.com, a truly authoritative voice on what constitutes a slur, so according to you it doesn’t need to refer to a group of people but merely be a “disparaging remark” since that’s what your dictionary says. You realize that would be indistinguishable from an insult? So you’re effectively saying all insults are slurs and therefore to never insult anybody again. Sorry, that’s ludicrously idiotic.
freedictionary.com listed three different sources.
it's not in https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/slur either or https://www.dictionary.com/browse/slur or https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/slur or https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/slur
please, do show me the way to this great great woke dictionary that you would prefer.
People born with below average intelligence are inherently less powerful than people born with above average intelligence. Our society values intelligence highly and people with below average intelligence are often made to feel like shit about it while people with above average intelligence are praised for it, especially as children.
Insulting/attacking/tearing people down for being less powerful than other people, especially when there’s not much they can do about that lack of power, is anti-communist.
Insults like “dumb”, “stupid” and “idiot” are essentially saying “you are lesser because you were born with less power” so they’re gross and anti-communist and we shouldn’t use them.
Sorry I maybe skipped a few steps in my logic.
SenoraRaton claimed that insults like "stupid" aren't slurs because they're "terms in general usage in the English language" and are "Not directed at any marginalized group".
Many slurs have been and are in general usage in the "English Language" and so this can easily be used as a generic defense of slurs. More generally, it implicitly argues that we cannot or should not attempt to change the english language as it's generally used provides no explanation for why. Which lead me to criticise it as implicitly saying "this is the way things are and we can’t change the way things are", which is an inherently conservative and reactionary idea.
The second part of my post is attempting to push back against the idea that people with below average intelligence or perceived to have below average intelligence aren't marginalised on this basis. Being born with above average intelligence inherently makes you more powerful than if you'd been born with below average intelligence. Additionally in our society people with above average intelligence or who are perceived to have above average intelligence are often made to feel special and valued for this while people with below average intelligence or who are perceived to have below average intelligence are often shamed for this. This especially applies to children in school, a formative situation almost everyone in our society experiences and one in which we are particularly vulnerable.
I said this could also be a generic defence of slurs as groups which are clearly marginalised are often falsely claimed not to be marginalised.
Are you trying to say that people with below average intelligence aren't a "group" of people?
“Stupid” and “moron” do not refer to any group of people, marginalized or otherwise. Anybody can make stupid arguments, like you’re doing now. The president of the United States is a fucking idiot and also the most powerful man in the world, in fact many of the people that lord over us are utter morons. Many stupid people are stupid basically by choice, they choose to act like asshats and refuse to learn things. The word does not refer to actual learning disabilities. It’s absolutely not a slur.
Obama was also president of the United States.
There are many powerful jews.
That doesn't make the N or K word not slurs.
There are people who will say the N word only applies to black people who steal or act "like thugs" or the K word only applies to jews who "are greedy". You're saying you only mean to use intelligence based slurs against people who "are choosing to be stupid" and not people with "actual learning disabilities".
Some people are born more intelligent than others. These people have a genuine disadvantage going into life and are also socially and sometimes systematically discriminated against on the basis of this. This discrimination can get worse when it's caused by a specific factor or just severe enough to get diagnosed but does not only occur against people who were diagnosed.
Intelligence based slurs are putting the person you're using that slur against in this group and saying it's a bad thing.
This is getting beyond outrageous, those words ARE slurs because they refer to oppressed racial and ethnic groups, stupid is not a fucking slur, holy shit. You’re venturing into extremely offensive and insensitive territory yourself trying to draw an equivalence.
There are oppressed intersectional groups which are not ethnic or racial. Less intelligent people are one of them.
Meritocracy, the lie used to justify capitalism in the Anglosphere, is inherently discriminatory against the less able and in particular the less intelligent. People who are seen as intelligent are thought to be deserving of power and luxury while people who are seen as unintelligent are said to be deserving of drudgery and misery. Historically, many other prejudices and unjust systems of oppression have been justified on similar intelligence based rhetoric.
Almost every Eugenics movement ever has identified the elimination of less intelligent people as one of its primary goals. At the peak of Eugenicist ideas popularity many states sterilised people they saw as severely mentally deficent and it's a view still held by many today. How many times have you heard or read edgy fuckers saying the world would be so much better if people with below x IQ or a group who are perceived as less intelligent were all dead/ weren't allowed to hold power? It's sometimes a dogwhistle for other prejudices, but not always, and it's often comorbid with those other prejudices.
Right now in schools all over the anglosphere children perceived as unintelligent are shamed for not learning fast enough and told they're worth less and will have lower social status than more intelligent children. This often has horrific effects on their development.
In general conversation "You're stupid", and, when targeted at someone who has internalised or is often told that they're lesser because they're unintelligent "That's a stupid idea" are often used to shut that person out of the discussion, to say they're too unintelligent to properly address the topic and should give up on trying, not trust their own judgement, and instead listen to and uncritically accept what the person telling them they're stupid is saying. If they've been shamed enough this social bludgeon will often work, and people perceived as "less intelligent" will be afforded less of a platform and less ability to self advocate because of this.
Is this not discrimination?
Your argument doesn’t make any sense. You’re arguing that some people actually are stupid but that the word itself just shouldn’t be used because it hurts feelings or has these other harmful effects, but to just stop using a word that is an accurate description of reality would require one to either just entirely stop talking about that aspect of reality, or substitute a different word, which would only take on the same negative connotation and have the same effects. The first is obviously impossible and the second is entirely pointless and makes this whole argument a colossal waste of time and energy.
If a phrase
such as forced sterilisation and furthering inequality.
It's not just about the slur, it's about not discriminating along those lines. Ceasing to believe the lie of capitalist meritocracy that people who are more able should have more and people who are less able should have less, and stopping shaming and discriminating against people for being less able
No, I don’t. I don’t think that using the word “stupid” is discriminatory or furthering systems of oppression.
It’s not about any slur because the word “stupid” is not a slur.
"Stupid" is a word used to shame and discriminate against people for something about them that is inborn and often can't be changed to a significant extent. It shames other people who maybe don't match the definition by claiming they do. It's absolutely a slur.
This is fundamentally, to me, about from each to each.
Just because people are less able does not mean they should have less
Never said that anybody should “have less” than anybody else.
Then why should people be shamed for being less intelligent?
Never said they should, never have shamed anybody for being less able
Insults based on intelligence are derogatory terms for people who are less able.
No, they aren’t.
Are you saying "idiot" isn't derogatory or doesn't refer to someone who is less able?
Or that being less intelligent isn't a form of being less able?
Less able to what? You keep describing people as “less intelligent” which is literally just the same thing as stupid. In fact I find your use of the words “less intelligent” in all these comments extremely hurtful because less intelligent people like myself are discriminated against. I insist that you stop saying those hurtful words and apologize to me.
This is the "noticing race is racist, you bigot" argument chuds fall back on when they're trying to pretend they're not owned.
Are you gonna tell me you didn't feel at least little gross typing that?
I just want to take a moment to appreciate this comment. lol
At this point I'm not sure what to do with all the cognitive dissonance I have after this.
Ironically arguing with RedDawn has shifted my view somewhat, especially:
is just impossible to square with using some of these words anymore.
It's ridiculous, but it feels like I'm holding on to 'st*pid' for dear life and I don't really even understand why anymore.
You should feel so gross you feel like you need to take a shower for actually trying to equate a word like “stupid” with actual slurs like the n-word. Frankly it’s disgusting and offensive in addition to being incredibly, mind numbingly dumb.
And this is the pro free speech warrior "haha look at me I'm calling the person asking me not to use slurs the slur" move.
Why is it so important to you to be able to refer to less able people in a derogatory way?
It’s not, and I don’t.
Also, it’s obviously not that, since I have not one single solitary time called you stupid. But I have called your arguments stupid which is what this is really about. You don’t like being called out when you type fucking nonsense on message boards and you’re trying hard to make that into you being oppressed somehow. And it’s honestly beyond disgusting, you need to grow the fuck up.
Calling an argument stupid again, has a similar effect to calling a person stupid IF that person or people who see it have internalised that they're stupid. It's a social bludgeon to tell those people their input isn't wanted and they're barred from this discourse.
I don't think you're oppressing me. I was pointing out your using bread and butter chud arguments and attacks. That's three in a row now so I'm not gonna bother with this conversation anymore.
Please take some time to consider why you feel the need to use words people are telling you are making them uncomfortable.
Thank god you’re done because every one of your replies that I read is making me a bit dumber.
Because I’m not in the habit of pretending things aren’t what they are because it might make somebody “uncomfortable”. Racists get uncomfortable when you call their racist arguments racist, but I’m not about to stop doing that anytime soon either.
deleted by creator
Additionally, as I said higher up in the thread
No, I didn’t say that. Stupid as a word does not refer to people with disabilities or whatever the fuck you think, you’re just flat out wrong.
Stupid as a word is a slur that says the person you're using the slur against is less intelligent than other people.
No, it isn’t.
stupid /ˈstjuːpɪd/ Learn to pronounce adjective adjective: stupid; comparative adjective: stupider; superlative adjective: stupidest
Right, like the argument you are making now is stupid.
so when you call a person stupid you are saying that they _____?
deleted by creator