I hear that this has been tried before but it didn't really land because finding viable substitutes for particular terms can be difficult. I'm fascinated by language though and I wanted to take a shot at this myself.

Just a disclaimer that I'm not trying to drag anyone over using any of these terms and I'm not going to pretend that I'm some paragon of anti-ableism myself - I have work to do on this front, you probably do too and if we all work together we can make some positive change and establish better habits and a more supportive culture in our communities.

Here's a list of words that are more socially acceptable in their ableism and some suggestions for alternatives:

Crazy, Stupid, Dumb, Moronic, Idiotic

[In the sense that something is incorrect or bad]

Silly, foolish, absurd, ridiculous, laughable, nonsense/nonsensical, illogical, incomprehensible, inscrutable, irrational, contradictory, hypocritical, self-defeating, naive, ill-conceived, inane, asinine, counterproductive, unbelievable,

Crazy, Mad

[In the sense of letting loose or being enthusiastic]

Going wild, getting stuck into something, in a frenzy, on a rampage, being engrossed, head over heels, obsessed.

Psychotic, Psychopath, Psycho

[In the sense that something is cruel]

Vicious, bloodthirsty, monstrous, horrific, sadistic, heartless, brutal, ruthless, horrendous, reprehensible, despicable, depraved.

Crippled

Hamstrung, moribund, incapacitated, impaired, ineffective/ineffectual, hog-tied (lol).

What are some other ableist words that are pretty commonplace even amongst the left that you've heard?

Are there terms that I have overlooked or any ones that you use yourself that you'd like to replace?

  • Sons_of_Ferrix
    ·
    2 months ago

    In past the logic being presented to me for why all the other terms are harmful is that they historically referred to actually developmental disabilities. If the actual argument is that they are just words that make people feel bad that's fine but I think we should be consistent then, really this could be applied to most non-specific insults then.

    • charlie
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s a way of trying to get people to grasp an issue they couldn’t normally. It’s a tool for bridging a communication gap. It’s a specific type of example of a structural problem. You are looking at trees and not the forest.

      really this could be applied to most non-specific insults then.

      Yes, and it should, but that’s an intersectional issue

      • Sons_of_Ferrix
        ·
        2 months ago

        Okay, that makes sense.

        Just to be clear, I am a big believer the left should try and have a consistent logic about these things, because if we don't I think it leads to assholes, wreckers and weirdos co-opting and abusing our arguments. You end up with people arguing that "gusano" is a slur and that Israel is a "indigenous nation" and getting more pull with baby leftists than they should.

        • charlie
          ·
          2 months ago

          Yes that’s fair, definitely.

          Where I don’t agree is that we can find a way to fight fire with fire without burning innocents.

          Agreeing on a basic framework of, “it’s okay to throw generalized insults at certain people” is not something I’m on board with, but I understand the reasoning in some ways.

          • Sons_of_Ferrix
            ·
            2 months ago

            “it’s okay to throw generalized insults at certain people” is not something I’m on board with,

            Issue is I think it's often debatable how "generalized" and insult is. Heck you see it here in this thread, people debating whether certain insults specifically refer to a lack of intelligence or lacking a specific acuity. Also there's different kinds of intelligence that have different causes for possessing or lacking, someone may lack emotional intelligence because they're autistic, or because their a privileged asshole who's never had to bother even trying to read social ques because people generally just hand things to them. Plus there are developmental disabilities that cause some people to struggle with logic, so is calling someone "illogical" an ablest insult? Or is only ablest if I'm directing it at someone who has one of those disabilities?

            It's a complex debate, and a lot of people, including a lot of neurodivergent people, are gonna have strong disagreements on.

            • charlie
              ·
              2 months ago

              Yea, I’m autistic and sometimes I get the feeling this is more of a ND vs NT debate. The left just cares enough about humanizing people to bother having it. Usually us ND’s just get ignored and told to change.

              • Sons_of_Ferrix
                ·
                2 months ago

                I am also autistic which i think shows even ND people can have disagreements about this.

                • charlie
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  Definitely. We aren’t super humans with all the correct answers. :)

                  I have a hard time changing my mind, they tell me that PDA factors into it, so I’m pretty sure I could shift my position if it was presented in a way I could internalize and think on later. I usually just lurk but I’ve been trying to engage with people more genuinely.