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 "removed" something or saying something is a "removedant" (like a fire removedant). Yes, those are the same "removed" 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 removed" is a verb, not an adjective or noun. "removedent" 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.
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 "removed" something or saying something is a "removedant" (like a fire removedant). Yes, those are the same "removed" 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 removed" is a verb, not an adjective or noun. "removedent" 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.