- This topic has 109 replies, 21 voices, and was last updated 8 years ago by .
-
Posts
-
Popa, Do poor people take offense at the term “polite society”?
Can you provide a source (that they take offense, I have nevr heard that. (In fact when I used the term I included many polite poor poeople)
Wiktionary:
polite society (uncountable)
The elite or upper crust of society.
1803, Maria Edgeworth, “The Manufacturers”:
[H]e had been brought up in an extravagant family, who considered tradesmen and manufacturers as a caste disgraceful to polite society.
DY. I didnt mean intend to offend developmentally delayed people. I doubt that is the case, they do however find it offensive when it is used as a way to offend others. They dont mind when it is used in a flame-retardent sense.
In contrast the n-word is considred offensive in all conotations. They do take offense if you said Yankel’s Hat is “n–ger” even though technicaly it is the latin term for black. Offenive/polite terms are decided by society.
Rape is uncouth in (most) yeshivish circles. although the hebrew term (even in ISarael) is not.
“retarded” is considred impolite. Though not in every usage.
The n word is offensive in every usage.
DY “I honestly don’t think they’re reading the CR. Their families might be, but if they’re normal (i.e. not hypersensitive), they shouldn’t be offended, as catch yourself said.”
I dont think you get to decide what should and shouln’t offend a large number of people.
When my moniker was used s a synonym for “retarded” as in any body who disagrees with that poster is “retarded (=) developmentally delayed, … (=) idiotic, (=) dolty, (=) ubiquitin-ey, (=) asinine, (=) insane,(=) bi-polar, (=)depressed, …” I was hurt . (The first time was funny, but then repeated three times in one post, hurt a little, I have sinceforgiven I am just using it to illustarte my point. Having your name used as a put down to others and as a synonym for “idiotic” doesnt feel good. It is not hard to understand why those with a condition are offended when their (or their family member’s) condition is used to insult others as a synonym for “idiotic.”
And again it doesnt matter, if they find it offensive then just don’t use it (if you want to be percived as polite) Whether or not they are being hypersensitve.
I dont think you get to decide what should and shouln’t offend a large number of people.
bingo!
ubiquitin – so well put. especially the last lines.
Your flawed assumption that everyone wants to be perceived as polite is not going to help you.
I dont think you get to decide what should and shouln’t offend a large number of people.
Why not? Why can’t I opine what is something which is silly to get offended by?
When my moniker was used s a synonym for “retarded” as in any body who disagrees with that poster is “retarded (=) developmentally delayed, … (=) idiotic, (=) dolty, (=) ubiquitin-ey, (=) asinine, (=) insane,(=) bi-polar, (=)depressed, …” I was hurt .
That I understand.
It is not hard to understand why those with a condition are offended when their (or their family member’s) condition is used to insult others as a synonym for “idiotic.”
Maybe not, but it it is hard to understand how the term “retarded”, which been obsolete in that context for decades, would be offensive.
DY. I didnt mean intend to offend developmentally delayed people.
What did you mean by “intend”?
rebyid, I have mentioned a couple times you are free to be offensive, if you dont care to be polite by all means use any word you feel like. I never assmued everybody wants to be polite, I am well aware that many don’t care.
DY, we arent discussing how term originated. We are discussing thow they are percieved today in 2014. In fact “retarded” originated as a polite way to replace the term “imbecile” that in no way changes the way it is percieved today.
DY. I didnt mean intend to offend developmentally delayed people.
What did you mean by “intend”?
He means that he never meant to accuse you of trying to hurt the feelings of the developmentally disabled with your use of “retarded” as an insult.
(More posts coming soon BE”H!)
That doesn’t answer my question.
popa: Excellent post about legal meaning/context/common meaning.
As for the English upper classes creating the term “polite society” to put down the lower class, please provide directions to a source. Also…
murdered someone by turning on a counterfeiting machine which I didn’t realize was hooked up to an ebola vial and set it loose
That’s an oddly specific reference, popa. I don’t say that accusatorily, of course – I’m just wondering if I’m missing a cutural reference.
“catch yourself”‘s post is pretty good, but…
should not be offensive to the clinically retarded any more than the use of the term weakling is offensive to the clinically weak. (emphasis mine)
“Should not” is the operative term here. More about this later (another post).
The intended offense is not to the “real” retarded
No – that offense is unintentional.
[the offense] is to the person whose arguments I find so preposterous that I would label them (him?) so irrational as to be “retarded”.
Why “retarded” more so than other words which imply one’s highly negative opinion of one’s opponent’s intellectual capacity, whether with pathological implications or not?
affected individual may be hurt (not offended!)
Wiktionary definitions:
offend – To hurt the feelings of; to displease; to make angry; to insult.
hurt – As verb: To cause (somebody) emotional pain. / As adjective: Pained.
I think you’re drawing a non-existent distinction.
(More soon BE”H)!)
DY: That post was written before he saw your question.
DaasYochid: How disingenuous of you not to include the other Wiktionary definition for “polite society”, which Ubiquitin obviously intended:
That portion of society that is especially concerned with etiquette, proper behavior, and politeness.
It is difficult to see how that could offend anyone.
DY “I didnt mean intend to offend developmentally delayed people.
What did you mean by “intend”?”
All I meant was what Randomex said.
That being said, it could alos be understood the way you seem to have understood that I am not accusing anypne of INTENDING to insult the developmentaly delayed. They are however (generally speaking) insulted by usage of the term even if the intent is not to offend THEM
The deaf and the blind feel no shame for their deafness or blindness,and the stupid do not know of their stupidity, but the retarded may well feel shame at their limited cognitive abilities if “retarded” is used as an insult.One could argue that this usage of the term has made it offensive.
Also, can you picture one child calling another “deaf” or “blind” in an attempt to hurt the other’s feelings? Now, how about “retarded”? I think it’s the element of false “accusation” that may be significant here.
(Dr. Twerski’s scar-on-your-face demonstration, anyone?)
People feel a greater sense of identity with their mental capacities than their physical ones, and they are more likely to be insecure about them as well.
There is an element of truth to the other side’s claims as well – “Mongoloid” is no longer considered an acceptable term for those with Down’s Syndrome, though I doubt it saw much use as an insult. Apparently, more clinical = more politically correct, lack of negative implications or usage notwithstanding.
And then…
I had written that last paragraph without Internet access – but
Wiktionary does have it used as an insult. (I doubt any of the posters on the CR have heard it used as an insult, at any rate.)
So maybe there is very little on that side of the debate.
It seems that once a term becomes used as an insult, it must be
discarded, the preferred term eventually becoming clinical enough that it can’t be used in that fashion (“the euphemism treadmill” thread-starter Veltz Meshugener mentioned earlier).
[Also, if anyone’s interested, Down syndrome is usually referred to as Down‘s]syndrome in England.]
NotaSheep:
I would think it was offensive because if you call someone or something retarded you are equating them or it with those who are mentally handicapped.
No. In that sense, any insult is offensive. For example, if I call someone/thing “stupid,” I’m comparing them to people with little intelligence. However, using “retard” as an insult implies that there is something negative about the developmentally delayed/disabled(/whatever), a cause for people to find it offensive to use it as such.
Next BE”H: The N-word!
Regarding the N-word…
DaasYochid: I hear people of a certain group using an epithet all the time, and since they’re the ones using it, it’s not considered offensive. So why can’t popa and I use the “R” word?
If this is not deliberate trolling, it may be the least intelligent thing DaasYochid has ever posted. “N-word privileges” is an irrelevant discussion, unless DaasYochid meant “Why can’t popa and I [who are developmentally disabled/w-e] use ‘retarded’?” Mistoma, dos hut er nisht gemeint.
Do I really have to talk about this? (Probably not…) Take it, Wiktionary!
In its pejorative sense, it ranks among the most insulting racial epithets in the English language, with strong connotations of cultural and intellectual inferiority or deficiency.
The term is generally derogatory (racist) when used by persons not of African descent (and sometimes when used by persons of African descent), but, it is also used by some black people among themselves, positively, especially when used in the form of “n—a,” in a form of reclamation.
It is important to note that many people do not believe that “N” is able to be reclaimed, because of its fraught history and continued pejorative usage. Usage by non-blacks, however, is almost invariably considered offensive.
So some do consider it offensive even when used by black people for each other.
Are the developmentally delayed/disabled then known to use “retarded” “among themselves, positively”, that the argument could be made under any circumstances?
There’s this, too:
it is hard to understand how the term “retarded”, which been obsolete in
that context for decades, would be offensive.
Wiktionary doesn’t seem to think it’s obsolete (I don’t know about common medical
usage), though neither does it find it offensive, unless used to describe persons with
mental retardation themselves.
Ubiquitin (various points):
Why when learning Kesubas can I say “Me’anes” but not the English equivalant. We a a society have arbitrary decided that in polite-yeshivish society we don’t use the English equivalent. [sic, sic, etc…]
It’s not arbitrary. The English term is a specific [X]ual reference, while the Hebrew is not. There is no “Hebrew word for rape.” The literal translation of l’anes
is “to force.” In context, the reference is obviously to rape.
A different dictionary definition of “retard” is being used when not talking about people. There is no room for offense there.
The Latin term for the color black, “niger,” is not pronounced the same way as the derogatory term used for black people. The “i” is pronounced like “eye.” Nobody would be offended at its use (unless, of course, they thought you were trying to stealthily make a negative reference to them).
“Offensive intent”: Does that mean intent to offend,
or an intent which causes offense?
Using it as an adjective is only the latter, while using it as an insult [offense at insult] or deliberately to offend a person who will hear it (knowing they find it offensive) [offense at use] is both (e.g., what popa is doing in this thread at times).
as a synonym for “idiotic.”
That is the practical effect though. Well, maybe not exactly the same… Of course, the point is not whether it is technically correct, but whether it’s right to use.
In conclusion:
I don’t think “retarded” should be used. Some people are offended by it, and no argument that they should not be will change that fact – in any case, a good such argument seems hard to come by.
(Can anyone say that halochoforbids its use? It seems doubtful. However, some of the populace certainly considers it offensive, and so, derech eretz and our mandate of kiddush haShem appear to me to be against its use (certainly where people who find it offensive can hear you).
DaasYochid: How disingenuous of you not to include the other Wiktionary definition for “polite society”, which Ubiquitin obviously intended:
That’s offensive. I was not being disingenuous. Retarded also has other definitions, and if you think someone has a right to be offended by retarded, they have the same right to be offended by polite society.
All I meant was what Randomex said.
Randmex took it out of context. You said there was intent to offend.
Your words, copied and pasted: “This whole discussion is about the use of the word “retarded” with offensive intent!”
Randomex, DaasYochid meant “Why can’t popa and I [who are developmentally disabled/w-e] use ‘retarded’?.
DY: That post was written before he saw your question.
What?
DY offensive intent as opposed to “flame retardent” when used with offensive intent (directed at the “dolt”) it is offensive to the developmentaly delayed (becasue they don’t like it used that way as elaborated above) That is what I meant.
Randomex, Menaes was not my best example, it was the one the mods allowed through. There is an element of arbitrariness that (any) society assigns to words.
At any rate, “retarted” isn’t arbitraily offensive as I explained above, so my point regarding meanes is not vital
Ubiquitin, how do you define the word “intent”?
Here is how Wiktionary defines it:
Noun
intent (countable and uncountable, plural intents)
A purpose; something that is intended.
Am I missing anything, Randomex?
DY i define it that way too
So you are referring to where the insult was intended and purposeful, whereas I am not.
DaasYochid, I’ll try to answer your recent posts in order.
Re: My charge towards you of disingenuousness:
In response to a request for a source showing that “polite society” is an offensive term, you gave one of its Wiktionary definitions – but not the one Ubiquitin was using it for.
(“Upper crust,” an exclusionary and thus potentially hurtful definition, as opposed to “people who care about politeness,” with no such implication.)
Would it not be disingenuous if, say, when asked to show that
“retarded” is not an offensive word, one were to give its definition as “Designating a parameter of an electromagnetic field which is adjusted to account for the finite speed of radiation”?
People have the same “right to be offended” by the use of “polite society” with the definition I provided as they do towards the definition of “retarded” above. (To be offended is not a matter of one’s right, in any case – it is more a question of whether one must reasonably expect people to be offended by his words.)
I stand by my charge. Perhaps we can commute the charge to facetiousness, given the ease with which it’s possible to see through this nonsense.
_________________________
Re: “Intention to offend”
DY: Your (Ubiquitin’s) words, copied and pasted: “This whole discussion is about the use of the word “retarded” with offensive intent!”
He meant the intention to use “retarded” as an insult, not an intention to offend the developmentally disabled with the use of “retarded” as an insult.
(New: He could also be taken to mean that this intention/use is offensive to the developmentally disabled.)
(My earlier words, CxP’d: He means that he never meant to accuse you of trying to hurt the feelings of the developmentally disabled with your use of “retarded” as an insult.)
Ubiquitin confirmed my explanation:
“(DY:)’What did you mean by “intend”?’
All I meant was what Randomex said.
That being said, it could alos be understood the way you seem to have understood that I am not accusing anypne of INTENDING to insult the developmentaly delayed. They are however (generally speaking) insulted by usage of the term even if the intent is not
to offend THEM.)
______________________
Re:
Randomex, DaasYochid meant “Why can’t popa and I [who are developmentally disabled/w-e] use ‘retarded’?
My question was: “The only way you can attempt to draw a parallel between
A) black people using the N-word with each other
and
B) you and popa using “retarded” as a negative adjective for stupid things/people
is if you and popa are “legitimate” targets of “retarded,”
just as black people are “legitimate” targets of the N-word.
Is that what you mean?”
Your answer above seems to be “Yes.” Correct me if I’m wrong.
_______________________
Re: “What?”
Here’s the conversational sequence that seems to be puzzling you:
Ubiquitin: DY. I didnt mean intend to offend developmentally delayed people.
DY: What did you mean by “intend”?
Ubiquitin: rebyid, I have mentioned a couple times you are free to be offensive, if you dont care to be polite by all means use any word you feel like. I never assmued everybody wants to be polite, I am well aware that many don’t care.
DY, we arent discussing how term originated. We are discussing thow they are percieved today in 2014. In fact “retarded” originated as a polite way to replace the term “imbecile” that in no way changes the way it is percieved today.
DY: That doesn’t answer my question.
Randomex: That post was written before he saw your question.
(I saw that the post time on his post was only 3 minutes after your post with the question. He obviously had not seen the question before that response, so pointing out that he had not addressed your question was an oversight.)
_______________________
As for this “how do you define intent” business, I think it’s certainly facetious.
I came into this undecided, you know – I read all the posts and came to my conclusion.
I’ll say it again, because I apparently have to:
He means “the insult s intended and purposeful” towards whatever it is “retarded” is being used towards, not that “the insult s intended and purposeful” towards the developmentally disabled who are offended by the use of retarded as an insult.
Randomex: Thanks! I didn’t think my post deserved such careful dissection.
To respond to your points:
Sorry about the “them”; I sometimes mix up me pronouns 🙂
For the record, MR (Mentally Retarded) is still very much in use as a medical diagnosis. Although it often presents together with DD (Developmental Delay), the two are not synonymous. MR, DD and MR/DD are three separate diagnoses.
People who make use of rhetoric in debates do not typically discriminate; they use retarded as well as stupid, crazy, asinine and many other words which have the general meaning of lack of intelligence.
In response to the point of an earlier post that the problem with retarded is offensive intent, I was simply pointing out that the offensive intent in the use of the word retarded is no more or less than in the use of any other insult. I have already made clear my opinion that no offense should be taken by the clinically retarded or their families.
I do think there is a clear difference between the meaning of “hurt” and that of “offend”, especially when you consider connotation.
Even in the definitions you cite, this is somewhat apparent.
To offend, as you say, is to insult. To hurt, as you say, is to cause [somebody] emotional pain.
By hoisting my trophy high in the air after winning a major competition I may hurt the recently vanquished, but I can not be said to have offended him.
My point in this context was that although I do not believe that retarded is an offensive term, its use nevertheless can be hurtful to those whose lives are drastically affected by clinical retardation, and that we should be considerate of this fact. I think that my original analogy to the word cancer expresses this rather clearly.
Ubiquitin – There is a clear difference between using the word retarded (which actually does mean a lack of intelligence), and imposing that meaning onto the name of an individual. The former is a legitimate (albeit unkind and potentially hurtful – see above) use of language; the latter is highly offensive.
One last thing: This entire thread should be recognized as an academic argument. Whether or not a particular term is offensive is completely beside the point. As Randomex points out, our mandate is to conduct ourselves in a refined manner. ANY term used in an insulting way is unbecoming to a member of the Am Hanivchar. Contrary to popular opinion, it is not okay to insult other people. Regardless of the particular words used, this is most certainly prohibited by Halacha as Ona’as Devarim. If you disagree with someone, you should be able to find a civil way of expressing this fact.
Ubiquitin asked for a source. Obviously there are other meanings, so the charge of my being disingenuous was either disingenuous or facetious.
_________________
Neither was intended, so it’s wrong either way.
___________________
Yes. Laugh. It was funny. I figured someone needed to counterbalance what’s going on in the jokes thread.
____________________
I was talking to you.
DY the reason i hate this thread is it brings up bad memories for me when i was growing up i was the family shame i was not normal, note i use the past tense now bh I am mostly normal, every time i hear this word it saddens me it literally makes me cringe not only because of my past but because of all those who have or are suffering which is do to no part on their own HKBH decided i was to born with challenges i accept his judgement but i cannot help but remember all those who tormented me because i was different, someone may say why is it i big deal if i hang a flag of a swastika i and most people like me will not be offended by it? it is because it is a symbol of hatred and intolerance and pure evil if it is wrong it is wrong.
That was the first normal reason anyone’s given.
DY I asked for a source that poor people are insulted by the term “polite society” This has not been provided. Feel free to scroll back (I was careful to phrase it that way)
True, but were someone to use it that way, surely they would be insulted.
catch yourself:
((First:
Sorry about the “them”; I sometimes mix up me pronouns 🙂
But I didn’t say anything about that! I don’t unnecessarilyattack people’s grammar or w/ever. Anyway:))
I concede!
You carry your points well, my friend, and I certainly think
your words deserve “careful dissection.” 🙂
You have convinced me that “offense” requires intent; otherwise,
it is hurt, not offense. You demonstrated your point excellently.
Everyone’s words have the power to influence people’s opinions.
But your words have managed to influence my opinions, which is usually more difficult. I salute you.
You speak sparingly, it seems – 20 threads in a year.
I’m tempted to go through all of them 🙂
(As a matter of fact, it is often things which are unworthy of people’s attention that it is the most fun to take apart… 🙂
But it is a more rewarding experience to find one’s mind changed
than to have proven the other fellow wrong.)
A source means a source for the term as it was being used.
Providing a source for the term being potentially offensive
in a way it was not being used… Call that what you will.
____
So when you use “retarded” to describe someone/thing, you do not
have intent to offend? Well, this is true when not using it towards someone directly. But as “catch yourself” and I point out, it can still be hurtful to hearers, and does us no credit in anyone’s eyes.
____
So that question was a joke to begin with. Okay…
____
So that question was supposed to have been what he meant by the
word “intend,” instead of what his complete statement meant,
and I was wasting my time trying to explain his meaning?
_______________________________________________
Very well. I say, and thus quoth I, “Whatever.”
Let’s declare this discussion over, shall we?
This is my 12th post in this thread, and though I am no
triskeidakaphobe, I’ve had enough. Goodnight!
Oh, wait, I forgot about the new posts…
That was the first normal reason anyone’s given.
Actually, I think that was the reason being given all along – those affected by the issue are hurt by the use of the word in that fashion.
True, but were someone to use it that way, surely they would be insulted.
What way? (B’li neder, I’m not coming back to find out!)
{{{{{{{HUGS, GOQ}}}}}}}
Thank you always!
Shouldn’t the word be retardant or is that a completely different word in which case what is the relevance b4
Crazybrit: Please learn to use a dictionary(/Wiktionary), or at least read all the posts in a thread before posting.
{Sincerity Mode}
Randomex: I thought you weren’t going to come back 🙂
I agree wholeheartedly…that is exactly the attitude we should have towards any and all speech which could reasonably be expected to make other people uncomfortable.
I didn’t come back for that!
Thanks, mod. Also, was the original title of this post continually appearing in the little “Latest from the Coffee room” box on YWN?
Because… that would’ve been really, really, awkward, and probably a Chillul haShem. Something to think about before anyone starts any more threads with “deliberately offensive title”s. (Yes, that was on the first line of this thread.)
A bumper sticker I saw this past Tuesday:
DON’T USE IT!
The word RETARD is hurtful to people
with developmental disabilities
Take the pledge at [website of the New Jersey Council on Developmental Disabilities]
It also had a “no” sign (circle with line through it)
featuring this: woRd
In the last month I’ve heard the word used twice. Once was when a woman was telling me about her son, and the second time was when someone was telling me about her sister.
Good bump!
Ooh, a compliment from Popa! Thanks!
Haifagirl: So, uh, were the people in question actually develo-pmentally disabled? (That might be a question best described with your preferred non-offensive word for “unintelligent.”)
Yes to both.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.