• spujb@lemmy.cafeOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Bingo. I assumed more people understood this, so I apologize for not communicating clearly. Any word can become an insult—with the right people in control. What’s particularly hurtful is seeing words that marginalized or oppressed groups use to describe their own experiences being co-opted and turned into insults, reinforcing their otherness.

        It happened with “removed,” as with “idiot,” and so many others. Recently, I’ve seen it happen with more niche phrases (look up “is X acoustic” if you’re unfamiliar). Just the other day, I made a comment that I could see two perspectives on a matter. Instead of simply calling me wrong, someone said, “You must be neurodivergent, you’re so gullible.” In that context, “neurodivergent” was clearly being used as a stand-in for the r-slur.

        To be clear, I am not against any language. I’m against the weaponizing of language.

        • inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          16 hours ago

          👍🏻

          What’s interesting about the word removed specifically is it’s still used as a technical term that has nothing to do with developmental disabilities - for example, fire removedant - to slow/stop something.

          • spujb@lemmy.cafeOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            16 hours ago

            right, i mean thats just kind of a side effect of language existing

            a similar concept appears in the terms “dumbwaiter,” “dumbfounded,” “dumbstruck” wherein “dumb” literally just meant mechanical/nonspeaking, and had none of the other implications of disability-related muteness it has now.

            obviously “dumb” carries a lot less weight these days than the r slur, but the existence of etymologically related terms doesn’t give an “out” to people using them for offense and denigration in either case

            • inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 hour ago

              but the existence of etymologically related terms doesn’t give an “out” to people using them for offense and denigration in either case

              Never said it did. I remember the first time I saw removed being used in a technical sense and being thrown by it’s usage in todays world. Ultimately though you can’t police language, people are gonna say whatever dumb shit they want, doesn’t mean you have to listen. And no, anyone using “dumb” or “idiot” today is not referring to disabled people, those words stopped being used to describe disabled people multiple decades ago and are far removed from being associated with disabled people. removed is a lot more recent, but even as a kid growing up in the 90s where calling people gay, queer and faggots were acceptable, even removed used as a slur back then was frowned upon.

              • spujb@lemmy.cafeOP
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                22 minutes ago

                Never said it did.

                no worries! i wasn’t saying you said that, just returning to the thesis of my post :)

                again, as i said two comments above. this is a descriptive post, not perscriptive. my main concern is to make people aware of the pattern, not to tell them what to do about it.