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.
good to see the trend of "i'm in argument in another thread, time to make a new thread about it" has continued from reddit
More like, argument about another site's rules in another thread...
Don't get me wrong OP, I'm not going to defend ableist language - but I really haven't seen any directed at actual users here. Maybe I'm literally blind to the issue, but... Chill mby?
The other site or rules are irrelevant to why I made this post, I made it because someone bringing up "hey lets avoid insults like this" got massively downvoted and the person insulting them was upvoted. A discussion on this is clearly needed
From the context it seemed like people were upvoting because the poster was shitting on raddle tbh. But from some of the more reactionary reactions in this here thread I'd tend to agree that a discussion may indeed be warranted. Either way, it's going on now so feel free to disregard me entirely
Could very well be true, I quite often miss stuff like that, could be the case here. And no way, I'm not going to disregard you comrade, you were respectful and gave me info about another perspective outside my own which I always appreciate :)
Ditto on the perspective, comrade. I've always been a bit torn on the whole intelligence-ableism complex, but that's probably because I identify myself a lot with my oh-so-functional brain - which I'm working on.
Perpetual becoming, eh?
I've never trusted myself much on anything, let alone an authoritative take on what's right and wrong, so taking other people's perspectives and grappling with them, trying to synthesize them, is one of the methods I've found to help myself feel comfortable with my own conclusions :)
Perpetual becoming
what's this?
Ok, so, I've heard that turn of phrase somewhere - and I like it for it's acknowledgment that nobody and nothing is in any kind of solid state; we're all changing, learning, developing, becoming forever, until we die - and even then. But, because I wanted to look up where that's actually from, I just found out it's the title of Alanis Morisette's biography and now I'm kinda torn on it lol
Oh HELL yeah. That's awesome! Knowing that I'll never be 'finished', never be done growing and learning and developing is a huge source of solace for me. Realizing that helped me stop beating myself up for my past mistakes, times when I harmed others because I didn't know better.
It's what drives my excitement to keep going, to keep making mistakes and learning the lessons.
Thanks comrade, now I have a dope phrase to describe my outlook <3
If It was about starting drama with a user their name would be here. This is about "hey this is hurtful and makes me feel uncomfortable here, and I wanted to talk about it"
Under capitalism being neurodivergent is treated as a personal failing
I'm very glad its not something that affects you and those you know, that's wonderful. I and those I know can't say the same
Edit: downvote me just for sharing my own experience, awesome! I really feel the love and support right now, super validating
While I don't think of myself as "stupid" or "dumb" or think that the r-slur is at all accurate in describing me (I'm autistic), those words ARE used against me specifically because of said autism and its conflation with learning disaiblities. I dislike autism being used as an insult, so it'd be hypocritical of me to not extend solidarity to comrades with cognitive disabilities. And besides, society at large will be lumping us together regardless - the normalization of using cognitive function as an insult harms me as well despite me being "booksmart" in a way that tests well.
Social standards are productivist. Cruelty and selfishness are considered preferable to inability, which is why attacks on intelligence and strength are so popular.
Ableism is woven into our culture and language very deeply. Can't speak to other languages and cultures though
dumb and stupid barely even correlate to any disabilities, they’re generally associated with personal failings
That's the whole point. Intelligence based insults don't really engage with an argument or the philosophy. Liberals aren't stupid. Conservatives aren't stupid. They have a different set of values. Those values are fucked, but it's not because they're dumb that they embrace that way of thinking. It's a lazy shortcut to accuse them of stupidity.
Something doesn't have to be a diagnosable disability for attacking people on the basis of it to be ableist
People born with below average intelligence are both 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.
While early socialist writers got a lot of things right, they also failed to overcome a lot of social prejudices. Engels, for example is documentedly a homophobe and there's no documented evidence (to my knowledge) that Marx ever saw a problem with or pushed back against that. Marx denied his daughter permission to marry the man she wanted to marry and there's no evidence Engel's pushed back against or saw a problem with that. Despite coining the maxim "from each according to their ability, to each according to their need" they were probably both fairly ableist. Modern communism has moved past Marx and Engel's latent sexism (which they to their credit did write about) and blatant homophobia. I hope we can move past their ableism as well.
Calling your comrades intelligence based slurs or thinking of them as lesser because they were born less intelligent than people around them isn't self criticism it's bigotry. Calling reactionaries ableist slurs is also bigotry. If there are flaws in your comrades ideology or reasoning then pointing out those flaws is doing them a service. If reactionaries haven't thought through their arguments or are being evil fuckers then absolutely point out those flaws and tell the world they're scumfuck shitlords who deserve to die screaming for their sins. You don't need to use bigoted slurs to do either of these things.
On "there will always be some people born smarter/stronger/etc and they will be more powerful than others because of this" yes, but it is our responsibility not to socially exacerbate this. To the greatest extent that we can shouldn't make people feel more or less valued or accepted because they learn, build muscle or make friends faster and we certainly shouldn't award people more commodities because of these traits. We shouldn't treat people's ideas as more or less valid because we think that person is less intelligent and we shouldn't respond to ideas we think are bad by saying "I think the person who came up with this is less good at thinking than other people".
When you call someone stupid or dumb for saying a certain thing, it probably won't have that much effect on them if they don't get called that outside of the context of internet arguments. But if they spent most of their childhood feeling stupid or being told they can't try things because they're mentally incapable then using insults/slurs based on them being below average intelligence is in effect a social bludgeon attempting to shame them out of the discussion for being incapable of understanding it. Aside from being a really shitty thing to do to someone mentally/emotionally in the context of trying to do self crit/ideological recruitment this has the effect of saying to them "you're too unintelligent to understand communism so you'll just have to do what I the smart person who understands communism says" and overall creates the impresssion that communism is for smart people only. Which is very damaging especially in the capitalist anglosphere where a lot of the working class have been told that the reason they're poor is because they were too stupid to get a real job.
I get where you're coming from Quill, and I think full blown slurs like re[dacted] are should unambiguously be denounced. But I'm not sure if extending this to any language that could be considered ableist is productive. There's an enormous range of possible disabilities and a lot of language that can be considered ableist in one way or another.
I absolutely understand where you're coming from :)
But what I'd ask is this: Is using intelligence based insults (and other ableist language as you mentioned) productive? Does it allow for uniquely powerful rhetorical uses? Does it do a job better than any other insult or criticism could?
In my view, insults like these are not only less effective than criticizing people for their actual monstrous beliefs and actions, but when they're used instead it means the person isn't getting criticized for those (fundamentally bad) things.
Gonna drop a quote here from @hogposting because I think they said it better than I can
Big difference between wokescolding and: “Hey you know how we all figured out that using the r-word is pretty fucked? Maybe we should think a little about how we’re using other, less severe insults designed to communicate the exact same thing.”
Even if you’re not bought in on that, there are so many more creative, precise ways to insult someone that aren’t “ur a dum dum.”
Honestly, I'm torn because personally, I try to avoid insults that aren't based on someone's character, like I'm not going to call Ben Shapiro short or whatever. At the same time, I find it understandable (if not exactly desirable) that others will grab whatever language is at hand to insult these people, because they are deeply odious and people want something that cuts deeper than saying they're a bad person in so many words.
I think you're getting a lot of pushback because of the tension inherent in a "Dirtbag Left" (or whatever you want to call the Chapo ethos) space. On one hand, what attracts people is its anarchic, and irreverent nature which is an antidote to suffocatingly woke spaces and civility politics. On the other hand, push it too far and you get Stupidpol (very bad). There's basically no way to solve that contradiction. To be clear, I think your post was valid, fine and good, but also you shouldn't be discouraged by negative responses because Chapo essentially exists as a tension between these two poles which means essentially a never-ending struggle session. I value your perspective on this as someone who sees something that makes them feel less welcome in this space, but I also have some sympathy for someone who wants to call Ben Shapiro a short smoothbrain or whatever.
But what I’d ask is this: Is using intelligence based insults (and other ableist language as you mentioned) productive? Does it allow for uniquely powerful rhetorical uses?
Yes, it releases stress (which allows for clearer thinking) and insults chuds in a language they understand
so fuck off, stupid
Chapo last week: haha r slash animemes is getting upset about not being allowed to say tr*p
Chapo this week: what do you mean my words hurt people?
I’m neudivergent and I agree with you but, on the other hand, I don’t think insults that are obviously hyperbolic and don’t refer to any real life condition a person could be in are that bad. Like if someone compared a chud’s brain to a leaky, expired chicken egg, I don’t care.
Yeah I get you, and I'm certainly guilty of that as well. The main issue really is associating "Having a brain that works good" with being a good person, and having a brain that doesn't work good with being a bad person
I feel you. I just think, past a certain point, it really isn’t at all different from calling someone a chud or a dog or a pig. I don’t see any difference between calling someone a snake and saying they have a beehive for a brain. Words like removed, psycho, and schizoid are obviously awful and I don’t think anyone should use them but you really get into the territory of “nobody should be insulted ever for anything” territory if “smooth brain” is considered on the same level as removed. Of course I’m not the ultimate authority on the issue and I definitely won’t knock you not using that language.
You're right, its certainly not on the same level, and I'd never claim it was!
I'm just of the mind that it's not useful, it doesn't make for good insults in any way to affect change in whoever you're insulting, and it causes harm to some. Just don't think it's worth it, y'know?
Yeah, I understand what you’re saying and I agree with you for the most part. Just thought I should add my own thoughts. It does hurt me a bit when people use actual ableist slurs in here like the aforementioned ones. It’s some insults which arguably are ableist, aren’t at all connected to any actual human experience and aren’t particularly harmful, imo. Like calling Zuck a robot/lizard person.
Thanks for adding your voice to the conversation comrade, I appreciate it a lot <3
Like calling Zuck a robot/lizard person.
this one is interesting as well actually, we talked about it on the Neurodiversity and Solidarity episode of The People's Podcast, I hadn't considered it problematic either but apparently that's not universal in the ND community. The example given was asking "why do we only talk about the Zuck like that and not jeff bezos, if the thing that makes them a robot/lizard person is their utter lack of humanity from being a capitalist monster and not his social weirdness?"
It was an interesting conversation, can't wait till editing is finished and we can post it :D
By the way, sorry you’re getting hate for this post, Comrade. It’s disappointing that some people had such a volatile reaction to a genuine post like this.
Thanks comrade, I appreciate it. It's been incredibly upsetting and has made it really hard for me to formulate my thoughts and express my feelings
Well, just to let you know, I’ve enjoyed seeing your posts on here since I’ve joined. Hopefully people here can become more tolerant to actual discussion because this sort of reaction will certainly dissuade other marginalized people from speaking up again. It’s really sad.
Thanks comrade :')
and yeah, it's really disuading me from speaking up again. Just wanting to have a discussion about something that causes me and my comrades harm being met with derision and invalidation hurts so much. I've long said this place feels like home, so to have this happen cuts pretty deep
Edit to add: as time has gone on and more people saw this post it got a lot better
It's hard to create a community around dunking on chuds and not have any collateral dunking consequences. I'm optimistic we can improve on this, though.
Yeah, I agree. I feel like the advent of the effort post label should be used as a signal to switch off the dunk tank brain and engage civilly from now on.
Oh me too! Our greatest weapon "post hog" for example skirts this issue completely after all :)
Not to mention focusing our insults on the bad things these bad people actually do and think sharpens our analysis and critique, it's good practice for drawing out exactly why it's not just "mean" but actually Bad that these people do what they do. No one cares if you call someone stupid on the internet, so what rhetorical value does it actually server?
To be honest, it’s the same reason I never made an account and posted on the original subreddit. If you need to take a break to do some self care, I would recommend it.
I will comrade, thanks. But until then I'm going to keep pushing the conversation so someone else doesn't have to :)
I'm really glad you made an account and post on here btw. I hope this thread doesn't make you second guess your decision. I'm happy you're here <3
This is a battle we will have for a long time.
Many people don't see those insults as crossing a barrier into hateful or ableist.
I have been trying to be better, but I know that I care a lot less than I probably should, to be honest. Especially because it seems, from my perspective, that much or most of the fight against using these words comes off as white knightery.
But yeah, there's also the barrier of having to come up with a different, more apt turn off phrase. Especially when some sort of insult is warranted.
Yeah for sure, and I understand that it can be hard change to make, but also like I said, If you're insulting someone and the only thing you can think to say is to insult their intelligence (instead of whatever evil shit they're up to) is just lazy and bad
How is saying that this is something that causes me and others harm and isn't something that is in any way useful to our cause "babytalk"?
Chapo will get wild when heated and people will be called fascist and revisionist and all posters will be struggled to new positions, new identities, and new unities
We don’t need ableist language to get there, we need to identify reactionary sentiments and then engage in a positive socialist struggle to remove them, and other poisonous weeds.
We are of the fucking masses. We can’t ban the language of the masses or coerce them into doing things they don’t want to do. This isn’t a totalitarian ban on the word stupid, as that would be an ultraleft deviation, this is a chance for the left to purge fascism where it finds it through criticism and self-criticism
Honestly 'dumb' is better to avoid, because it refers to mutism, which is not even an intellectual impairment.
(edit: not just being 'woke' here, this was pointed out to me by a deaf person online; and selective mutism is a severe anxiety disorder, again totally unrelated to intelligence; also that makes it worse because it is pure ableism, not even related to stupidity)
Similarly I would avoid 'cretin' because it is related to a specific medical condition.I still use 'stupid' and 'moron' (edit: which was defined in terms of IQ, not anything else); or even 'lunatic' in rare cases where people are unhinged and causing harm to others. (edit: specifically Donald Trump)
(not saying I'm perfect, or doing good enough, just that we should raise the bar somewhat)
(edit: oh look a helpful List of disability-related terms with negative connotations on Wikipedia)
never trust anyone who tries to be the voice of “marginalized communities” in an internet forum pls
We're tired of being wokescolded about everything. Not what Chapo was founded on.
Focusing on shit like "stop calling people stupid" doesn't actually do anything and is a distraction from actual leftist action.
You mean if I'm going to partake in a community based on an ideology that advocates for the marginalized and vulnerable in society, people are going to expect me to listen to the marginilized and vunerable when they ask me to respect them? Idk sounds like wokescolding to me ://
This is a really bad argument because it can be used as a generic defense of slurs.
Very few people aside from a few poor fucks who've internalised oppression or people who are trying to reclaim word unironically identify as [slur] but a lot of people are the thing [slur] is meant to target.
By definition, half of all people have below average intelligence and they didn't have a choice in being born with below average intelligence, so using "born with below average intelligence" as an insult is gross and ableist.
comrade claiming that other peoples subjectivities are silly or nonsensical is how the nazis got started please do better!
when an indigenous bolivian tells you that evo has to go- oh well shit!
I find your use of the ableist slur “asshole” incredibly hurtful. Please apologize and stop using this term
when a “person from a marginalized community” tells you you’re wokescolding and you call them an asshole or a fascist it just makes you a weird narcissist i think
Can we not do more than one thing at a time? Are you suggesting we wait until after the revolution to push back against something in our own community that harms our comrades and achieves nothing of value?
Big difference between wokescolding and: "Hey you know how we all figured out that using the r-word is pretty fucked? Maybe we should think a little about how we're using other, less severe insults designed to communicate the exact same thing."
Even if you're not bought in on that, there are so many more creative, precise ways to insult someone that aren't "ur a dum dum."
people are saying intelligence based insults are fascism in this thread.
edit: why downvote? are you saying it’s asking in good faith or that your “opponents” are fascists? surely it can’t be both?
No term in general usage in the English language has ever been harmful to a marginalized group.
This is not something I've invented, ableism runs deep in our language and culture. You can of course choose to keep using them, but don't just write this off as something I've made up, I didn't even used to believe this until I spoke with more of our ND comrades. Just food for thought.
Yeah, again this is a terrible argument because it can be used as a generic defense of slurs. More generally this argument is "this is the way things are and we can't change the way things are" combined with "people born with below average intelligence don't have more social capital than people born with below average intelligence". The latter is blatantly false and the former I'm utterly shocked to see not only unironically posted but actually upvoted on an American dominated Communist forum. Is ableism that much of a thought terminator?
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.
these words are not slurs because they do not refer to any specific group of people, which a slur does by definition.
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)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.
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.
Slurs are bad because the reproduce systems of oppression against marginalized groups of people,
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?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!”
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
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.
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.
stupid /ˈstjuːpɪd/ Learn to pronounce adjective adjective: stupid; comparative adjective: stupider; superlative adjective: stupidest
having or showing a great lack of intelligence or common sense.so when you call a person stupid you are saying that they _____?
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
hurts feelings or has these other harmful effects
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 just about the slur”
It’s not about any slur because the word “stupid” is not 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
Insults based on intelligence are derogatory terms for people who are less able.
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:Slurs are bad because they reproduce systems of oppression against marginalized groups of people,
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?
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.
Please take some time to consider why you feel the need to use words people are telling you are making them uncomfortable.
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.
"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.
Additionally, as I said higher up in the thread
Aside from being a really shitty thing to do to someone mentally/emotionally in the context of trying to do self crit/ideological recruitment this has the effect of saying to them “you’re too unintelligent to understand communism so you’ll just have to do what I the smart person who understands communism” says and overall creates the impresssion that communism is for smart people only. Which is very damaging especially in the capitalist anglosphere where a lot of the working class have been told that the reason they’re poor is because they were too stupid to get a real job.
Well people are shitheads because they spend most of their time with their head up someone's ass
never considered shithead as an intellegence based insult personally, but that could just be because of the specific connotations it has in my head. I don't know how it came about and could end up changing my mind, especially if I were to hear it's hurtful to people
I can't imagine anyone in good faith reading it as an intelligence based insult. It's like "bonehead."
Isn't bonehead rooted in phrenology? The 'science' used to 'prove' that black people and other races are inferior to whites?
I've never checked but I feel like I heard that somewhere. Either way, I tend to agree with you :)
No idea, I always just assumed it was like "your head is all skull"
I recognized this a while back and since then I've actively removed those terms from my everyday vocabulary. Even if it seems like a very low-priority issue to some, I recognize that it's considered ableist by marginalized groups, so I want to do better. I don't see why this can't be everyone's response, it's not that hard to use different (and more precise) words.
That's a great way to think about it! Also made me think of how it's similar to switching to they/them as default pronouns, because means I'm much less likely to cause someone harm by accident, and I think that alone makes it worth the effort since there's no downsides.
Thanks comrade. This has honestly been pretty rough, and it's shaken me a bit. This is no different from the type of thing I usually post it's just specific this time, so the vitriol was a bit of a shock. I'll try not to let it get to me, but shit, I'm really not good at that
I feel like it's worth noting that admitting you're wrong or using ableist language is HARD, but it's part of the growing process. the fact is, at some point in time, I'd be willing to bet that all of us have used ableist language at some point and then learned why it's harmful. I'm thinking in particular about words that were "cool" to use in like, middle school or high school. or, language I used two weeks ago that I didn't know was ableist, and now I do.
There's nothing wrong with making a mistake, especially if you didn't think of it as harmful. Most people don't call someone stupid and think of it as making fun of a disability. They say it to make a point. But I'd suggest everyone reading consider this – we don't know each other in real life. You don't know if someone is struggling with something, and for all you know, whatever word you're using is the same word kids used to make fun of a comrade when they were younger, or even as an adult. Just be mindful and think about the impact your words could have on ANYONE reading your posts/comments. Think of all the slurs you wouldn't dare use and the reason you don't use them. Then think about other words that could have the same effect, but just aren't as accepted necessarily as "slurs" in general society.
Side note, making fun of someone's intelligence also suggests that someone who may have an intellectual disability or even just be neurodivergent and not think the same way you do has opinions of lesser value. While yes, you probably don't mean that with your words, it contributes to a stigma that benefits no one.
TL;DR: think about the person on the receiving end and write what you actually mean to tell them, not the insult you shout when you're mad/frustrated
Shut up, nerd. How's that for an intellgence based insult, four eyes.
Not a great time for a joke like that comrade, it's honestly pretty hurtful and diminishing
I know its an obvious joke, but for real, trying to have a difficult conversation
I agree that we shouldnt call people stupid or dumb but I will never give up my ability to call people smarter than me a nerd
Totally fair haha, I'm probably being oversensitive at this point because of how some people are reacting to this post. Sorry <3
It's no big deal, man. You can't control your chemistry. What's your take on calling actions stupid or dumb instead of targetting the person. I haven't thought on it too much but my gut instinct is it's better.
I'd say it's probably better than the alternative, but I think focusing on why the actions themselves were bad or flawed is more useful, especially when it comes to yourself. Makes it easier to find the root of the problem and come up with solutions to improve :)
Yeah I meant in a critical fashion. "What you did was dumb because of X, I know you can do better" yadda yadda
