• Xoriff@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    23 hours ago

    I still have such dissonance about this. I want to say “Look at this idiot” and point out something unintelligent that an objectively evil person does. But because intelligence is an inherited trait, we can only use negative language when referring to a person for evil that they do by choice? Or something? So, evil people bumbling can only be mocked for the evil intent and not for their inability to be evil with skill and intelligence?

    I dunno. Trump is a numpty and if that offends the numps or whatever group that term was originally a slur for then I apologize.

    edit: to be clear, the r word seems objectively shitty to use and I don’t. I just have yet to find an objective litmus test for where the line is between that and “silly” cuz I swear there’s always someone there to explain the etymology of “silly” and how it’s origins were shitty in some way

    • booly@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 hours ago

      But because intelligence is an inherited trait

      I don’t think this is true, practically speaking. Intelligence is like endurance running speed in that there are heritable components to it, but at the end of the day environmental factors dominate on who is or isn’t faster than another.

      I can make fun of someone for being dumb in the same way that I can make fun of someone for being a slow runner. It’s only problematic when their slowness is actually caused by something out of their control, like some kind of health issue.

      • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        I know this is distilling your well stated point down too far, but I’ve always enjoyed the Forest Gump philosophy:

        Stupid is as stupid does.

    • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      I agree. Furthermore, I see no difference between the “r word” and any other word that denigrates someone for their intelligence. That’s because there is effectively no difference other than a well monied campaign against that one, single word.

      I accept all of those words as valid as a result. I don’t conflate them with actual horrible words with actual history, such as the n word. I’m actually quite offended that people are suggesting these are equally offensive.

      People who are offended by this “r word” are idiots in my book. If the only thing that offends you about that last sentence is the “r word” bit, then you’re probably a hypocrite.

      Idiot, imbecile, stupid. These are all offensive if you yell them at a neurodivergent person. So, why is only one word not okay to ever say? Why must I censor myself here in this very conversation?

      The answer is money. Lots and lots of money went into a campaign against it. Also, virtue signaling. Lots of that, too. Have some moral integrity, stop this assault on semantics. It’s meant to divide people who would otherwise be united.

      • OBJECTION!@lemmy.mlOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        It’s meant to divide people who would otherwise by united.

        “I want to avoid using language that offends others in order to be more inclusive and reduce division.”

        “Stop being divisive!”

        • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          When Musk started using this word earlier this year, he knew what he was doing. This is a weakness to all of us who actually care about other people, and vulnerable groups. You do you, though.

          • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            3 hours ago

            To expand upon this, the reason I defend the use of this word within the context of using it to replace “stupid”, or other denigratory language targeted at intelligence, is because the majority of people alive today were raised with it not being an insult. I think it’s despicable to label people “ablest” when all they are likely doing is trying to call someone “stupid” - something that everyone seems to still agree is totally fine.

            This was a common, clinical term before 10-15 years ago. It’s wrong to use against neurodivergent individuals because it over-simplifies the many different different complexities that exist within the neurodivergent community. This said, the idea it is so horrible we can’t ever utter it again is absurd. If you go back into the roots and origins of other words, such as the n-word, there is no moral justification for it’s existence. This word, however, has a justification… a strong justification.

            Punishing people for using a word they don’t see as divisive is immoral, and in itself divisive.

            • OBJECTION!@lemmy.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              2 hours ago

              This is complete nonsense, it was already an insult 10-15 years ago and was largely phased out because most people agreed it was problematic and offensive. Now, the right is trying to bring it back and sow division by introducing the idea that it isn’t, an effort which you are choosing to be complicit in, god knows why.

    • bearboiblake@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      15 hours ago

      The ableism is coming from inside the house - it’s not a bad thing to be intellectually disabled. The problem with Trump is not that he’s stupid, it’s that he’s a selfish, careless, thoughtless, cruel, ignorant asshole.

      Using words like “stupid” as an insult implies that all people lacking in intellect or wisdom are also bad people.

      • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 hours ago

        The thing is, having someone who is so intellectually disabled try to run our country is a really bad idea. And we can see all the pain and destruction this is causing.

        Trumps stupidity is very valid to insult for this reason. It is emphatically harming countless people across our nation.

        Stupid is as stupid does, and Trump does lots of stupid things.

      • Xoriff@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        Right. This is what I was talking about. I (and I suspect others) oftentimes want to name call a person and not only point out their evil but also point out their incompetence and inability. Both of which usually have some intelligence component.

        It seems reasonable to berate an evil person when they can’t even be evil competently.

        But we can’t (or shouldn’t) because it indirectly (or directly) makes fun of people who are perfectly good people who are unintelligent.

        Again. I get it. Probably just showing my bias and yet another fuckin thing to unlearn.

        I’m guessing it’s not just cognitive abilities either? “Tripped over his own dick” is offense to folks with motor control problems. Etc etc.

        Therefore the only thing you can make fun of is a person’s evilness. Not their incompetence (because all incompetence is presumed to be from natural causes that aren’t their fault)