Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Retarded.

Options
  • 25-05-2013 4:47pm
    #1
    Czarcasm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,076 ✭✭✭✭


    This is one I've been thinking about for a while now in relation to Boards.ie as it's something I come across far too often on this site, and it IS a site wide issue-

    The use of the word "retarded".

    Under the newly published DSM-5 (The American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders), published on May 18th 2013, the phrase "Mental Retardation" has now been revised to "Intellectual Disability" or "Intellectual Development Disorder".

    It's a phrase that is commonly bandied about on a whim in the After Hours forum, particularly in the Dumb Facebook Status thread, and even in one of the legendary threads, well, R. Rated was shown the more dubious side of our beloved Pighead.

    To those who would question it as a site wide problem, I was reading the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender forum this morning and happened across this Moderator note from mango (I hope they don't mind me quoting) -

    mango salsa wrote: »
    Folks in future please don't use the word retarded on this forum. It is a word that people find offensive. Any problems pm me.


    I also didn't bother correcting Seachmall on this little misinformed exchange between themselves and another poster in the political correctness thread in After Hours (deciding it was best I get all my ducks in a row first and not to appear like I was picking on posters as opposed to merely pointing out examples) -

    suicide_circus wrote: »
    why do Americans still use "retarded" as a proper medical term and we see it as offensive ? genuine question
    Seachmall wrote: »
    Because it is the medical term and was used in medicine before it became offensive. We shouldn't expect the sciences to alter the terminology just because some people have a stick up their arse.

    I remember my leaving cert biology teacher having to explain that "Retarded" and "Mongoloid" were medical terms and hence used in the book and her class. In particular I remember the look of contempt on her face at the thought of needing to preface her class with a disclaimer.


    Edit - References to Mongoloids to describe Down Syndrome had apparently been dropped in 1965. Meh.


    But mango's Moderator warning was the straw that broke the camel's back this morning so to speak. It shouldn't have to be pointed out to posters that referring to a person as retarded is both insulting and misleading, and for Boards.ie and society in general where awareness surrounding mental health is becoming more prominent in society, I think it can only be a good thing that we start educating people in the proper use of the terminology and emphasise the importance of making people aware that there's ridiculous political correctness terminology, and then there's sheer ignorance, and you don't need an IQ below 70 to be able to tell the difference.


    Now please, to those whose first thought having read the above is to quote Stephen Fry-

    Nobody likes a smartàrse.
    Post edited by Shield on


«1345

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Czarcasm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,076 ✭✭✭✭Czarcasm


    And about 20 minutes after I made the OP and went back to After Hours to catch up on the threads, well-

    Ryuji_w wrote: »
    If the law makes sense to me, yeah i will, But if the law doesn't make sense to me aka is something retarded i wouldn't if the consequences were really big or i didn't know i was sure i could pull off and get away with it.

    also if its a case of absolutely having to do it to survive e.g starving to death i would have no problem being a thief and robbing some food if it's to survive, otherwise no i wouldn't break the law


    I won't keep quoting user's posts, but it's just that often in Feedback we are asked to provide examples of an issue. It's certainly nothing personal against any of the posters I've quoted above.


  • Options
    #3
    Steve
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 22,584 CMod ✭✭✭✭Steve


    Seriously dude, have you ever considered actually going out an interacting with real humans - for example in a pub or something?

    You seem to have an unhealthy forlorn outlook on life there.

    I'm not taking the piss there btw, if you want, pm me and I'll go for a pint with you (as long a you agree not to be a grumpy hoar..:D:D)


  • Options
    #4
    Czarcasm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,076 ✭✭✭✭Czarcasm


    Steve wrote: »
    Seriously dude, have you ever considered actually going out an interacting with real humans - for example in a pub or something?

    You seem to have an unhealthy forlorn outlook on life there.

    I'm not taking the piss there btw, if you want, pm me and I'll go for a pint with you (as long a you agree not to be a grumpy hoar..:D:D)


    More than welcome to drop in any time Steve, though I'm still waiting on one poster who thanked your post to take me up on the same offer-
    Czarcasm wrote: »
    No but seriously Clarice, when are you coming over for dinner? Some fava beans and a nice chianti, I've got some killer business cards I'd like you to have a look at.

    I'm sure by now you know where I live too, as do plenty of people, you're more than welcome to drop in any time, heroin addicts to the left, homeless people to the right, you'll have to squeeze in there somewhere in the middle.
    Czarcasm wrote: »
    A poster on boards.ie says to another poster they know who they are, I agree with you, it IS creepy, and juvenile, it lowers the tone of the discussion to the mental intellect of a rotten peach.

    Of course you're more than welcome to join us Nodin and we can have our own justice league committee putting the world to rights, one wrong at a time.

    There will be no coke and hookers though, just so you all know. That stuff is illegal. Maybe we could address it at our next meeting.


    I too am big into community involvement and I'd love for you to come down and spend the day with me-
    Czarcasm wrote: »

    Jesus if this day gets any worse...


    I work in a fairly "rough" neighbourhood, and there was just myself and the cleaner here in the office, next thing there was a ferocious bang like a gun going off and I dived on the cleaner to get her down below the window.

    She was already having a shít fit having thought a gun went off, but when I went to investigate, it turns out a gust of wind had just slammed the door shut!

    Scarlehhh :o :pac:

    And I'm not averse to getting out for a few drinks either, as long as you don't get drunk and fall back on top of me-

    (can't directly quote from a locked thread)
    Call me cynical, but even from the language used in the OP, I truly have a sneaking suspicion that Graham and his friend knew this and wanted to make a point.

    I have a friend in a wheelchair and I get around on crutches myself and we've never had any issues getting into any nightclub/bar, etc.

    Only once have I ever been knocked over on my back by a guy who was drunk and fell back himself by accident, but that's the risk you take.

    My friend I DO worry about her flipping backwards in the wheelchair and doing herself a serious injury, so I could understand if door staff were to refuse either or both of us entry for our own safety.

    I'm all for equality, rights, etc for disabled people, but I'd sooner be more mindful of the practical considerations.


    Now that we're done attacking the poster and not the post, can we get back on topic, which is the flagrant use of the word "retarded" on Boards.ie?

    Cheers.


  • Options
    #5
    Dades
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,558 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    It's not a term I'd use myself, but I do not think it's one that needs a site-wide addressing. I'm happy that individual mods can reject its use from their forums, but not all forums and not all user bases are the same.


  • Options
    #6
    humbert
    Registered Users Posts: 5,238 ✭✭✭humbert


    Words shouldn't be banned simply because they offend some people. If a person is using that word to express a view or attitude that is unacceptable then it should be addressed.

    Retarded as an example has become offensive because it has come to be used outside of a medical context to imply a person has an intellectual disability, much like handicap before it. Whatever you choose to call it when a person's brain isn't working normally, it will probably come to be used in a pejorative manner toward others.

    This incessant quest to modify the language we are allowed to use so that it offends nobody not only annoys me but is futile.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    lmaopml
    Registered Users Posts: 3,080 ✭✭✭lmaopml


    humbert wrote: »
    Words shouldn't be banned simply because they offend some people. If a person is using that word to express a view or attitude that is unacceptable then it should be addressed.

    Retarded as an example has become offensive because it has come to be used outside of a medical context to imply a person has an intellectual disability, much like handicap before it. Whatever you choose to call it when a person's brain isn't working normally, it will probably come to be used in a pejorative manner toward others.

    This incessant quest to modify the language we are allowed to use so that it offends nobody not only annoys me but is futile.


    It's 'futile' all is futile...lol..Yay for hope etc and so on..

    Really and truly if one doesn't think that calling someone a 'retard' is objectionable, than perhaps it's time to wonder what exactly freedom of speech versus being politically correct means exactly, if it means anything?

    If you find yourself arguing that it should be 'ok' - well I think that it should at least begin to question the advocate as to why one thinks it is 'ok'.


  • Options
    #8
    Rev Hellfire
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,346 ✭✭✭Rev Hellfire


    Personally I don't think banning words is particularly desirable, better to call people out on them and at least educate them as to why such terminology might be unacceptable.
    Anyway the ban list is ineffective, there are numerous simple ways to circumvent it which are used frequently here on boards.


  • Options
    #9
    Omackeral
    Registered Users Posts: 32,956 ✭✭✭✭Omackeral


    Calling people a retard/retarded is fairly bad form in my opinion and is quite offensive, especially if theres a sinister nature involved.

    But calling situations retarded can be more light hearted. Context and common sense needs to be applied.

    If it bothers someone that much, they can use the ignore function. It's far easier than quoting various posters, although I do accept the OP was only doing that to raise a point in this instance.


  • Options
    #10
    Tom Dunne
    Registered Users Posts: 23,212 ✭✭✭✭Tom Dunne


    Omackeral wrote: »
    Calling people a retard/retarded is fairly bad form in my opinion and is quite offensive, especially if theres a sinister nature involved.

    For me, I think the issue is that it has become part of the common parlance.

    People do not appear to see the potential offence of such a word. And I agree that handling it on a forum by forum basis is better than a sitewide ban.


  • Options
    #11
    RoundyMooney
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,910 ✭✭✭✭RoundyMooney


    There's also, admittedly less commonly, a number of technical uses for the term.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    padd b1975
    Registered Users Posts: 10,703 ✭✭✭✭padd b1975


    I think people who use "DUUUHHH!!" as a way of belittling a posters point of view are worse.


  • Options
    #13
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,073 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    RoundyMooney wrote: »
    There's also, admittedly less commonly, a number of technical uses for the term.
    Indeed. Only last week in the real world a fellow Boardsie suggested the engine in my car was retarded. Only for he's built like a brick wall I'd have thumped him, but he was talking about the ignition timing so that's alright then...

    Rev Hellfire sums it up for me anyway. I'd add that if it's aimed at a person it's breaking the Don't be a dick rule, if it's aimed at a situation or thing it's pretty much game ball.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Options
    #14
    anncoates
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,925 ✭✭✭✭anncoates


    Omackeral wrote: »
    Calling people a retard/retarded is fairly bad form in my opinion and is quite offensive

    I think that's the general point of it.


  • Options
    #15
    ejmaztec
    Registered Users Posts: 23,974 ✭✭✭✭ejmaztec


    Having been brought up in the UK, It was made clear to me early on that the use of the word is unacceptable. It may be part of "common parlance", but as far as I can see, that would be common parlance on Boards only, the only people in real life that I've heard use it, being people one could describe as under-educated low-lifes.

    Another word falling into the same category is "spastic" or more commonly "spa". It makes me cringe each time that I see those descriptions.

    In my opinion, using either retard or spastic is as unacceptable as using the "N" word to describe coloured people.


  • Options
    #16
    Dravokivich
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,360 CMod ✭✭✭✭Dravokivich


    I don't have a problem with it and have no issue with using the word. Sure in context it can be quite offensive and derogatory, but so can a lot of words. Are they all to be excluded to so that all posts are rainbows?


  • Options
    #17
    Omackeral
    Registered Users Posts: 32,956 ✭✭✭✭Omackeral


    anncoates wrote: »
    I think that's the general point of it.

    Yeah except you left out the next part of my post which was the main point. It said that its not really offensive (in my opinion, anyway) when used to describe a situation, rather than a person.
    But you already read that and ignored it


  • Options
    #18
    returnNull
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,235 ✭✭✭returnNull


    Political correctness gone mad.People just looking to get offended imho.


  • Options
    #19
    Myrddin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 33,733 ✭✭✭✭Myrddin


    When I was growing up it used to be 'mongo', then it became 'rehab', then it became 'spa', then it became 'retard', now it's ''tard'', & 'f**ktard'. It'll be something else at some other time. I don't find the word offensive really, but I do think using them in such context is without any type of class so I refrain from ever doing so. Is it worth banning the word? No, not in my opinion. You can't police people's feelings.


  • Options
    #20
    muckwarrior
    Registered Users Posts: 4,044 ✭✭✭muckwarrior


    Czarcasm wrote: »

    Now please, to those whose first thought having read the above is to quote Stephen Fry-

    Nobody likes a smartàrse.

    Here's another relevant Stephen Fry quote:
    “It's now very common to hear people say, 'I'm rather offended by that.' As if that gives them certain rights. It's actually nothing more... than a whine. 'I find that offensive.' It has no meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. 'I am offended by that.' Well, so ****ing what.”


  • Options
    #21
    Insect Overlord
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 30,857 Mod ✭✭✭✭Insect Overlord


    muckwarrior wrote: »
    Here's another relevant Stephen Fry quote:
    “It's now very common to hear people say, 'I'm rather offended by that.' As if that gives them certain rights. It's actually nothing more... than a whine. 'I find that offensive.' It has no meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. 'I am offended by that.' Well, so ****ing what.”

    I'm pretty sure that's the exact quote Czarcasm was anticipating...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    muckwarrior
    Registered Users Posts: 4,044 ✭✭✭muckwarrior


    Insect Overlord wrote: »
    I'm pretty sure that's the exact quote Czarcasm was anticipating...
    Ah, misread his post :o


  • Options
    #23
    Beruthiel
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 42,362 Mod ✭✭✭✭Beruthiel


    Omackeral wrote: »
    Calling people a retard/retarded is fairly bad form in my opinion and is quite offensive, especially if theres a sinister nature involved.

    I am of the opinion that when a poster uses said word, their opinion can be instantly dismissed as lacking any kind of credibility.

    Let them off I say, they are doing more damage to themselves than they are to who ever the comment was directed at.


  • Options
    #24
    My name is URL
    Registered Users Posts: 25,059 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    EnterNow wrote: »
    When I was growing up it used to be 'mongo', then it became 'rehab', then it became 'spa', then it became 'retard', now it's ''tard'', & 'f**ktard'. It'll be something else at some other time. I don't find the word offensive really, but I do think using them in such context is without any type of class so I refrain from ever doing so. Is it worth banning the word? No, not in my opinion. You can't police people's feelings.

    hkyL2a4.gif


  • Options
    #25
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,709 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    My name is URL wrote: »
    hkyL2a4.gif

    Rehab Ireland provide training/work for people with disabilites. At some point rehab began to be used as an equivalent for retarded. It was the term used by kids instead of retarded.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Options
    #26
    Myrddin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 33,733 ✭✭✭✭Myrddin


    My name is URL wrote: »
    hkyL2a4.gif

    Yep, certainly was a prominent one around where I lived anyway. The point remains, it was one thing, then another, then another, now its this. Beruthiel hit the nail on the head, it says more about the user than the target


  • Options
    #27
    wonderfulname
    Registered Users Posts: 3,943 ✭✭✭wonderfulname


    Czarcasm wrote: »
    ...To those who would question it as a site wide problem, I was reading the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender forum this morning and happened across this Moderator note from mango (I hope they don't mind me quoting)...

    Howdy, we don't actually have a major problem with this in LGBT, I think that's the second time this year someone's been pulled up for use of the word. The forum has to be a safe space for anyone who may need it, and the charter sets out an ethos of "equality and inclusiveness". How matters are conducted in LGBT in relation to minority recognition and treatment, are, for very obvious reasons, not wholly relevant to the rest of the site.

    I don't think it needs to be pointed out that I agree with your views on the word but is it boards place to educate and police this? I know in other cases, particularly regarding trans terminology, it has been boards users standing up and explaining certain words, jokes, or viewpoints are insulting or derogatory, then offering another option, that has resulted in the site as a whole being more inclusive, not some form of top down initiative. In fact, in retrospect this approach has a lot to do with the lack of acceptance of "retard" in LGBT, or at least on my part...

    Perhaps you should be engaging with the posters, and not the site?

    On the other hand "faggot" is very poorly censored, although probably more for the fact it is taboo than derogatory. There are other words of equal or greater issue, in my mind, where this is not the case, and you would be hard pressed to convince me it should be.


  • Options
    #28
    Czarcasm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,076 ✭✭✭✭Czarcasm


    Dravokivich wrote: »
    I don't have a problem with it and have no issue with using the word. Sure in context it can be quite offensive and derogatory, but so can a lot of words. Are they all to be excluded to so that all posts are rainbows?


    You're presented with an interesting conundrum then Drav-

    Is a person's intellect who uses the word "retarded" so limited that they cannot think of another word that doesn't carry with it such a stigma? I can think of an infinite number off the top of my head tbh, and English wouldn't be my first language, nor French, where the origin of the word "retard" means slow, or to slow down.

    See nobody is asking that we all post sunshine and rainbows, just that we reach a common understanding of what words mean, and the meaning behind them, their context and unfortunately what's missing in written form is the intonation.

    By maintaining the use of the word, and as others have said to use it in it's objective form-

    By Boards standards I could legitimately say your opinion is retarded. That'll get your back up though because you view what I've said as subjective. I wouldn't use the word though as I could think to say your post was ill informed as to the power of the use of the word and the negative connotations it carries with it.

    As others have quite rightly pointed out too- language evolves all the time, so is it really such a hump to expect posters on boards to show some standard of intellect beyond that of a thirteen year old? (That IS the minimum age requirement of the site!)

    Insect Overlord wrote: »
    I'm pretty sure that's the exact quote Czarcasm was anticipating...


    In fairness IO mucks post DID amuse, purely because in attempting to come over all Fry-like faux intellectualism, he provided a perfectly ironic example of why I hate anyone thinking they are clever by quoting people THEY think are clever-

    Czarcasm wrote: »
    Anyone (watch the amount of people get offended by this generalisation and feel the need to pull me up on it) who proclaims "Ohh I'm not easily offended" are lying. They are THE first, AND the easiest, to take offence, especially when their intellect is questioned, because they hold their own opinions and their opinion of themselves in such high regard that they feel they are infallible and beyond reproach.

    Stephen Fry is only a well educated gobshìte with a lofty demeanour. In truth he knows fannyadams that any of us here couldn't have educated ourselves about, he hasn't had an original thought, well, I don't think he's ever had an original thought actually, and that oft trotted out quote referring to the word offensive is merely a parroted platitude intended to appeal to same self ascribed "intellectuals". His soundbite statement is the height of ignorance and is just an excuse he gives other faux intellectuals to vent their ignorance caused by their misplaced arrogance.

    If these people were actually intelligent, they wouldn't need to be regurgitating anyone else's opinion, they'd be able to form an opinion of their own, based on an original thought of their own.

    Even the demi-god Fry that these faux intellectuals so often quote, isn't averse to taking offence and getting downright belligerent about it when he is pulled up on his misinformed waffling-


    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/03/25/stephen_fry_not_upset_you_twat/


    That's what happens when you depend on the opinions of others to form your opinions without bothering to form an original opinion of your own based on an original thought of your own.


    Speaks for itself really.


  • Options
    #29
    P. Breathnach
    Registered Users Posts: 12,089 ✭✭✭✭P. Breathnach


    muckwarrior wrote: »
    Here's another relevant Stephen Fry quote:
    “It's now very common to hear people say, 'I'm rather offended by that.' As if that gives them certain rights. It's actually nothing more... than a whine. 'I find that offensive.' It has no meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. 'I am offended by that.' Well, so ****ing what.”
    While I enjoy most of Stephen Fry's work, and am impressed with his erudition, I have no reservation is saying that that passage is arrant nonsense: it's tantamount to giving people a licence to utter the ugliest of sentiments.

    The odd thing is that Fry himself clearly tries not to give unnecessary offence. Can you imagine him calling anybody a retard?


  • Options
    #30
    Czarcasm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,076 ✭✭✭✭Czarcasm


    wonderfulname wrote: »
    Howdy, we don't actually have a major problem with this in LGBT, I think that's the second time this year someone's been pulled up for use of the word. The forum has to be a safe space for anyone who may need it, and the charter sets out an ethos of "equality and inclusiveness". How matters are conducted in LGBT in relation to minority recognition and treatment, are, for very obvious reasons, not wholly relevant to the rest of the site.

    I don't think it needs to be pointed out that I agree with your views on the word but is it boards place to educate and police this? I know in other cases, particularly regarding trans terminology, it has been boards users standing up and explaining certain words, jokes, or viewpoints are insulting or derogatory, then offering another option, that has resulted in the site as a whole being more inclusive, not some form of top down initiative. In fact, in retrospect this approach has a lot to do with the lack of acceptance of "retard" in LGBT, or at least on my part...

    Perhaps you should be engaging with the posters, and not the site?

    On the other hand "faggot" is very poorly censored, although probably more for the fact it is taboo than derogatory. There are other words of equal or greater issue, in my mind, where this is not the case, and you would be hard pressed to convince me it should be.


    Hi wonderfulname, and thanks for weighing in on this one as I didn't want to have anyone think I was targetting any specific forum. I too enjoy the LGBT forums though I don't post there too often. I like the way too the snide attitude towards AH has been toned down in there in the Off-Topic thread ("That's After Hours Simba - You must never go there!" :D).

    Anyway, sorry, that IS off topic, and I'm glad to see three Site Admins have contributed to this thread too, must surely be a rarity for such a short thread, but it shows people DO sit up and take notice when the word is mentioned, and they get very edgy about it too! That's the power of language I talked about earlier.

    If I had posted this thread in After Hours, the Moderators there have had to deal with enough threads about mental health in the last few weeks to warrant yet another one, and I was preferring to address it as a site wide issue because that's exactly what it is. It's not confined to one particular forum, I've seen it used in many forums and nobody calls anybody up on it.

    The LGBT forum is a safe space for people who identify as LGBT, After Hours is supposed to be an inclusive space on boards for everybody, but is often dismissed as the knuckle draggers haven. I just think could we not apply some standards surely if one section of regular posters despair at people's misunderstanding of mental health, yet see fit to defend the use of the word retarded.

    There's an irony there, I'm nearly sure there is, but I can't quite put my finger on it.

    Just on the use of archaic homophobic terms- posters are warned infracted for using them, should we not be treating archaic terms for mental illness in the same fashion, especially now when so much progress has been made and people often like to point out how Boards is often seen as a barometer of the attitudes of Irish society?

    It only took ten years for mental retardation to be re-classified in the DSM, is it going to take another ten years for Boards to examine the use of the word on the site or should we continue to pander to the lesser intellect that clings to such archaic, misguided and over used terms?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Czarcasm wrote: »
    .

    The LGBT forum is a safe space for people who identify as LGBT, After Hours is supposed to be an inclusive space on boards for everybody, but is often dismissed as the knuckle draggers haven. I just think could we not apply some standards surely if one section of regular posters despair at people's misunderstanding of mental health, yet see fit to defend the use of the word retarded.

    ...it's a shared space.


Advertisement