They probably also had a page for the 'fags' in Drama Club but, as it is Texas, no-one saw any problem with that.
I teach and we refer to them a "special needs"
One of my yearbooks has "Special Ed" printed in a childlike "building blocks" font, all arranged at different angles right above the pictures of the poor children who were in that class.
Isn't that damaging for all the kids under the label, r8?
I've heard Special Needs or Special Education referring to dyslexic or ADD kids (many who aren't even ADD-don't get me started) as well as the mentally retarded.
The PC generalities are ridiculous. I understand that retarded might be offensive, but honestly, it's not fair to the other kids to put them in with Down syndrome children. Expectations are lowered and they'll have a harder time on the playground.
I think the labels we had when I was growing up made more sense: 'mentally disabled' for retardation and GLD or SLD (general or global vs. special or specific learning disabilities) for the dyslexics, etc.
Use "alternative learners," please.
R7, I do see a problem with hyphenating "no one."
Whatever happened to good old-fashioned words like "mongoloid"? So descriptive.
All right, then may we posters at Datalounge pleasantly suggest that they use, "fucktard"?
"Feeble-minded" was also right to the point.
This thread is making me really, really, really kind of sad. I used to think everyone here was really neat!
Don't you fucking call me a retard!
Well isn't that special.
"Slow" and "simple" were also used in the same era as "mongoloid."
"Johnny is a simple child."
"Betty was moved to a special school that deals with slow children."
"Did you hear? The Johnson's new baby is a mongoloid!"
I have an elderly relative who is retarded. I'm not making fun of her when I refer to her this way (usually when talking to a friend to explain some of the things she says / does). I've always known her as retarded, and it's simply true, just like it's simply true that I'm fat (another word I don't have a problem with, so long as it is spoken factually and without malice).
Why must we assume malice with these words? Malice can occur with any word.
My relative is not mentally "challenged". She's retarded, or deficient, or disabled. It's just true. I love her all the same. It's like fag - we don't have to get our panties in a twist about it. It's just a man who is oriented to men.
If, instead of being careful what words we use, we instead looked at the intention behind them, that would make sense. You can call me fat any day of the week. I'd nod and say you're right.
In the 19th century, they called them "naturals."
"Lavinia's first child is fine, but her second child is a natural daughter."
That's interesting, R21. I didn't know that 'natural' was used that way.
r20 - You don't truly need this explained, do you? You just want to mention how pure of mind you are.
No, I'm not pure of mind, R24.
And no, my family and friends don't call me fat on a regular basis. But if the subject comes up, I don't want someone tiptoeing around with nice euphemisms, all meant to mitigate potential hurt feelings. It's silly. Just speak plainly.
I don't call my relative a REtard. I say she's reTARDed if the conversation calls for an explanation.
I'm sorry, I really don't get what's wrong with being kind and factual at the same time.
r26 - Most pejorative terms are, strictly speaking, "factual." Factual doesn't mean respectful or kind. Using a word that's most often meant as an insult, like fag or retarded, is not being kind. Do you refer to "coloured folk" too? It's factual. But it's idiotic to use out of date terms that have come to be insulting. Even if you don't have malicious intent, you know better.
You're all retarts.
i can't call faggots faggots anymore!
Sounds like a menu for retard fetishists. All that was was missing were the prices.
It doesn't matter: whatever word they come up with, will be the new perjorative. They should try to stop people using the "r" word in a negative way, rather than trying to police the word. "Shortbus" is a perfect example of a substitute word that now has even less ambiguously a negative connotation.
R27 is an asshat.
I am amazed at how clueless and tone deaf people are who still use the term retarded. It is like people who call Asians Oriental or African Americans colored. even worse, are those who use the word as a put down.
R27 & R33 are just too sweet for this cruel world.
Mentally retarded means having an IQ lower than 70. One can have learning difficulties but still do better than 70 on an IQ test. So 'learning disabled' doesn't mean quite the same thing. What do you propose we call those who have an IQ lower than 70?
What do you propose the NAACP change their name to?
Are you offended by the movie "For Colored Girls" or the book on which it is based, which features that phrase in its original, longer title?
R20/24 is the only person in this thread with any sense.
"I am NOT retarded!"
The politically correct term is "tard."
So the proper way to refer to the people with Down Syndrome is "people with Down Syndrome."
Then, there are Native Americans. In Canada, they are "people of the First Nations." In Australia, they are "aboriginal," but maybe not any more.
Then we have African-American, African-Canadian, African-English, African-French, African-German, African-Swede, etc. These join Asian-American, Asian-Canadian, Asian-English, Asian-French, Asian-German, Asian-Swede, and thanks to Chinese colonialism, Asian-African or African-Asian.
These terms might be descriptive, but they also put the hyphen and/or euphemism people at a certain distance. Some groups want this distance, others want to keep these groups at a distance.
I like the term "natural". I shall use that from now on instead of "Differently-Abled".
r21/r38: you do know that "natural" was a euphemism for "bastard", not for "mentally handicapped" in the 19th century, don't you?
Or don't you?
Bless your hearts, dear slow ones!
Why can you say "of color", but you can't say "colored"? It has fewer syllables, it's grammatically correct and, damn it, it's more efficient!
R40. It's part of people first language. In the US, the preference is people of color or people with disabilities. In the UK, it is disabled people (I don't know about the people of color equivalent--it may be the same as here or may be tied to very specific ethnicities or cultures). There's a political component--US culture tends to focus on people's potentials and capabilities--hence, "people with disabilities"; Britain's disability movement is rooted in Marxist theories of economic and access disparities, so activists often argue they want to lead with the word describing the inequity. Neither is right or wrong. Almost all groups want to avoid nominalization, "the disabled," "the blacks," "the gays," for example.
FWIW, in the US, I hear the terms "developmentally disabled" (or "developmentally delayed," which seems inaccurate to me, as it suggests such individuals will eventually "catch up," which is not true of all or even most, depending on the specific cognitive condition) or "intellectually impaired." Call them euphemisms if you like, but language exists in time and context and, while I don't find the term "mentally retarded" in and of itself offensive, its reduction to "retarded" and "RE-tard" in common, middle school usage has made it problematic rhetorically--it's not as simple as saying "objectively" the term has no negative effect (or affect)--language is never neutral.
I think you can say "mentally retarded" if you are truly being descriptive not pejorative, though I know people in the disability rights movement may still object. Intellectually disabled or cognitively impaired also work, I think. I dislike developmentally delayed as it implies that the person will eventually "catch up" to whatever is the norm--which is probably less likely to be the case than not.
Be nice to them, who else will give you some hole for a shiny balloon?
So OP, would you like it if people called you a queer or faggot? I would hate that, wouldn't you?
No matter how you say it, it means the same thing. Shit, everything is absurd.
I know many people who identify as queer and one or two who identify as faggot, although the term is usually derogatory.
Please explain the basis of why certain terms are considered derogatory.
My partner works with this population and the correct term is intellectually disabled.
But it is retardation, R50. 'Retarded' is not some kind of slam. Many gays shy away from the factual term 'homosexual'. Why? I don't understand those who want to hide from the truth.
[quote]Please explain the basis of why certain terms are considered derogatory.
Often rooted in the intention of those who use the term. Once the main way that the term is used is in a derogatory way, it becomes a derogatory term.
'Intention'? Please explain. A word is a word. What is it, in their pronunciation?
[quote]Please explain the basis of why certain terms are considered derogatory.
Go up to a black man and ask him if you can call him 'n1gg&r' and see what happens.
Not sure how to explain, but surely you understand that the same word may be used very differently according the the person using it. I could refer to someone as gay, and that could be an observation, a stereotype, or an insult, or a combination.
That isn't an explanation, R54. Especially when he and his cohorts use the term almost every single day. Again, I want an exhaustive, logical explanation.
Things stopped, stunted, or ruined early on are 'retarded'. It's a word, people. Deal with it.
R20, I agree that the intention is exactly the point, and when people use the word "retard" as Ann Coulter did, they obviously mean it a pejorative way.
Also, there's a world of difference between "retard," which sounds like a word an eighth grader would use, and "mentally retarded." Even though the latter phrase may not be totally PC, I would have no problem with anyone using it, because they obviously don't mean it in an offensive way.
People who complain about how awful "PC" is are almost always assholes who are too lazy to be empathetic.