Daily Mail article designed to create outrage from the anti-SJW crowd.
Anyone who thinks the Daily Mail is a reliable source is disabled.
Oh, words. They hurt. It's like saying Voldemort. Twitch is also so SJW. Say a forbidden word once, and you're out!
Or, you know, try to calm down.
It's one person's ("Mr Tonga's") opinion which is being sensationalised because that's what the Daily Mail does.
That being said, there is still a lesson to be learned from this opinion: Words have a way of gaining meaning as pejoratives. For example: "Retard". So the response is often to ostracise those words. But unless we deal with the underlying problem, namely that some people out there feel the need to use pejoratives in the first place, all that does is shift the problem and those same people then start twisting formerly acceptable words to take on the pejorative meaning.
What problem?
Words with universally negative properties cannot be alleviated in any way.
Like, the word is not bad because its being used as a pejorative, it was bad to begin with.
The only solution would be for those things to not exist in the first place, tall order though.
Nah I'm just gonna keep saying disabled. Not only is it a correct label, but if people are so soft skinned they find it offensive, it's just a bonus to see them get pissed off.
Trying to think up another softer word for disabled is just being intellectually dishonest
Last edited by Trassk; 2019-04-24 at 11:44 AM.
#boycottchina
How the fuck is the word "Disabled" offensive? What's next, handicapped an offensive word? Unable an offensive word? Where does it end?
I've worked with disabled people and I have disabled people in my family, I'm also technically a disabled person, and with that said I can say that what this mayor is doing is beyond condecending.
Disabled people aren't idiots, they might be blind, deaf, lack a limb or whatever. They don't need to, nor do they want to be, coddled and treated with this disgusting condecention and disrespect.
What really really gets to me is how this person says that "Social attitudes to disability have already changed and almost no one stigmatises and diminishes what people with disability can and should achieve" but that is exactly what they themselves are doing. Social attitudes have NOT changed, many disabilities are still DEEPLY stigmatised, and disabled people are dimished everywhere because of people like this Mayor.
The only people who ever care about this dumb stuff are people who AREN'T disabled.
There only doing is because their the ones seeking offense, it's not for disabled people but themselves.
If I was in a wheelchair unable to walk, and needed to pull myself into the toilet each morning with my arms, the last thing I'd want is some entitled virtue signaller claiming 'your just as able as everyone else, don't belittle yourself!". That's more demeaning then the reality of the situation.
#boycottchina
Not true. The meanings and implications of words change over time according to how they are used.
Here's a very clear example: Autistic.
Autism is a very specific condition. But calling people "autistic" is a common insult used by gamers. The result is that "Autistic" is becoming synonymous with "Stupid" which obviously is offensive to people who actually have (or care about people with) the condition of autism.
It's such a common thing to pervert words descriptive of some human condition into a demeaning pejorative that most people don't even notice it. Here are a few more:
"Dumb"
"Retard"
"Gay"
"Girly"
What I am saying is that those words come into existence for legitimate reasons, but are perverted over time to take on bad meaning. The problem isn't with the words, but with the people who decide to use them as pejoratives.
- - - Updated - - -
The only thing the mayor did was to hear Mr Tonga out. That doesn't mean she has any intention, or is seriously considering acting on his ridiculous suggestion. It's the daily fail ffs. Their entire business model revolves around deliberately sensationalising non-stories and presenting them in such a way that they are drastically distorted.
Last edited by Raelbo; 2019-04-24 at 12:42 PM.
The meaning didnt change because its still being used in the medical field,it just gained another meaning to it.
Now it has two:
Literal : a condition
Figurative/spiritual : behavioural pattern
Again, having autism is negative. Its not like it became so when people started using it figuratively.Here's a very clear example: Autistic.
Autism is a very specific condition. But calling people "autistic" is a common insult used by gamers. The result is that "Autistic" is becoming synonymous with "Stupid" which obviously is offensive to people who actually have (or care about people with) the condition of autism.
Using it that way does not make fun of/demean actual autist. How does one make that leap?
Again, i did not make autism into a bad thing. It was bad to begin with. You are the one deciding its demeaning. Like now you've define using a word as also doing more than just that, namely making fun of autistic people.It's such a common thing to pervert words descriptive of some human condition into a demeaning pejorative that most people don't even notice it. Here are a few more:
"Dumb"
"Retard"
"Gay"
"Girly"
What I am saying is that those words come into existence for legitimate reasons, but are perverted over time to take on bad meaning. The problem isn't with the words, but with the people who decide to use them as pejoratives.
Calling you autistic, does not mean i have something against autistic people.
My question, does the figurative usage make the word less serious or more serious? In comparison with the condition itself.
I would say less:
Last edited by Demasiados; 2019-04-24 at 01:09 PM.
I mean, as I see it "retarded" was first used as an euphemism too. It only meant they had retarded intellectual development, sounds better than idiot or fool to me and is quite clinical.
So yeah, people come up with new words to get rid of any negative connotations, but then these new words get used and guess what, new negative connotations appear. Who would have guessed. Seems to be what this mayor believes happened with the word "disabled", but it says more about his own prejudice than anything else to be honest.
What is it meant by "access inclusion seeker", someone who seeks an inclusion of the access type?
What the heck is that, i can't understand it as a non-english native.
Not going to bother reading the Daily Mail, but here's my thoughts:
The term disabled implies that the person in question has something "wrong" with them. Society has generally been designed for the "average" person, meaning that an outlier would become "disabled" because society was not designed with them in mind.
"In order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must be intolerant of intolerance." Paradox of tolerance