Sir it was in a Disney show when I was growing up. Yes, it was the polite way to say it. - It quite literally means slow. Fire retardant, for example, slows fires.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Sorry... why does it matter that it was in a Disney show when you were growing up?

Again, 'retarded' has been an insult for a very long time. It hasn't even been federally legal to use the term "mental retardation" since 2010 (more than "barely a decade") and by that time, the only people using the term was the federal government. The same federal government that used 'negro' until the 2000s. Are you going to claim 'negro' was the polite way to refer to a person in 1995 next?

But sure, call it polite. People who are actually bullied by it would disagree with you.

https://www.specialolympics.org/stories/impact/why-the-r-word-is-the-r-slur

https://www.spreadtheword.global/resource-archive/r-word-effects

https://www.npr.org/2012/11/05/164342230/a-special-olympian-on-pundits-use-of-the-r-word

https://www.verywellfamily.com/what-is-the-r-word-3105651

[–] RealFknNito@lemmy.world -1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

.. Because Disney after the whole Hitler era became sanitized and kid friendly and I don't think they were throwing in slurs on their kid friendly shows.

Starting to think you're making stuff up because it's not illegal to use. They made legislation to change the terminology from "mental retardation" to "Intellectual disability" for the Federal Register but made no claims that to use it is illegal.

By the mere fact this exists means Federally it was the proper term to call someone "Mentally retarded". The proper term. I don't think the Federal government was using slurs in legal documents as instanced by the fact they changed it when it started being used for that.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

I like how you ignored every link I posted and continue to insist it's polite despite the Special Olympics and a person with Down Syndrome explaining exactly why it is offensive.

Basically you're telling me that you know better about what offends "retards" than the "retards" do themselves.

[–] RealFknNito@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Well yes because there's no date on the first or second article, it could have been written a week ago and I have not at any point said that the word wasn't being used offensively a week ago, nor a year ago, nor five. I said that at one point, over a decade ago (yes I'm being very approximate with time), it was the proper term used by experts to characterize someone.

The link from NPR shows in 2012 it was offensive but still being compared to "Idiot" or "Moron" which I'd wager is where it was at the start of being used as an insult.

All of them ignore my point that it was once the proper and even 'polite' usage to call someone "Mentally retarded" and it evolved into a slur against the intellectually disabled and that cycle of turning words into slurs is exhausting. I personally think using hateful words in non-hateful context is how you reverse this loop which is why you'll find me using it in every way except to talk poorly about people who have an actual disability.

[+] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world -6 points 9 months ago (2 children)

The link from NPR shows in 2012 it was offensive but still being compared to “Idiot” or “Moron” which I’d wager is where it was at the start of being used as an insult.

My god, you didn't even read them. Bailey literally says in the NPR article:

She said that it's not offensive and that it's the same as saying cretin or moron, and it's definitely not.

"She" being Ann Coulter, who used the slur to begin with. So sure, it's comparable to 'moron'... if you're Ann Coulter, which I hope you are not.

Again- It is offensive, I do not like to see it here, and I will delete it sometimes.

That is my final word on it as a mod and I advise you not to try to argue with me further on this.

[–] aidan@lemmy.world 8 points 9 months ago (1 children)

That is my final word on it as a mod and I advise you not to try to argue with me further on this.

That's ridiculous to say. You're of course free to have a different opinion, and free to not respond, but a veiled threat to someone following the rules in expressing a disagreement with you is absolutely ridiculous.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world -3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Do you think this path you're going down right now is a wise one?

[–] aidan@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

What does that mean?

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world -2 points 9 months ago

I mean I wouldn't argue about you doing your job in politics. If you have an issue with me as a moderator, airing it out in public is not the way to do it. It's not good for either community.

I do not feel that I need a long argument to justify why I sometimes delete a comment using a word that the people who it is used against find offensive. Especially when I didn't do that this time. If you want people to argue endlessly with you about your reasoning for doing something as a mod in your communities, that is your right.

And when someone not just ignores what I have to say about it, but claims what I have posted says the literal opposite of what it says, then yes, I am going to shut that conversation down. I think I gave them plenty of time to air out their complaint that me occasionally deleting "retard" was completely uncalled for because it's not offensive. They certainly didn't do me the same courtesy.

[–] RealFknNito@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

I didn't know we were having an argument on it. I agree with you for the most part and appreciate you not reactively deleting my original comment.

Have a good weekend.

[–] aidan@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago

you not reactively deleting my original comment.

Instead just threatening to if you continue to disagree.