691
Anon introduces himself
(sh.itjust.works)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 27 Jan 2025
691 points (96.3% liked)
Greentext
4925 readers
1133 users here now
This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
- Anon is often crazy.
- Anon is often depressed.
- Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I don't know - the term "ableist" has certainly spiked in popularity in the last ten years or so, but even in the 90's you'd get a bollocking for throwing around the terms "mong" or "spaz" or "flid" within earshot of a teacher.
I mean, I can see why - I hate the terms myself now. but when you're in single digits of age, it's just used as another derisory term rather than a specific slight at someone's physical or mental development challenges.
It still got you in hot water if you were daft enough to get caught shouting it though.
I'm not native and I discovered the word by reading a Lemmy community's rules.
I had a teacher in the 90's call me a spaz.
Spaz was very mild in the US and very serious in the UK. Meant kinda different things too.
The opposite for extremity in these countries at the time was fanny. Meant completely different things.
Were you in a big city? Mine was pretty small. I wonder if that has to do with it? I never heard the word until maybe high school or college
Nah I was in a pretty small town, semi-rural but not buttfuck-nowhere either.
It certainly wasn't labelled "ableist" then, it was simply "being a little shit" - I only really learned of the term ableism around 10-15 years ago.
Same, but in a suburban area (suburb of major metro). Never heard of "ablism" until I found leftist communities like this online, and I grew up in a left leaning area. I don't think I've ever heard the term in person, and I have kids about OP's claimed age.
I went to catholic schools in a right leaning area, but while the term wasn't used we did have to watch an in school video in which people with downs syndrome talked about how that word made them feel like shit and had to learn how to treat other disabled people. I think it worked because people only ever picked on me for being a loser, not for being hard of hearing.
That's pretty wholesome. Kids can be brutal, sorry you were picked on anyway.
Really? I was in a pretty medium sized city (30-40k people, suburb of 1M+ city), and we used it all the time as kids. I have kids about the age of OP and live in a similar sized city, and I catch my kids using similar language.
I grew up in a liberal area and now live in a conservative one. It would take a lot more effort than that to get suspended from elementary school, you basically need to actually beat someone up or use drugs in school to do that.
Are you saying used the word ableist? Or the r word? I’m saying the r word was used frequently in elementary and middle school and wonder how young OP must be.
I have literally never heard "ableist" in real life.
We used the word "retard" (the R word in case it gets censored on your instance) a ton as kids to insult each other (e.g. for doing poorly at something), and I've heard my kids say it as well. I personally don't see the word nearly as problematic as the n word, because I've literally never heard it used to insult someone with an actual mental disability (have heard "mental retardation" [censor?] to describe such a condition though), it's only used to tease friends.
I crack down on it, but mostly because we have a few people with such conditions in our community and I'd hate for them to be offended at something my kids say off hand. I don't see it as "ableist" or whatever, and most don't seem to associate it with people's actual mental development, and instead I hear "slow," which is much less censored and IMO more offensive since it sounds like you're trying to hide a more ugly word in the hope that they won't understand (and I bet they do). I crack down on any potential slurs, but it wasn't that long ago that "idiot" meant much the same as "retard" (again, potential censored r word) does now, so banning its use just retards ("slows", if censored) that process.
I think "the left" (not sure who to point at here, but they largely seem leftist) have gone too far down the "inclusive language" rabbit hole here and often do harm than good (e.g. "latinx" is offensive because it came from English speakers, not the Latino community). Creating special terms just highlights differences instead of focusing on similarities, which IMO causes more problems than it solves. But I also don't want to offend anyone, so I try to enforce clean language and stick to technical terms (and not academic terms that dance around the issue) for things when I'm unsure of the acceptable parlance. I'll ask as well, e.g. I use "black" since that's what my black friends prefer. The "right" takes things too far the other direction, so I stick somewhere in the middle and try to ask when unsure.
You actually have made me think if I heard it in school or on reddit. Outside of newspapers, the internet, and universities this sort of rhetoric is pretty rare, I agree. But I’m in academia so I see it all the time.
We’re on the same page. My school used those a lot. I also agree that inclusive language and maybe even add identity politics has gone so far that it’s missed the point. Who actually gets offended at those? Middle school had people using a lot of n-words, retards, or everything was gay, maybe even fg. For the most part I think they ought to be not used. But it makes me think of the South Park episode where the Harley Davidson bike drivers come into town and all the kids are calling them fgs for how they’re acting and they get in trouble but they make the point they in no way are trying to be offensive to homosexuals. It’s weird that many of these words except for the n-word are taken as blanket unacceptable words even when that’s not their use case. Like calling wrestling gay was not an attack on lgbt people. But even typing this out I fear someone may be offended, which I do not want!
Latinx is probably the best example of how ridiculous it is. Seems Latine is much more reasonable and already used in SA.
I feel like leftists outside of moderate democrats may not have the rhetoric as much.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts on how you handle it with your children. Mine is too young but I do need to consider this.
Exactly. We just substitute other words, for example, "beta" means pretty much the same thing that "gay" and "fag" used to mean as kids.
And that's the crux of the problem. Most of those being offended aren't even targeted by those terms. Look at the PC term we used in the 90s and 00s (and maybe earlier idk) for black people, "African American," which was actually more offensive since it implied that they're immigrants or whatever despite having deeper American roots than most Americans.
The right takes this too far the other direction. But like I like to say, the truth (or best solution, in this case) lies somewhere in the middle. In this case, I think it's closer to the left, but the mainstream left takes it way too far.
When in doubt, ask. If you can't ask, use technical terms, but really try to just ask.
Exactly. But nobody bothered to ask, they just injected their own opinions.
I think the answer is typically younger teens-30s white people who get offended on others behalf. You've framed this in an interesting way. IDEK why I've been led to think that way. I know I don't want to think like the right does. And I disagree with how radically anti-logic academia can be but I do try to speak carefully within that setting.
It's almost as if white/cis/straight people are taking the potential suffering of non-whites and making it their own. Or at least living in a white savior fantasy.
Join us at the edges (or middle, depending on your perspective) where we dislike both mainstream sides and instead decide on issues piecemeal. Don't pick sides, even Republicans sometimes have decent ideas (though I only voted for one for many years, and I've voted for several Democrats in that time).
I consider myself libertarian (small l, the Libertarian Party is just conservatives who like weed these days). I'm not anti-government or anything, I just think simpler is generally better, and I'm against big changes like limiting speech just to reduce perceived harm to some demographic.
Exactly this.
Ask any minority and they'll say they don't need a savior, they need respect. I should know, I'm married to a first generation POC immigrant, and I've been corrected a few times. If you act like you're pulling someone up, that means they're below you, and it's just as hurtful (and sometimes more) than pushing them down. I understand the desire to help, but sometimes the best course of action is to leave them alone if you're not willing to genuinely become a friend.
I'm a huge proponent of DEI, but only in the way the company I worked for handled it, which was asking minorities to share their experiences. There was no mandated speech adjustment, hiring quotas, or anything like that, just understanding, and it was 100% optional (free lunch though). We even had professional speakers (in addition to our own panels) come and explain the issues they dealt with, with absolutely no call to action, and from diverse backgrounds (professional white women, black people of both genders, immigrants, etc). We had a decent turnout, and I was sad that they discontinued it.
Understanding is how we solve these types of problems, just changing the labels we use feels like progress but doesn't really help IMO.
Makes sense to me :)
That's good to know.
That does sounds beneficial. What sort of things would be shared?
The correct term is African America but we still enslave millions in prisons across the country, right? lol
Usually stories about struggles they had growing up.
One black gentleman was adopted into a non-black home in an area with very few people who looked like him, and while he had a good childhood (though he certainly experienced racism), he felt disconnected from his roots until he found the local black chamber of commerce and realized how vibrant the local community was.
Another was by a black woman who grew up a strong black community somewhere in the south. She didn't have as many issues with racism until later in life, her struggles were more with her career, since black women (or women in general) weren't expected pursue careers in tech (or maybe business, I forget), so more sexism with a racial backdrop.
We also had people from Asia, E. Europe, and Africa, as well as women and gay men, either as speakers or on discussion panels. It was all focused around personal experiences, either when they felt excluded or something that helped them feel accepted.
My takeaway was that hiring quotas and language don't really do anything (one even brought stats about retention), the most important thing is to foster a sense of community. It shouldn't be a top down thing either, or even within the company, just be aware of local community resources in case it comes up. If the focus is on quotas and language and not retention and community, you're going to have issues.