The acceptability of using the word 'retarded'

[_Ren]

It's probably to do with the idea that our mind determines - more or less - who we 'really' are.

I would think there's more to it than that. I find, for example, that there isn't as big a taboo attached to other emotional or mental conditions such as depression, schizophrenia, or alzheimer's.

Hmm - yeah. I see what ya saying.
Specifically with alzheimer's, it usually only comes on in old age, so the person 'afflicted' will have had a decent chance of having a "normal" (whatever the hell that's supposed to mean) life most of the time. That may take an edge off the sense of sympathy when compared to other conditions.

But yeah - I see your point on the other two.
If I were to make the joke:

"Schizophrenia beats being alone"

Would anybody be offended by that...?
But then again, is there an inherent required negative for the above joke to 'work'? I'm not sure that this is even about the conditions involved - isn't it also about the nature of the joke itself...?

The joke this thread is about had the structure: 'Even though you've won X, you're still Y'.
This implies that Y is effectively 'losing'.

Does it matter what condition / person / group gets placed into Y? No matter what you placed into Y (and whatever is appropiate to place into X), isn't the end result inherently offensive to 'Y', and anybody who feels badly on behalf of 'Y'?

[_asbestosman]

My position has nothing to do with a word, the use of a word, or what it means to be slow or fast, retarded, brilliant, or anything... it has to do with cruelty towards those who are in need of care and compassion.

I might argue that we are all in need of care and compassion. What separates us from them is that they are unable to defend themselves, aren't really accountable on the level we are, and are less able to take care of themselves.

My point was not by any means that laughing at kids in the Special Olympics is ok. My point was only a question of consistancy. And also a question of why it is such.

[_asbestosman]

Does it matter what condition / person / group gets placed into Y? No matter what you placed into Y (and whatever is appropiate to place into X), isn't the end result inherently offensive to 'Y', and anybody who feels badly on behalf of 'Y'?

What if 'Y' is "ugly", "stinky", or "fat"?

Thinking about it more, there may be a way to interpret the internet debate "joke", in a way that doesn't rely on depricating people in the Special Olympics--at least no more than calling someone "retarded" which it seems that Truth Dancer wasn't particularly concerned with. The point of the "joke" in some sense isn't that being "retarded" is mockworthy, but rather that the significance you place on your internet debating skills is extremely subjective, and something that many other people could easily outdo you on. However, I'll also say that yes, for those in the Special Olympics it is likely that their efforts are comparable to those of other atheletes given what means they have.

Like any comparison, one can take different points from it and one can take it too far. I think there may be a way to use that "joke" which does not rely on laughing at those in the Special Olympics, but I think that the "joke" is ill-conceived nonetheless.

Perhaps it'd be better formulated as something like, "Winning an internet debate is like wining the diaper derby. Even if you win, you're still an immature baby who's full of crap."

[Guest]

What if 'Y' is "ugly", "stinky", or "fat"?

I could imagine quite a few people getting offended at an 'ugly' or 'fat' equivalent...

"Even if you win the weight-watchers 'slimmer of the week', you're still fat.". Doesn't really work as a joke, but you get the idea.

Probably not the stinky example, but then I suppose all stinky people need to do are jump in a bath, or take a shower. Usually...

How about:

"Even if you win a MOBO, you're still black."

As long as the term for 'Y' has a minimum capacity of being used in an offensive manner, I think the structure of the joke in question will turn out to be offensive to somebody. The whole point of the joke is to look down on 'something'. It's just a matter of what...

I do see the point about concentrating more on the comparison with the 'winning' condition, and how that can be taken as analogous with feeling like you've 'achieved' something. It's true, it depends on the emphasis you perceive. But if the 'Y' component is bad enough, it'd be hard to not notice it!!

Perhaps it'd be better formulated as something like, "Winning an internet debate is like wining the diaper derby. Even if you win, you're still an immature baby who's full of crap."

That would have been better - probably because we know that being an 'immature baby' is usually a temporary affair.
They eventually grow out of that. Well, at least usually... ;)

[_keene]

The "joke" was basically...

Some guy standing on the sidelines, laughing at a young girl as she crossed the finish line after an heroic effort... and laughing in her face... yelling to the family.. ha, ha, ha.. so what that you just ran across the finish line. You are still retarded. Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.

I'm sorry but anyone who would think such a thing let alone say such a thing is cruel.

<snip>

it has to do with cruelty towards those who are in need of care and compassion.

~dancer~

Gawd, if you imagine jokes like THAT, life must seem so horrid!

Perhaps instead of imagining that we're laughing at the child, you can think of it as an apt analogy. Fighting on the internet, like special olympics, is a huge ammount of effort, and gee golly you sure do smile when you're done. You feel so accomplished! Yet somehow, it doesn't change the hard aspects of real life, and you're still going to suffer when you log off and return home.

What we laugh at is the irony, not the retardation, or the effort put out by retards in the special olympics.

The joke wasn't creul at ALL until you created that image. It was an ironic -- and fitting -- analogy.

As for the statement I bolded...

These kids DON'T need care and compassion -- not any more than anyone else. They need to be treated like human beings, but the protectiveness you portray goes overboard, to the point of insulting. Imagine if you had a friend who felt (compassionately) that you needed to be sheltered. Say you were in a bar, and some guy's hitting on you, and teases you a little -- suddenly your friend hops in "Hey! Don't say that! You'll hurt her! She's a sweet person! How awful of you to laugh at her!"

It'd get annoying REAL fast if it were to happen to you -- the retards don't like it much either.

Now, don't get me wrong -- real mistreatment and exploitation is wrong, no matter who does it, or who it's done to -- but 'sensitivity' can go too far.

[_keene]

What if 'Y' is "ugly", "stinky", or "fat"?

I could imagine quite a few people getting offended at an 'ugly' or 'fat' equivalent...

"Even if you win the weight-watchers 'slimmer of the week', you're still fat.". Doesn't really work as a joke, but you get the idea.

Probably not the stinky example, but then I suppose all stinky people need to do are jump in a bath, or take a shower. Usually...

How about:

"Even if you win a MOBO, you're still black."

As long as the term for 'Y' has a minimum capacity of being used in an offensive manner, I think the structure of the joke in question will turn out to be offensive to somebody. The whole point of the joke is to look down on 'something'. It's just a matter of what...

I do see the point about concentrating more on the comparison with the 'winning' condition, and how that can be taken as analogous with feeling like you've 'achieved' something. It's true, it depends on the emphasis you perceive. But if the 'Y' component is bad enough, it'd be hard to not notice it!!

Perhaps it'd be better formulated as something like, "Winning an internet debate is like wining the diaper derby. Even if you win, you're still an immature baby who's full of crap."

That would have been better - probably because we know that being an 'immature baby' is usually a temporary affair.
They eventually grow out of that. Well, at least usually... ;)

I think the assumption that 'Y' is something to be insulted is a false assumption -- and could be offensive in the manner Ren has shown in this post. However, the point of any good joke is the combination of truth and pain. Keep that in mind as I now dissect the joke in question.

"Fightin on the internet is like the special olympics. Even if you win, you're still retarded."

The truth and pain: Being retarded is something we can all identify with. It's not a fun life, it's full of difficulties, and it's generally painful.

The comic twist: By fighting on the internet, you are identifying with a position you wouldn't want to be in.

Saying things like "You're still black" would be offensive, because "black" is not necessarily a position one wouldn't want to be in, unless they were racist. Ugly is not as bad, because everyone can agree that being ugly is not a position one would want to be in.

The joke doesn't so much as ridicule the 'Y,' so much as acknoledge that it's a crappy situation. To ignore that would be lying. The laughter is a form of release from the tension of the crappy situation -- like the old statement "We laugh, so we won't cry."

This joke, in my opinion, does more good by acknoledging the situation, then it could possibly do to offend. Unless of course you assume that all acknoledgement of shittyness is the same as ridicule.

Edit: My language skills are off today -- I'm starting a polyphasic sleep system, and I haven't had REM sleep in a couple days. I'm kinda zombified at the moment.

[_Ren]

I think the assumption that 'Y' is something to be insulted is a false assumption -- and could be offensive in the manner Ren has shown in this post. However, the point of any good joke is the combination of truth and pain. Keep that in mind as I now dissect the joke in question.

"Fightin on the internet is like the special olympics. Even if you win, you're still retarded."

The truth and pain: Being retarded is something we can all identify with. It's not a fun life, it's full of difficulties, and it's generally painful.

The comic twist: By fighting on the internet, you are identifying with a position you wouldn't want to be in.

Saying things like "You're still black" would be offensive, because "black" is not necessarily a position one wouldn't want to be in, unless they were racist. Ugly is not as bad, because everyone can agree that being ugly is not a position one would want to be in.

The joke doesn't so much as ridicule the 'Y,' so much as acknoledge that it's a crappy situation. To ignore that would be lying. The laughter is a form of release from the tension of the crappy situation -- like the old statement "We laugh, so we won't cry."

This joke, in my opinion, does more good by acknowledging the situation, then it could possibly do to offend. Unless of course you assume that all acknowledgment of shittyness is the same as ridicule.

I do agree with the way you've looked at it Keene. And it is a positive way to view it.
I guess my main, underlying point is this - I'd have to be sure that that's how the person saying the joke meant it.

If I believed a comedian wanted and intended to laugh 'with' 'Y', then I'd give them plenty of slack. They could go pretty far before they'd even get close to offending me. The South-Park episode is a good example. I don't find it offensive because I'm perfectly confident that they don't intend to laugh AT Timmy - their laughing with him. I think it was clear from the way the 'jokes' were approached.

Now, if someone other than Nehor had made the EXACT same joke, in a different context - then I could potentially find EXACTLY the same joke far more offensive. If I thought they really WERE trying to have a dig at that group of people. Because someone surely could - right? Someone COULD hate 'retards' for all kinds of crazy reasons, and use exactly the same joke in a way that is intended to offend.

I think it really comes down to the perceived intention. I was perfectly confident Nehor didn't mean it 'that' way, so I didn't take it 'that' way.
I still think it was a little dumb though... But that's not offense...

[_keene]

I do agree with the way you've looked at it Keene. And it is a positive way to view it.
I guess my main, underlying point is this - I'd have to be sure that that's how the person saying the joke meant it.

If I believed a comedian wanted and intended to laugh 'with' 'Y', then I'd give them plenty of slack. They could go pretty far before they'd even get close to offending me. The South-Park episode is a good example. I don't find it offensive because I'm perfectly confident that they don't intend to laugh AT Timmy - their laughing with him. I think it was clear from the way the 'jokes' were approached.

Now, if someone other than Nehor had made the EXACT same joke, in a different context - then I could potentially find EXACTLY the same joke far more offensive. If I thought they really WERE trying to have a dig at that group of people. Because someone surely could - right? Someone COULD hate 'retards' for all kinds of crazy reasons, and use exactly the same joke in a way that is intended to offend.

I think it really comes down to the perceived intention. I was perfectly confident Nehor didn't mean it 'that' way, so I didn't take it 'that' way.
I still think it was a little dumb though... But that's not offense...

Regardless of how someone intends a joke, the intention loses all power if you defuse it by looking at it positively. Say someone did use that joke offensively - a good response, without getitng offended and uppity:

"Haha, yeah that's funny. Being retarded is a sad situation, and hoo boy, I wouldn't want to be in their shoes!"

If they were trying to get a rise out of you, they failed. If they weren't, then you two both appreciated a good sense of irony together.

Of course, there's always the layered irony of that joke that makes it so beautiful: The poster of the joke nearly always does it in order to win an argument on the internet, thus putting himself in the same situation he has already expressed distress for! This layer of self-deprication on the side of the poster makes it quite difficult to intend the joke in a mean spirited way, unless they were very self-masochistic.

[_The Nehor]

Of course, there's always the layered irony of that joke that makes it so beautiful: The poster of the joke nearly always does it in order to win an argument on the internet, thus putting himself in the same situation he has already expressed distress for! This layer of self-deprication on the side of the poster makes it quite difficult to intend the joke in a mean spirited way, unless they were very self-masochistic.

I've been found out......RUN!!!!!!!!!!

[_truth dancer]

Hi Asbestosman...

I might argue that we are all in need of care and compassion.

You won't be arguing with me!

:-)

What separates us from them is that they are unable to defend themselves, aren't really accountable on the level we are, and are less able to take care of themselves.

Agreed. Picking on the vulnerable and weak, or less able, downtrodden, hurt, etc., moves the cruelty to a whole new level, in my opinion.

My point was not by any means that laughing at kids in the Special Olympics is ok.

Glad to hear this.

~dancer~