this post was submitted on 31 Dec 2025
857 points (85.3% liked)
Comic Strips
20901 readers
3849 users here now
Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.
The rules are simple:
- The post can be a single image, an image gallery, or a link to a specific comic hosted on another site (the author's website, for instance).
- The comic must be a complete story.
- If it is an external link, it must be to a specific story, not to the root of the site.
- You may post comics from others or your own.
- If you are posting a comic of your own, a maximum of one per week is allowed (I know, your comics are great, but this rule helps avoid spam).
- The comic can be in any language, but if it's not in English, OP must include an English translation in the post's 'body' field (note: you don't need to select a specific language when posting a comic).
- Politeness.
- AI-generated comics aren't allowed.
- Adult content is not allowed. This community aims to be fun for people of all ages.
Web of links
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world: "I use Arch btw"
- !memes@lemmy.world: memes (you don't say!)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retard_(pejorative)
As was idiot, cretin, moron, and imbecile, which suffered similar misuse.
Previously? It's in my medical paper.
It has fallen into disfavor due to its constant misuse as a pejorative. Might want to update the paper.
Why are you telling me, I'm not the one calling patients the R word 😭
So it's in your medical record. Depending on how old it is, that was very unprofessional of whoever wrote it.
They wrote F70.8, and when I searched it up, the description was the R word.
I looked it up, and it looks like the terminology has changed to refer to "intellectual disability" instead. So it's actually not in your record when using the most updated terminology.
Oh, nice!
so you agree it is a multifaceted word that requires contextual definition in order to be used properly.
https://www.etymonline.com/word/retarded
It's unfair to judge a word that has over 500 years of use on the last 70 years of history.
A bridge that has stood for 500 years can be considered unusable today due to recent developments.
The word clearly isn't having the effect you say you want. The solution isn't to bemoan the poor treatment of the word - the solution is to change the word you use.
You have many options - be creative!
more analogies that have no other purpose but to oversimplify and confuse the topic. I can't fault you though, if this is the best way you can understand language. you tried your best after all.
if the intent of the speaker is misunderstood by the listener it's the listeners fault for misinterpreting and failing to understand contextual intonation.
simply put, the speaker speaks and the listener listens. intent is conveyed through our words and their meaning. if the listener misinterprets the meaning based on context given, it's the listeners fault.
have you observed that when listening to the speech of someone who is classically educated that their vocabulary seems to be endlessly descriptive and their intent often lost on the uneducated masses? that those with higher education are often ostracized or mocked because they are perceived as "thinking they're better".
that's because the uneducated masses fail to understand the meaning of the words they speak. the peasants fail to understand the nobility of the spoken word. they simply use common to communicate with their simpleminded friends and neighbors.
I'm sure at this point you have clearly understood my intent of this comment.
if not, read a book.
On the contrary, a skilled orator adjusts the message to suit the audience, and a skilled craftsman chooses the tool best suited to the task.
However, your intent here seems to be primarily to offend, rather than to convince or persuade, as evidenced by both your word choice and the direction of your statements - this is your choice of course, and I will similarly choose to ignore it!
it's impossible to convince anyone who refuses to see. all that's left is to openly mock them in their refusal.
and before you make the assumption that I'm refusing to see, let me reject that opinion. I see the term "retarded" is triggering to some, frankly I don't care. a word is a word and unless directed at you shouldn't be a topic that causes an emotional response.
"this board game is retarded" is not the same as "you are retarded". much the same as "people are the worst " is not the same as "you people are the worst".
it's a descriptor that modifies the intensity and volume of the rhetoric.
this brand of censorship is annoying as best and infuriating at worst. anyone who is triggered by words in context needs to get over themselves. the world doesn't need to cater to you and your insecurities.
downvote or mock me all you want, I won't change my position just because a bunch of people and their infantile preferences demand it.
Yea, and from the same wiki article:
this is either the perfect comment that uses the word "ignoramus", or the worst insult.
I'm still not sure if you actually meant to do it or not.
I chose it for its Latin-ness, if that's what you're asking.
your comment used it as a zeugma. the term described who you were speaking to as "one who is ignorant" as well as being used as a tongue-in-cheek soliloquy, using a Latin term when you had announced none were present, which used the original definition of "we take no notice of, we do not know".
it's quite clever, though I doubt you meant to do it 😆.
No, we’re speaking English. Do you know the definition of etymology?
Do you understand semantic shift?
That’s specifically what I’m referring to.
Good, so you would understand that today the R word in 99% of any realistic context is going to be a slur. Stop trying to "um akshually" defend the usage of it.
One thing I don't like about this approach, which I have seen mostly coming from the US but also in other places, is that with the best intentions people identify a problem. Once the problem is identified some plausible solutions are discussed. A bit of attention is placed into how to act in everyday life to limit such an issue. An often proposed option, mostly in the US - I have not seen this in other places, is to stop using words that may have an influence in aggravating or normalising such a problem. All this is good thinking and a great way to address the problem, but eventually many people forget what the actual objective of such action was and end up discussing about the usage of words rather than the actual problem.
I'm pretty sure the person above did not mean to insult people with medical conditions in any way. Is the whole of this discussion actually important in any way? Are you actually helping people with mental diseases by pointing this out?
I'm sure they didn't. However, they're using a term that is very offensive to some people, which they may be unaware of. That's why it was pointed out. If they want to be an asshole and continue using it anyway, that's on them.
I'm offended by being considered "some people". I'm not "people" I'm a person.
in recent history, I was always grouped into social hierarchies as "you people".
it's very offensive, you should stop calling us "people" and start using the word "person" or "persons".
I use the term as a general insult towards people who seem hellbent on never learning from their mistakes. Like when people keep voting for politicians who openly advocating for violence against those same people, or when people keep getting in car accidents because they think everyone else is the problem (Oh the irony though).
Would never use it towards someone medically incapable of learning from their mistakes, that's just cruel and not their fault.