Lemmy Shitpost
Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.
Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!
Rules:
1. Be Respectful
Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.
Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.
...
2. No Illegal Content
Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.
That means:
-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals
-No CSA content or Revenge Porn
-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)
...
3. No Spam
Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.
-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.
-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.
-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers
-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.
...
4. No Porn/Explicit
Content
-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.
-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.
...
5. No Enciting Harassment,
Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts
-Do not Brigade other Communities
-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.
-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.
-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.
...
6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.
...
If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.
Also check out:
Partnered Communities:
1.Memes
10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)
Reach out to
All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker
view the rest of the comments
That's a poorly reasoned take. Slurs are only slurs if someone's around to hear it? That's definitely not how that works. Additionally, groups that are not necessarily mentally delayed (waves in autistic) get painted with that brush too. So even by your poor reasoning, it was a slur because I was there to see it.
It was also definitely punching down. It was the classic usage "Group X is like group Y and they're bad because of the features they share", specifically difficulty understanding new information in this context. Explain how it wasn't that? How it didn't draw an equality between them based upon the expressed undesirable feature of learning difficulties, thus implying that the intellectually disabled are less because of it?
So, yeah. You're taunting me. Really badly.
So calling someone a common racial epithet always a slur? Ignoring context is stupid because it is willfully ignorance. Clearly context matters.
Furthermore who defines it as as a slur. I know someone who is mentally delayed that throws around the retard word all the time. Are you offended for them?
Also retardation has fallen out of favor for medical diagnosis. It has not fallen out of favor for a general insult, no matter how badly you want it to. Once again, ignoring context.
Lastly punching down refers to social ridicule from a high standing group to a low standing group. This did not happen. You are clearly wrong to say it did.
So yeah you are acting stupid and you continue to double down on the stupidity like it is a badge of honor.
So dropping the n-slur when no black people are around strips it of its history and the connotations used by the speaker? History is part of the context. Tone is part of the context. Both were present.
Society as a whole generally does that. We collectively decided 20 or so years ago that it was a bad thing to do. And the world was better for it. But that is a bad argument. Advocacy groups publishing articles reasoning far better than I regarding its status as hate speech is probably the better angle.
I'll assume you meant developmentally delayed. I don't care for it, but that's getting into 'reclaiming the word' territory, which is not what this conversation is about.
The existence of this conversation and my general net upvote (with a nod that lemmy is not a complete demographic, nor do a few comments do an informed study make) rather disproves that. It was out of favor for a long ass time. It was scumbags like Joe Rogan who brought it back. Words evolve past their history. A point I have at no point refuted, merely rejected the argument that this is relevant. One must show that the evolution has changed it sufficiently to no longer be a slur. It still bears its history and current status of being a slur despite falling out of medical favor.
The individual, presumably not disabled, used the intellectually disabled as an insult against others. While perhaps not directly social ridicule it's not exactly promoting social standing. I'll grant that they were not attacked directly and thus punching down is not the most appropriate term. What was done was definitely a sibling and still a shitty thing to do.
You fundamentally misunderstand. I see an offensive thing. I make a single comment that spiraled in a big way. I defend my position and await a compelling argument to convince me otherwise, which has not arisen. I've even had some good faith debate and conceded a few things in this mess. Your arguments just aren't landing for the reason's I'm spending too much time and effort on.
I'll admit that my taunts were in poor taste. It doesn't induce good faith debate to insult.
Black people don't view as a slur, they took it back like the Chicanos did. The major difference is they didn't fully take it back so it is both a source of unity and disrespect. That is on them for trying to take back a word they don't want others to use.
We collectively as a society stopped using retardation as a medical diagnosis. The rest of what you say is nonsense.
Glad you can admit the punching down was nonsense.
Speaking of spirals, I just said it was a dumb take because you forgot context and added in some bullshit about punching down. This is objectively true so I am not sure why you need to keep going on and on.
Black people are not a monolith and I'd be dead in the street if I said that in the wrong neighborhood. This is also irrelevant as that is more about reclamation than the status as a slur (which it is). It would matter if the original usage was performed by one who was disabled, for which we have no evidence nor reason to assume.
So history, the appeals of advocacy groups, the direct rejection of what you say by someone who would have been called such not long enough ago is irrelevant? Context only matters when it helps you I guess?
Linguistic imprecision is hardly the most salient point. My inability to name a better term for the wrong done does not remove the wrong.
I've listed off context multiple times. You have failed to refute any of it.
You're rather arrogant to aspire to objective truth. Even I'm not doing that and I'm having trouble breathing from my high horse. Sociology and linguistics are not the land of objective truth. It speaks ill of your reasoning abilities that you believe that is what you're doing.
Edit: I continue because you haven't convinced me. Do so and I'll yield.
So you admit that slurs are not always slurs and that context matters. This context was missing for you to call it a slur to begin with. There was no mentally delayed person being called a retard. Glad we can agree your original comment was half-baked.
What are you left with again? Oh yes a lie about a slur and a false usage of punching down. Stop bloviating, this is the beginning and end of it.
That's quite a few words you shoved in my mouth. I, at no point, said slurs are not always slurs. I acknowledged context matters as a general statement and then posed the context that I believe matters. I, in fact, positively asserted that history, usage, and present recognition by relevant advocacy groups as being relevant context to define it as a slur. You have yet to acknowledge any of those points. I'll happily yield if you can name why those three things are irrelevant.
Lie? You've lost me on that one. I hold that the usage was offensive even if it does not necessarily meet the definition of 'punching down' specifically. The bat is still harmed when it strikes the baseball.
Is it? You have ignored my points multiple times while I have endeavored to engage with yours. I should know better than to engage with bad faith. Alas.
Glad we could agree even if you are coming from a point of bad faith now. I get it. You are wrong and want to try to make yourself right instead just admitting your comment was a hot take at best and a disingenuous lie at worst.
You say calling it a slur was not lie, but it was. It misrepresented reality and as so meets the definition. I also suspect you knew this hence why a lie is appropriate. I suppose you could claim ignorance, but I think that would be disingenuous at this point.
The way it was used was simply not a slur. Context matters and as I pointed out it was not a disparaging comment used to belittle a group. It was simply a personal insult. You might find it distasteful and I may even agree it can be in the correct context. It simplt wasn't in this situation though.
I apologize if you feel I have not conceded to any of your points. Most of what you say is not wrong, just the original comment was.
Ah pigeon chess. Delightful.
I'm still confused. What did I misrepresent? Calling it a slur was a lie? That's my entire thesis that I have backed at every step.
I contend otherwise. Extensively. With logic and rationale that you refuse to engage with.
You don't have to concede. I expect you won't. I'd like you to engage with me rather than put words in my mouth and ignore what you find inconvenient, though even that is out of what I have control over. I've specifically marked why I have dismissed some of your arguments (mostly red herring) while you've relied on the tried and true 'nuh uh' strategy.
I listed three things that, if refuted directly, I would gladly yield. You have ignored this condition that is the basis of having any sort of debate and instead decided that you have won by some metric that you have come up with. Or would you like to babble about context while ignoring it more?
Bad faith confirmed.
You may contend otherwise, but you are wrong. As I pointed out.
I suppose we won't see eye to eye here and that is fine. Your comment was garbage and I explained why. You have failed to convince me otherwise. Cheers!
It's rather hard to see eye to eye while you cover yours. Enjoy your hate speech.
More lies, to be expected.
This has taken such a strange turn. At the risk of encouraging the pigeon, you do realize that deception, by definition, requires an intent to deceive? At worst I'm just wrong.
I don't understand your affinity for hate speech nor why you defend it to the point of apparent delusion, but you might want to ask a therapist about that.
The only strange turn is you being a total liar and bullshit artist.
I swear you must be some fascist fuck pretending to be a social justice warrior. Sorry if I don't share you faux outrage.
It's just very suddenly aggressive. I'm very confused where the turn happened and where the poorly founded accusations of lying enter. What statement did I intentionally misrepresent?
I mean, I dumped a lot of effort into defending against the use of a slur. Fascists have a tendency to be pro-slur in general. Your stance is... shaky.
Took me a minute to figure it out, but now it is clear.
It's unfortunate. Other than you loving hate speech apparently, your comment history indicates we agree on quite a bit, if perhaps not to the same level of passion.
More lies, you just can't help yourself.
I am sure we share many similar beliefs like all people. Cheers!
I see. Care to share with the class? Or are you just gonna show up outside my house with a knife, cause that's the vibe you're now giving off.
An appeal to your... whatever you've got going on: it'll help other people not be deceived if you say whatever the fuck you're talking about.