This post was originally published in March 2021 on Medium
Swear all you want – it may be offensive to some but it won’t actually hurt anyone. But using words that dehumanise minority groups isn’t just offensive, it does real harm.
In 2003 The Black Eyed Peas released the single “Let’s get Retarded”. It was later renamed to be more “radio friendly” (though a number of very dubious lyrics remained) and it went on to win a Grammy. I vividly remember being in the car with my sister and her son, who was maybe 9 at the time, when the original version came on the radio. It instantly started a discussion about the use of the word “retarded”. For my sister, the origin and connotations meant that it should never be used. For my nephew “retarded” had a completely different meaning in the song, it wasn’t being used to make fun of people with intellectual disabilities so that made it ok. I was 21 and considered myself to be progressive and liberal, yet although I could see my sister’s point I was firmly on my nephew’s side; language is fluid and intention matters.
Fast forward to today and my views have (thankfully) changed radically. I am much better informed about the origins of identity-based slurs (insults based on race, disability, gender or sexual orientation) and I have a greater understanding of why these words should not be used. I have listened to those most affected by the use of such words and learned from them the devastating impact they can have. While it’s true that language is constantly evolving, when you look closely at the “new” meanings for words originally used to marginalise, mock or dehumanise minorities, it’s clear that this is less an evolution and more a re-branding. This is particularly the case for disability slurs (and other ableist language), which have been largely ignored in the general push for more inclusive language around gender and ethnicity.
Let’s take a look at the re-branding of “retarded”. It was originally a medical term for people with intellectual disabilities and comes from the Latin for “make slow/delay”. It entered general usage as an insult to describe someone/something considered to be inferior or undesirable, not-so-subtly implying that having an intellectual disability – being “retarded” – is a bad thing and something to avoid at all costs. The argument made by the Black Eyed Peas (and that I bought into at the time) that the word has since evolved and has nothing to do with intellectual disability collapses under closer examination. They argued that it is simply a synonym for being drunk, in the same way as “messed up” or “wrecked”. In other words, it is synonymous with a state of cognitive impairment characterised by incoherent speech, poor motor control and impaired decision making. Couple this with the generally negative connotations of being “messed up” and it is clear that while the link may be more subtle the meaning is essentially the same.
Language informs our perception of the world. When a language link is made between between the label for disability and inferior/undesirable traits it internalises an association between these traits and people with that disability. Once we start to see people as inferior because of their differences – whether that difference is race, gender, sexual orientation or disability – we start to view them as less valuable to society and therefore less deserving of basic rights. This has been proven time and again throughout history, and it’s just as true today. Children with disabilities were the first minority group targeted by the Nazi regime with medical professionals and teachers required to report children with disabilities to the regime so they could be institutionalised (read: experimented on and murdered). This provided the regime with assurance that people were willing to commit horrendous atrocities providing they saw the victims as inferior and it paved the way for the regime’s to extend this to other minority groups.
I make a conscious effort not to use abelist language (though I’m not always successful), but I’ve realised I need to be more proactive in challenging this language in others. This became clear when I found myself having a conversation with my own children that was almost identical to the one my sister and nephew had almost two decades ago. This time the words in question were perhaps less (obviously) controversial: “Idiot”, and “dumb”. They are generally considered acceptable alternatives to “retard”, especially when used in a self-deprecating way: “I’m so dumb!”. But when you dig deeper into their origins it is clear that they are equally problematic. “Dumb” was originally used to refer to people who were non-verbal and evolved into an insult synonymous with “retarded” because it was assumed that lack of speech equalled intellectual disability. Likewise, “idiot” was originally a medical term for “those so defective that mental development never exceeds that of a normal child of about two years old”. Yet these and dozens more – based not only on disability but on race, gender and sexual identity – are used frequently in everyday life. They appear in children’s books, TV shows and movies, and can be found all over social media. No-one seems to bat an eyelid when hearing these words used and explaining they are offensive often results in people justifying their use – as I did – or simply deflecting with complaints about people being too politically-correct, easily offended or “woke”.
Contrast that to the outcry that would occur if children’s entertainment was littered with “offensive” language such as “dick”, “wank”, “shit” or “fuck”. These words are widely accepted as inappropriate for children and are still considered offensive by many adults, despite the fact they have become commonplace in general conversation. But why do we happily accept that these particular words are offensive and not others? None of them originated as labels for apparent defects. They have not been used to marginalise, stigmatise and justify the abuse of minority groups. They do not carry negative undertones linking specific groups to undesirable traits or characteristics. These, and indeed most profanities, are deemed offensive merely because they relate to sex or bodily functions. Is that really who we are as a society? More offended by natural biological processes than we are by the oppression, abuse and discrimination of those who diverge from the “norm”? Are those the values we really want to pass onto our children? Whatever you do, don’t talk about sex! But by all means disrespect and devalue people with disabilities as much as you like…
Thankfully, it seems like people are beginning to realise how little sense it makes to demonise swearing while accepting derogatory slurs. Hopefully that shift continues as the inclusive language movement takes on the fight against ableism.
So, swear all you want. The worst that will happen is someone will be offended. But maybe think twice about calling someone “dumb”, even yourself.
Check out this link for suggestions on how to make your language more inclusive.
Kommentare