There’s a clear campaign against the mentally ill with the global rise of fascism. Lots of it shows up in anti homeless rhetoric, but you can see it in the MAHA and anti vaccination movements.
There’s no reason to use the word “r-tarded” to describe someone. As someone who’s worked with the intellectually challenged, it’s an insult to them to compare them with people who are willfully ignorant.
context is important. when I call my friend steph a “stupid removed”, we both know she’s not “stupid” nor a “removed”.
when I call a political leader removed, I mean it in a derogatory way. a slur. in all the negative meanings as possible.
when I call a neurotypical person removed, I mean it in the same way.
however, important context, it is never acceptable to use the word to describe someone who is intellectually challenged. it’s not their fault, and they have zero control over their situation.
I think it’s actually offensive to even compare intellectually challenged people to the word even.
I believe the word has purpose in the lexicon still, and that is describe the willfully ignorant in a visceral way that they are forced to take offense to it.
words can have more than one meaning. if it’s not directed at you or used to discriminate against you, it should be perfectly acceptable to use words to describe.
this zero tolerance and censorship of words never ended well in history only because it’s a constant battle of drawing lines in sand.
I know I’ll probably get banned for this comment, but I still think I deserve to speak my opinion on this. you don’t have to agree or disagree, I just want people to think for themselves and not fall into a dark pattern of censorship.
it’s an entirely reasonable take. but context is hard for people and they fail to understand that other people are not them, and get very angry with other people don’t behave the way they think they should.
And that’s that person’s problem.