Are we ret*d?

Post Reply New Topic

at least some of us have the inside straight on the fact that being worldly-wise is not the be-all and end-all of wisdom. in fact, a lot of us know that being worldly wise can be hazardous in the long-run, as it makes such folks complacent and arrogant.

You've learned adaptation, not necessarily true social skills that you react to intuitively. Our ability to "read" people is just not the same as an NT, it never can be. That's why I would argue against ret*d as a delay in this case, if it were merely delayed that infers that it can "catch up" and be the same, but it really can't. I know what you're talking about, I certainly do better now than when I was younger but I also know it's not the same as an NT when I socialize. They instinctively feel the conversation and I do not.

Another point I'd like to make: you'd think the psychologist would have the social skills to avoid using language that could even be misconstrued as derogatory...perhaps he's autistic.

Very elegantly put; I concur.

Technically, those that are intellectually disabled aren't necessarily "delayed" either. They are delayed in many areas, but they will never "catch up" to reach a level that is considered to be "normal" functioning. So the term isn't really correct, even when used in that context, even though it was proper medical terminology at one time

Yes, "ret*d" is now a derogatory term and no longer considered to be an appropriate medical term when used in the context of one's mental abilities. It's still correct when used in other contexts. I'm not sure why a psychologist would use that term.

I am reminded of the old Einstein quote about how a fish could be judged deficient in the task of climbing a tree.

Since this was a psychiatrist speaking, I presume he was using the clinical definition of "ret*d" or "mental retardation" rather than some other sort of developmental delay or deficiency in socialization. The term was phased out in DSM-V, and the ICD-11 working group is discussing phasing it out too. I was surprised to hear it's even still used, since it's really not precise, in addition to have gotten an insulting meaning. It is being replaced with "intellectual disability": 'a group of developmental conditions characterized by significant impairment of cognitive functions, which are associated with limitations of learning, adaptive behavior and skills' (ICD-11, proposed).

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/782769

The article indicates that this is intended more for people like Down's Syndrome persons, rather than Aspergerians, whose disabilities tend to be social and sensory. Severe autism may occur with intellectual disability, but not Asperger's syndrome, by definition.

no

I used to be called "socially ret*d" by my mother's boyfriend.

Just the fact that we are autistic/Aspie or whatever does not make us "ret*d."

Hear, hear - And being different is a good thing!

Depends on how you define "ret*d".

Last edited by Kyle Katarn on 26 Feb 2016, 11:50 am, edited 1 time in total.

This is one of those things I have to pay attention to in what I study. It falls under the umbrella of something called "disability discourse" or the way in which disability is discussed.

"ret*d" is now a word like the n-word for blacks or the f-word to describe a gay man. All kinds of people do use these three words, although they probably shouldn't. It is generally accepted that the only people entitled to use the n-word are black people and the only people entitled to use the f-word are gay people, probably just gay men. The word d---- to mean a gay woman is probably about the same. SO, the only people who are entitled to use the word ret*d are people who are themselves cognitively impaired.

People who used to be called ret*d are now referred to as cognitively impaired (this is for low IQs) or people with Down's, if that's what they have. What used to be called autism with retardism is now called low spectrum autism, or autism with cognitive impairment.

The dictionary definition of ret*d, as being a process that has slowed, doesn't matter. You can't just refer to people as their technical descriptions. If we did that, I would be referred to as a "pink woman with indeterminate, medium toned hair". That would be a lot more accurate than a white woman with red/brown hair.

<--- Loopy as a f*cking loon but I don't know about ret*d, though.

An excellent point, that context is *everything* in determining when it is acceptable vs oppressive to use certain terms. Or in some cases the term has nothing to do with social usage whatsoever. Engineers and mechanics still refer to the timing of certain cyclic events as "ret*d" or "advanced" based on a zero point, and I recall a certain politician being hounded by an ignorant press when he correctly used the word, "niggardly" (which has no connection to the slur).

So, given that some researchers describe people with autism's social and other skills as being developmentally delayed...does this mean we can use the term ret*d with a sense of ownership? And the larger question, *should* we do so, knowing it is likely to be taken by NT people (right or wrong) as an endorsement of using it as a slur by people who don't fit the classic definition of intellectually low functioning?

Yes, and I concur as well. The psychiatrist I am seeing currently seeing is not the clinician who diagnosed me with Asperger’s Syndrome Disorder. I am seeing my current psychiatrist for my co-morbidities OCD and depression. I was diagnosed with AS by the wonderful Dr. Joel Jeffries of CAMH Adult Psychiatry and Health Systems who went out of his way to make me feel comfortable and relaxed during interviews and tests. But unfortunately Dr. Jeffries does not see individual patients. His field is autism. He does diagnostics, but not treatment for co-morbidities. I only wish that Dr. Jeffries was indeed available. He would be my first choice.

My current psychiatrist shocked me when he said that people with AS were "ret*d". I only took seriously in any way anything he said because he was "an authority figure" whom I assumed knew more than I. I have always lacked confidence in myself, due no doubt to the fact that throughout my entire life everyone has told me that no matter what I do, it is never good enough. When you hear that your whole life you come to believe it yourself. But my scepticism was piqued when I could not find the term "ret*d" used by Tony Attwood in his book or any other clinical source online, so I decided to check in with the autism community. I am only at the beginning of my studies on autism; although I have read a great deal online I still have a long way to go. I want to study autism thoroughly so that I can debunk all the myths about ASD, including this one, and learn about myself. I take very seriously the Delphic maxim of Socrates "Know thyself". The general public is abysmally ignorant on the subject of autism.

As for my psychiatrist, bad as he might be, the previous one was MUCH WORSE (the most vile and unfeeling member of the profession I have ever met) and the one before that was completely ineffectual. I have spent years looking for a psychiatrist. It is incredibly difficult to find one here in Toronto, Ontario. Finding *any* psychiatrist at all is hard, finding a good one even harder. It is so every difficult to find a psychiatrist wherewith one has a rapport, a psychiatrist who is "a good fit". I have yet to find one to whom I can completely relate.

By the way, only the verb is "ret*d". When used as a noun it is always an oppressive pejorative, as the testosterone-pumped playground- and school-hall bullies use it, going out of their way to pronounce it "REE-tard" as if they lived in the deep southern United States. My entire school experience was one of being bullied, but, as I was born in 1955, I do not know if things have changed.

@Punkrockaspie,

I'm not surprised about CAMH, I've heard horror stories from parents concerning one of their children's clinics.

A bit pedantic, but I believe the descriptive forms of ret*d are also valid as in,
"The [advanced|ret*d] timing of the interrupt signal is causing it to go unnoticed by the CPU" (adjective)
"The interrupt timing is [advanced|ret*d] and is causing the signal to be missed." (adverb)

no matter what the latest neutral-sounding words chosen, somebody will still warp them into some kind of epithet.