How do you feel about the word ret*d?

Post Reply New Topic

"ret*d" is actually not an "accurate descriptive word." It conflates two different things: (1) developmental delay and (2) intellectual disability. Literally, it refers to the former. But it more commonly refers to the latter.

It is possible to be "ret*d" in the sense of developmentally delayed without being "ret*d" in the sense of intellectually disabled. Examples include many "high-functioning" autistic people who fit the DSM IV criteria for "autistic disorder" or "PDD-NOS" rather than "Asperger's disorder."

I personally was slow to learn to walk and slow to learn to talk. And, when I was little, my parents worried that I was "ret*d." But I ended up doing very well academically.

So in other words the “ret*d” diagnosis was sort of describing a few things based on lack of understanding. “Autism” currently describes many things based and lack of understanding. If a more scientifically accurate AND intuitive term emerges by all means use it. While “intellectually disabled” might be less inaccurate then “ret*d” that is not the primary reason the diagnostic label was changed, it was because the colloquial “ret*d” and the offshoot “ret*d” had become a pejorative. The cliche you can run but you can’t hide applies here. What is happening is that we are getting diagnostic terms that are not intuitive/gobbledygook. Manic-Depression was a more accurate label then bi-polar which sounds like something that belongs on a weather map.

It must be noted that I do not remember “ret*d” being anything but an insult. “ret*d” was the schoolyard taunt, as far as I remember “ret*d” came into common usage much later maybe in the 80s or 90s.

It's used to hurt people intentionally. It's despicable.

Like a lot of other slurs, I'm comfortable using it as a self-identifier, but I'm not prone to using it towards others.

I'm probably only comfortable using it because my intellect has never really been doubted, even by people who thought I was stupid for other reasons, basically matching how I was later diagnosed as 'doubly exceptional' - or half-retarded if you prefer. Of course, if I had a profound intellectual impairment I wouldn't comprehend how this impacts me and I might be a less miserable person.

On a tangent, you can have smart bombs, dumb bombs and ret*d bombs. A dumb bomb is made into a ret*d bomb with the addition of a parachute or similar to induce lots of drag as it falls, making it safer to drop at low altitudes (keeps the plane out of the blast radius). A smart bomb is made by attaching a guidance package to a dumb bomb. If one attaches both the guidance package and a parachute, wouldn't that be a smart ret*d bomb?

besides the first sentence, i don't understand anything you wrote here esp the last paragraph

The last paragraph needs a familiarity with military jargon and really doesn't matter, so don't worry about it.

The middle one says:

Because my intelligence is rarely doubted I'm able to poke fun at myself by calling myself ret*d. Even though I sometimes appear clueless, people don't usually treat it as me not being intelligent, just being weird or not knowing what's going on. It's easy to mock traits you don't actually struggle with since they're not things you're insecure about.

Since I've been diagnosed with both learning disabilities and a high IQ, I'm in the category 'doubly-exceptional', both gifted and impaired. Being gifted doesn't offset the impairments, so I'm not average, I'm min-maxed. Because my intellect isn't impaired I'm able to grasp my limitations, which is a depressing realization. If I had a subpar intellect I might not understand how impaired I am and thus might be a less miserable person.

Is that more clear?

yes i get it thanks!

Awesome.

It's not rocket science is it (no pun intended)...if the word is used in a practical context and has some functional purpose then there is nothing wrong.

When it's used in jest or a joke and the person using it says it's "harmless" then there is a problem with that person, especially when they wear the label of autism or Aspergers like a badge of honor.

I think you summarized everything perfectly


. I dont know anyone who wears ASD label as a badge of honour but everyone i know only uses it as an explanation. Not an excuse

. But im sure ppl like that exist esp on Twitter

I know a person who slandered me in a very plausible way and by slander i mean basic facts like she said i snatched something frm her when i was sirting n she threw or slid it at me, and snatched item from me...

and lied about me to me in writing to add to the plausibility...

She tried to make it out that autism was the reason and not that she was actually lying n flipping her own actual behaviour onto me word for word.

and using my diagnosis as a convenient false explanation for her false accusation. Maybe things like that happen to others too.


Then ppl assume a person actually did those things and wears asd like an excuse. Thays why i never disclose except to very trusted ppl.

I find it slightly denigrating anyone with autism to use the term at all? it's not like a black person using the n-word as they of course are reclaiming the word from racists.

I observe plenty of people on this forum use the r word because they want to conform to some type of crude NT social culture where this type of language is acceptable.

When I was in school the r-word would have been used by 95% of the kids (not unlike the n word used by white kids in the old days). I was speaking to my sister over the holidays and despite being socially aware/sensitive she let slip words like "spak" (a slur that means spastic), "specs" for slow/special kids who have learning disabilities. Yet she claims to love her autistic niece?

People unfortunately are very cruel and take advantage of social stigma toward autism to attribute behaviour/conduct that is not true.

Ah. I think we are referring to 2 diff things. Now your words make sense to me...thanks for explaining again.

I have never heard of the terms "spak" or "spec" before.

"ret*d" is a nasty term. That being said, I understand that it's widespread and people who use it (like people who use "autistic" as an insult) aren't necessarily bad people.

I care more about how people treat us than the words they use. I know a lot of SJW types at school who have all the trappings of "Autism Allies" and wouldn't dream of using words like ret*d, but are still condescending to us at best. I know people who have used those terms who later went on to ask me out (though I declined for separate reasons).

Point I'm making is that I care more about how much you value me than what terms you use.

Terms like retardation, moron, imbecile and idiot all once had legitimate uses in serious discussions, while the terms were all broader than current medical terminology, so was the general understanding of intellectual disabilities, developmental disabilities, mental health and related topics so it's no surprise the terminology was broader - you need to understand red before you can understand the difference between crimson, scarlet and vermillion.

Those terms inspired insults that continue to be used as insults, but people also use contemporary medical terminology as inspiration for insults, and they'll continue to do so in the future. The attitude remains the same even in the noises the animal makes to express it change.

That's probably the healthiest attitude to have. If people are hostile or disrespectful, it doesn't matter what euphemism they use because that phrase will end up tainted by their attitude too, in time.