Mods and rules

[mistermagic]

 

[Captain Scumbag]

In the 'real world', 'disability' (including learning difficulties, etc.) is one of the nine protected characteristics, including gender, race and so on. Discrimination includes: harassment - unwanted behaviour linked to a protected characteristic that violates someone’s dignity or creates an offensive environment for them. Obviously there is nothing more important than Banter, but could we try and avoid ableist, homophobic or misogynistic language on here? The English language is amazing, full of colourful and creative ways to insult people; relying on cheap digs at people's impairments or choice of sexual partner isn't witty, it's discriminatory and doesn't help create a welcoming environment or foster that sense of community cohesion we need. There are more important things than our right to call people fags or mongs willy-nilly

The English language is amazing, not least because our use of it can be so richly metaphorical. And while Abertawe calling someone a “libtard” in the politics forum isn’t the best example, the word should still be considered in that context.

Thing is, it’s derived from an ableist term but isn’t used as one. It wasn’t coined to insult people with intellectual disabilities and it’s never knowingly directed at those people either. Rather, it’s evoking the idea of mental disability to colourfully insult obviously non-disabled people with certain political views. It’s a metaphor, i.e. describing someone or something with reference to something they’re obviously not. And while that doesn’t give those who use it perfect absolution, it strikes me as reductive (or opportunistic) to lump the term in with “spaz”, “****”, “flid”, “poof”, “****”, “coon”, “Paki” or any other word used to denigrate people who actually are part of a vulnerable/minority identity group.

The best justification for proscribing racist, sexist and ableist language is a desire to give added protection to people who are already vulnerable or disadvantaged in some way. Does that apply here? I doubt there’s been a single instance in human history of, say, someone with Down syndrome being upset or discouraged by someone writing “libtard” in a politics forum. The people who tend to get injured by it are non-disabled ‘liberals’ who don’t like being called stupid.

I understand people’s frustration with Abertawe. He’s virtually impossible to have a constructive argument with because he’s a moron (will this ableist term be banned under the new Quackavelli regime?) and because he never grasps the nettle of his opponent’s argument. Faced with a half-decent counterargument, he’ll invariably do one of three things: (1) ignore it; (2) attack a straw man; or (3) resort to personal abuse. People like that can be infuriating. They’re also best ignored.

You’re making a big fuss over very little, IMO.

 

[Saddlerrad]

Hadn't seen the tag in this thread.

There are rules in place, however, I'm not sure there's actually a listing for them. They will be reviewed and sorted out in the coming days.

 

[Abertawe]

because he never grasps the nettle of his opponent’s argument. Faced with a half-decent counterargument, he’ll invariably do one of three things: (1) ignore it; (2) attack a straw man; or (3) resort to personal abuse. People like that can be infuriating. They’re also best ignored.

* Edited