I blogged on this today.
I don't believe this is about banning the word all together, which is typical of the over reaction this gets. It's the slur that's the problem, any use of it as a slur, whether it is describing a person with a disability or not, is the problem. I think it's still fine to say something like "lack of exposure to the sun will retard the growth of plants." There is no slur in that description. But if you derisively call that plant retarded, you cross that line into slur and offense happens, whether intended or not.
Language is tricky. Words are socially constructed symbols with meanings that change with use over time. Trying to keep up to date can be dizzying, especially with slang. In the case of the r-word, it changed from a technical term meaning slow, which I think is still ok, into a slang term meaning BAD in reference to a group of people that are not bad and have done nothing to deserve such blanket and blatant negativity. The language is moving on, changing as we speak it, and it is our responsibility to keep up so as to try and uphold right speech. But...
Right speech is tricky. We can insult/offend without intent or even being aware of it, but being mindful of right speech means we stop insulting/offending once we become aware of it. Being mindful of our speech means paying attention to how we use words, and in this case that means either as a technical term or as slang, and how those words are interpreted by others. This is not about perfect speech, which is unattainable because language can be so tricky and we can't control how people perceive our speech. It is about trying to do the best we can by respecting others in our speech that comes from our buddha (compassionate) nature instead of our human (insulting) nature.
I bring all this up here not to fight the r-word fight again, though I will, but because it is an aspect of our practice and how hard that practice can be. Everybody is for the concept of right speech, but when it gets to down to specifics on how we actually talk, the actual practice of right speech, is where we begin to falter. Blaming others for being overly sensitive is not our practice (even if that's true), nor is our practice to absolve ourselves of responsibility for our hurtful speech (just because you didn't mean it that way does not make it okay). And defending insults as being our human nature is certainly not our practice. These are all easy ways out of the dilemma. Our practice is to face that dilemma, to BE and DO better, and that's hard.
I don't believe this is about banning the word all together, which is typical of the over reaction this gets. It's the slur that's the problem, any use of it as a slur, whether it is describing a person with a disability or not, is the problem. I think it's still fine to say something like "lack of exposure to the sun will retard the growth of plants." There is no slur in that description. But if you derisively call that plant retarded, you cross that line into slur and offense happens, whether intended or not.
Language is tricky. Words are socially constructed symbols with meanings that change with use over time. Trying to keep up to date can be dizzying, especially with slang. In the case of the r-word, it changed from a technical term meaning slow, which I think is still ok, into a slang term meaning BAD in reference to a group of people that are not bad and have done nothing to deserve such blanket and blatant negativity. The language is moving on, changing as we speak it, and it is our responsibility to keep up so as to try and uphold right speech. But...
Right speech is tricky. We can insult/offend without intent or even being aware of it, but being mindful of right speech means we stop insulting/offending once we become aware of it. Being mindful of our speech means paying attention to how we use words, and in this case that means either as a technical term or as slang, and how those words are interpreted by others. This is not about perfect speech, which is unattainable because language can be so tricky and we can't control how people perceive our speech. It is about trying to do the best we can by respecting others in our speech that comes from our buddha (compassionate) nature instead of our human (insulting) nature.
I bring all this up here not to fight the r-word fight again, though I will, but because it is an aspect of our practice and how hard that practice can be. Everybody is for the concept of right speech, but when it gets to down to specifics on how we actually talk, the actual practice of right speech, is where we begin to falter. Blaming others for being overly sensitive is not our practice (even if that's true), nor is our practice to absolve ourselves of responsibility for our hurtful speech (just because you didn't mean it that way does not make it okay). And defending insults as being our human nature is certainly not our practice. These are all easy ways out of the dilemma. Our practice is to face that dilemma, to BE and DO better, and that's hard.
Comment