The word "spastic"

Tune that ear! In 2007, Lynne Murphy, a linguist at the University of Sussex, described the term as being "one of the most taboo insults to a British ear".

I was giving my opinion, just as Lynne Murphy gave hers.

And now I'm a bit bored of this. 

Is it generational?  I've always known that the term spastic was offensive.   I've never encountered it to be acceptable.   

I've had endless debates with people who use the word stupid, as well. 

And now I'm a bit bored of this.

Yo también, pero tengo razón.

I think Chary's point is that you aren't going to find a place called The N***er Shop, because that word is unacceptable in almost every context, while the word spastic is still used medically and in the name of a charity.

I've had endless debates with people who use the word stupid, as well. 

That is one of my biggest word-related peeves.  When I was a child (I'm in my 50s), that was a medical diagnosis.  I've never liked the word being used in lieu of something like "stupid" or "foolish." 

That is one of my biggest word-related peeves.  When I was a child (I'm in my 50s), that was a medical diagnosis.  I've never liked the word being used in lieu of something like "stupid" or "foolish." 

When I worked in education in the states (6 years ago) stupid was still used as a medical word in order to access special services. Due to the way the word is used regularly it was very difficult to have a conversation to prepare a parent to hear that the term will be applied to their 5 year old child.

I regularly have conversations with the children I currently teach in regards to the words gay, spastic and stupid explaining why they are not appropriate.

Then again where I teach I have conversations about many, many inappropriate words.

I agree with Chary though that I would put spastic in a very different category than the n word-- and I think that is proved by looking through this thread and seeing how many times people have written out the word spastic yet not felt comfortable at all writing out the n word

I think Chary's point is that you aren't going to find a place called The N***er Shop, because that word is unacceptable in almost every context, while the word spastic is still used medically and in the name of a charity.

That was my point! That outside of medical usage, the word is a complete no-no. By the way, the Spastics Society was renamed Scope in 1984, so that shop in Wales is a distinct aberration. If it's the one in Hill Street, Haverfordwest, this is run by a company called "Pembrokeshire Spastic Charity Shop" which, I am fairly sure, has nothing to do with Scope. An online review reads "Smells of dust and death, this shop is an absolute mess. The staff have no sense of shop layout often balancing bone china on top of soiled clothes on top of old board games."

I agree with Chary though that I would put spastic in a very different category than the n word-- and I think that is proved by looking through this thread and seeing how many times people have written out the word spastic yet not felt comfortable at all writing out the n word

I think that might be more PC fear than anything else. The N word for Americans is like "G-d" for ultra orthodox Jews:  the word that dare not spell its name. And quite right too, I suppose, when you think about slavery and lynch mobs, etc, although I personally do not see anything wrong in discussing the word itself in a sociological context.

By the way, the Spastics Society was renamed Scope in 1984

Actually it was in 1994 - I just checked because I definitely remember it being called 'The Spastic Society' when I was in primary school... and as I attended primary school between 1987 and 1994, it couldn't have been renamed in 1984.

That was my point! That outside of medical usage, the word is a complete no-no. By the way, the Spastics Society was renamed Scope in 1984, so that shop in Wales is a distinct aberration. If it's the one in Hill Street, Haverfordwest, this is run by a company called "Pembrokeshire Spastic Charity Shop" which, I am fairly sure, has nothing to do with Scope. An online review reads "Smells of dust and death, this shop is an absolute mess. The staff have no sense of shop layout often balancing bone china on top of soiled clothes on top of old board games."

What is your problem? Must everything I say be under attack from you??

Yes, that is the charity shop I'm talking about and, unless you've actually been there, then you can't really judge it, can you? I can vouch for the fact that it's a fabulous place, besides which, I'm not sure what your 'review' has to do with the topic at hand.

I think that is proved by looking through this thread and seeing how many times people have written out the word spastic yet not felt comfortable at all writing out the n word

Exactly.

Wow.

That is one of my biggest word-related peeves.  When I was a child (I'm in my 50s), that was a medical diagnosis.  I've never liked the word being used in lieu of something like "stupid" or "foolish." 

Exactly!   Having worked with the MR (or developmentally disabled, which was one of the accepted terms at the time as well) population after school, I'm admittedly hypersensitive to when people use it, because 99% of the time, they are using it to describe something in a negative fashion.

I'm sorry. I find this thread and the things some have wrote to be very ignorant of the issues for disabled people, speaking as a disabled person. I have CP and spastic was originally an insult meant for me. The word 'spastic' is one of many used to refer to disabled people that is considered as offensive as the N-word, I'm afraid. And unless you are a disabled people reclaiming the word, I would be offended by it's use.

There is a reason that Scope changed it's name - it wanted to move with the times and recognised that the word was offensive to disabled people. Just because a charity shop somewhere didn't change its' name does not make it acceptable. Further, there are historical issues regarding disabled people / people with a disability and the relationship between their 'need' for charity because of societal inequalities, disadvantage and disablism that causes many disabled people to question charities and their need to be a 'cause' as opposed to a charity that is user led for rights for self determination.

For those that say then word is more or less offensive than those related to other groups, I don't think you can judge on the impact unless you are in that group.

There is also a big different between saying:

Someone has spastic quadriplegia - this refers to someone who has a medically defined condition

and

Someone is a spastic or indeed, the Spastics Society, or whatever - that can imply that the person is the condition, and that nothing else is relevant and that they are less of a person as a result.

For more about offensive words and disability, see:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/ouch/play/worst-words-vote.shtml

If anyone in this thread really wants to understand about disability, inequality language and self determination, I suggest you read articles from the Disability Archive at the University of Leeds Centre for Disability Studies. I'm sure if one types in the offensive word, one will get articles regarding issues of disability and language from disabled people's perspective:
http://www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies/archiveuk/index.html

I really hope that a mod looks at this thread. I hope anyone reading this really considers how words can hurt people. If you think something may be offensive, why say it? Why not challenge yourself in considering why it is offensive to not perpetuate inequality?

I won't be commenting any more on this thread.
 

Just because a charity shop somewhere didn't change its' name does not make it acceptable.

I think you're missing the point I was trying to make. Yes, we do all understand the origins of the word and the offensive meaning that's behind it. But the use of the word actually is acceptable within a community if a shop is still carrying that name. Nobody's saying that's right, just that it is viewed as acceptable.

MLG, nobody is claiming that the word is not insulting in that usage/definition. The argument is whether that is its usage/definition everywhere, and I think it is clear that in certain parts of the US, it is not a word associated with disability at all, but with hyperactivity, having excess energy and being scatter-brained. Wikipedia agrees: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spastic#Evolution_of_the_term_in_the_United_States. Yes, I know it's not the best source, but this section is well-cited. Also, nobody is saying that it's acceptable in the UK in the context of a slur, but that the word still has a medical usage that is acceptable (unlike, e.g., mongoloid idiot), while the n-word does not have any usage-appropriate connotations. Please don't think that anyone is saying it is appropriate to use the word in relation to disability, simply that many of us had no awareness of the word as referring to disability because of its different evolution in parts of the US.