POST:

why do people justify the R slur being used
i dont understand why people justify the usage of the R slur in this society we live in "as a medical term" when the term that replaces that in the DSM-5 is "intellectual disability". i understand medical documents before it became a slur - because, obviously, it wasnt a slur at the time of writing, but why do people criticise others for feeling offence over an ableist slur being used right now? not only is it outdated, but it is also disrespectful. you wouldnt call a black person the N word, for any reason - so why would you call people with disabilities the R slur? makes no sense to me.

r/Autism

Anti-Slur:
[REDACTED] → agrees it’s a wider problem of slurs and “euphemistic treadmill.”
[REDACTED] → sees it as ethically questionable, tied to same family of insults.
[REDACTED] → explains why the R-word cannot be reclaimed.
[REDACTED] → says it comes from lack of empathy.
[REDACTED] → openly an “avid hater of the r-slur.”
[REDACTED] → says people use it to be edgy assholes.
[REDACTED] → agrees with the above.
[REDACTED] → annoyed by slur usage even when disguised spelling.
[REDACTED] → links it to the same type who use the N-word.
[REDACTED] → one-word response: “Ableism.”
[REDACTED] → says people misuse it as a synonym for “dumbass.”
[REDACTED] → admits to past use, but now thinks it’s rude and glad it’s dying out.
[REDACTED] (2nd comment) → says people use it to demean others, can’t reclaim it, it’s just edginess.
[REDACTED] → personal experience of backwards diagnosis wording.
[REDACTED] → strong condemnation, connects to personal identity as African-American & disabled.
[REDACTED] → ignores people using slurs because they’re “being dicks.”

Neutral:
[REDACTED] → “it’s the intent, not the word itself.”
[REDACTED] → doesn’t care much personally, says it should be individual choice.
[REDACTED] → sees it as inevitable euphemistic treadmill issue.
[REDACTED] (1st comment) → anecdotal, notes progressives using it but not overtly racist.
[REDACTED] → “I never hear it used, maybe age group.” (not strong stance, observational).

Pro-Slur:
[REDACTED] → personally reclaims “rd” & “ft,” uses them ironically, justifies usage in some contexts.
[REDACTED] → agrees, uses slurs on self to defang them.
[REDACTED] → “I think it’s funny.” (dismissive).


r/adultautism

Anti-Slur:
[REDACTED] → directly asks why anyone should “let” others use an ableist slur.
[REDACTED] → long, thoughtful comment about cognitive dissonance, systemic ableism, and problematic “reclamation.”

Neutral:
[REDACTED] → pivots away from the slur, talks DSM-x vs recognition issues.
[REDACTED] → “you do you, others will make their own decisions.” Relativist framing.
[REDACTED] → says it’s not their responsibility to police adults’ language.
[REDACTED] (mod) → approves borderline content, notes usage “still appropriate.” (procedural, but permits the language).

Pro-Slur:
[REDACTED] → used “retard” in a cooking context, shrugged it off.
[REDACTED] → insists it’s not a slur in some contexts, compares to “niggardly.”
[REDACTED] → explicitly self-identifies with “retarded,” embraces it proudly.


r/AutisticAdults

Anti-Slur:
[REDACTED] (multiple times) → pushes back against justifications, points out offensiveness and outdatedness.
[REDACTED] → admits past use, learned, stopped, supports calling people out.
[REDACTED] → says only people with IDD (targeted directly) could reclaim, most on sub can’t.
[REDACTED] → says justification comes from bullies, word is a slur regardless of history.
[REDACTED] → critiques “plausible deniability” and lack of accountability.
[REDACTED] → hates that it’s returning to use, sees it as tied to “anti-woke” backlash.
[REDACTED]→ agrees with you, says people don’t want to admit it’s offensive.
[REDACTED] (partly) → acknowledges people don’t think about it, but does admit it’s wrong.
[REDACTED] → says people don’t think about language impact, don’t care.

Neutral:
[REDACTED] → explains social reasons for continued use, distinguishes vent vs answer, not defending but describing.
[REDACTED] → says “no bad words, only bad intent,” but admits slur use can be harmful.
[REDACTED] → talks euphemism treadmill, stresses intent over words, promotes inner peace.
[REDACTED] → questions if “stupid” or “idiot” are also slurs, pokes at definitions.
[REDACTED] → appreciates distinction between weaponized vs habitual use.
[REDACTED] → stresses non-slur technical uses, argues against “blanket banning.”
[REDACTED] (later comments) → argues euphemism treadmill and “false equivalency” in your analogy.
[REDACTED] → generalizes that people will always insult others regardless of word.

Pro-Slur:
[REDACTED] (multiple times) → rejects it as a slur, embraces “delayed” meaning, compares to “autistic” becoming a slur, argues intent is what matters.
[REDACTED] → agrees, says people are even “giving up autist,” views backlash as overblown.
[REDACTED] → uses it for themselves, says they can reclaim it like the N-word.
[REDACTED] → says it’s not a slur outside US, still official medical term in some countries.
[REDACTED] → shrugs it off, generationally normalized, doesn’t take offense.
[REDACTED] → argues it’s the same as “idiot” or “dumb.”
[REDACTED] → jokes about “fire retardant” to downplay offensiveness.


r/AutisticWithADHD

Anti-Slur:
[REDACTED] → compares it to fake “free speech” defenses, calls out cognitive dissonance.
[REDACTED] (long chain) → says self-deprecation with the slur is harmful, rejects reclamation.
[REDACTED] → nuanced: only people bullied with it or with ID can reclaim, blanket ND reclamation isn’t right.
[REDACTED] → says people justify it because they’re weak/lazy/cruel.
[REDACTED] → says it can’t be reclaimed because it was always ableist in origin.
[REDACTED] → parallels ableism with religious intolerance, calls it out.
[REDACTED] → compares it to “gay” as insult, hopes R word use fades with maturity.
[REDACTED] (second comment) → urges using “intellectual disability,” says R word is harmful regardless.
[REDACTED] → critiques reclamation attempts, says it won’t destigmatize disability, justifies nothing.
[REDACTED] (third comment) → ties it to normalized ableism.

Neutral:
[REDACTED] → mentions euphemism treadmill, prefers teaching empathy over banning words.
[REDACTED] → agrees on euphemism treadmill, notes neutral uses (“retardant”), stresses empathy.
[REDACTED] → didn’t know “intellectual disability” replaced it, sees confusion in vocabulary.
[REDACTED] → uses it self-deprecatingly sometimes, but stresses intent, advises explaining impact to friends.
[REDACTED] → “all about context.”

Pro-Slur:
[REDACTED] → says it’s not linked to disability in practice, compares it to “idiot,” rejects N-word equivalence.
[REDACTED] → uses it with close friends/self, avoids with those uncomfortable.
[REDACTED] (multiple times) → uses it with ND friends, reclaims it, rejects policing.
[REDACTED] → admits it’s a habit, doesn’t use it to mean disability.
[REDACTED] → says reclaiming is valid, sees “asshole problem not language problem.”
[REDACTED] → draws parallels to idiot/dumb, says language shifts are futile.
[REDACTED] → calls it “our word,” uses it self-deprecatingly.
[REDACTED] → uses it widely, sees pushback as “American policing,” rejects “cancelling” of words.
[REDACTED] (second comment) → says they use it to mean “stupid people,” wants to destigmatize it.
[REDACTED] → loves using it on self, sees context as key, says many don’t think about impact.