Quantcast
Using "autistic" as a derogatory term; please don't

Forums - General Discussion - Using "autistic" as a derogatory term; please don't

Azuren said:
VGPolyglot said:

Don't agree with limiting speech? What about giving out other people's personal information?

Sharing personal information puts individuals at potential risk.

 

Describing someone who is acting autistic as "dripping with autism" does not.

So, you're already acknowledging that there should be limits though. And what is "acting autistic"? Can't you use something that is less ambiguous anyway?



Around the Network
VGPolyglot said:
HomokHarcos said:

People should say they want to. I don't agree with limiting speech on forums. Banning people from using insults is not likely to change their opinion.

Don't agree with limiting speech? What about giving out other people's personal information?

Remember Judge Judy's comparison. Insults are nasty, handing out personal information is dangerous.



HomokHarcos said:
VGPolyglot said:

Don't agree with limiting speech? What about giving out other people's personal information?

Remember Judge Judy's comparison. Insults are nasty, handing out personal information is dangerous.

But the question is whether or not there should be limits to speech.



Calling someone autistic is not even a good insult, many autists are high functioning individuals. So, calling someone autistic just shows what a moron the name-caller is.

On the other hand, the reactions toward the usage of the words fag and retard are a bit over the top, in my opinion. I've used those in my circle of friends for over 10 years, and nobody is actually insulted. I agree that they shouldn't be used as offensive insults towards strangers, but I see no harm in them being used jokingly.
There is that Bill Burr bit about the usage of "fag" amongst friends, but I have no clue how to embed YT clips.



VGPolyglot said:
HomokHarcos said:

Remember Judge Judy's comparison. Insults are nasty, handing out personal information is dangerous.

But the question is whether or not there should be limits to speech.

There should be limits obviously. Otherwise I would be allowed to leak State secrets. Luckily the limits of free speach are defined by laws and not by peoples feelings. At least not in most places of the Western world. 



Please excuse my (probally) poor grammar

Around the Network

Yeah no all I said was "autistic screeching" to mock Sony, and now look at us. At the end of the day, speech should never be limited, but it should be allowed to be challenged like it is right now.
When you limit speech you disagree with, you have a dictatorship. When you challenge speech you disagree with, you got a democracy. I won't stop making jokes, but I won't stop someone who disagree with my jokes. Just disagree and move on. ISN'T THAT THE BEAUTY OF FREE SPEECH. The freedom to be free of discrimination mostly applies in the workplace and for governmental services. Not between people in normal everyday conversations.



VGPolyglot said:
Azuren said:

Sharing personal information puts individuals at potential risk.

 

Describing someone who is acting autistic as "dripping with autism" does not.

So, you're already acknowledging that there should be limits though. And what is "acting autistic"? Can't you use something that is less ambiguous anyway?

The limits have less to do with speech and more to do with physical safety. Doxxing you on a website of people who dislike you is dangerous. Saying you're acting autistic doesn't.

 

And yes, anyone who displays symptoms of autism, though it specifically refers to Asperger's-style behaviors.



Watch me stream games and hunt trophies on my Twitch channel!

Check out my Twitch Channel!:

www.twitch.tv/AzurenGames

Azuren said:
VGPolyglot said:

So, you're already acknowledging that there should be limits though. And what is "acting autistic"? Can't you use something that is less ambiguous anyway?

The limits have less to do with speech and more to do with physical safety. Doxxing you on a website of people who dislike you is dangerous. Saying you're acting autistic doesn't.

 

And yes, anyone who displays symptoms of autism, though it specifically refers to Asperger's-style behaviors.

And there are many symptoms of autism, to the point again that it's ambiguous and that it'd just make more sense to use a more specific adjective, unless of course that is the point.



SpokenTruth said:
TheBird said:
*cough* I said "Autistic screeching" to describe Sony in the Minecraft Cross play trailer post on VG news. And I can say I seriously don't care about your anti-free speech policing.

It was used in a kidding manner, and completely alright to say. This is like saying you can't eat a steak because a baby can't chew it. And right now you're yelling at a wall that refuses to change color.

That's a bad analogy.  There is nothing negative implied about a baby that can't chew a steak.

Eh it's the best one I could think of from the top of my head in a second. I don't entirely like it though because it implies eating steak is a manly thing, when it isn't. But I said it anyways, and it works to get the job done.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEU-t-ANpdY 

 

I think of this scene every time someone tries to tone police or trim or cut out language in the name of being less offensive. 

How about this, let's play this game, I find your attempt to language police offensive. So you can either let autistic users on the site be offended (supposedly), or you can offend those of us that care about language and free speech... no matter what you are offending someone.