I think that's the real "hit zone" of prejudiced language -- where human traits which are outside the control of a particular subgroup of society are used as a metaphor for some generic, negatively associated trait.
The difficulty for people with impaired vision, physical disability and the like is that the "negative" character of their traits is taken as a given by others (although this in itself is offensive to some), and the metaphoric step from one negative to another (e.g. from blindness to ignorance, or from deafness to pig-headedness) is elided because the majority simply don't observe any difference.
Speaking personally, I do find it difficult to credit certain terms as giving offence -- one example is a generic pejorative term like "crazy" (as opposed to a more specific term like "spasticated" or "retarded" that stands in for generically "mad").
I can understand the argument as to why its use is considered offensive by some of the mentally ill, but can't understand why the same argument doesn't extend to, say, "stupid", and people with low IQ. At which point pretty much any negative adjective that can be applied to a human is arguably removed from appropriately sensitive discourse. This I view as an unacceptable restriction at the moment, but that may be because I can't appreciate the perspective of those who might be offended by the use of words like "crazy".
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
The difficulty for people with impaired vision, physical disability and the like is that the "negative" character of their traits is taken as a given by others (although this in itself is offensive to some), and the metaphoric step from one negative to another (e.g. from blindness to ignorance, or from deafness to pig-headedness) is elided because the majority simply don't observe any difference.
Speaking personally, I do find it difficult to credit certain terms as giving offence -- one example is a generic pejorative term like "crazy" (as opposed to a more specific term like "spasticated" or "retarded" that stands in for generically "mad").
I can understand the argument as to why its use is considered offensive by some of the mentally ill, but can't understand why the same argument doesn't extend to, say, "stupid", and people with low IQ. At which point pretty much any negative adjective that can be applied to a human is arguably removed from appropriately sensitive discourse. This I view as an unacceptable restriction at the moment, but that may be because I can't appreciate the perspective of those who might be offended by the use of words like "crazy".