Isn't retard as in to slow something down really a different word with a different pronunciation?
Never really heard it pronounced differently really, and not so much a different word but different use and meaning based on context.
At one time that may have been true, but I think, at least to me, that "retarded" is a colloquialism for stupid. I don't think most people are thinking about handicapped people when they call something retarded.
And you know, this may come from my part of being the god father of a child with Downs Syndrome (and mind you, in all this, I actually don't care about people calling others retarded and have said Palin was over reacting here), but I don't see "Oh, its just a colloquialism now, its not a slur any longer" as a way to excuse it.
For example I'll even harken to my ever favorite show on TV, South Park. "Gay" or even "Faggot" often now a days, when used, is used less as a means of saying "You're a homosexual!" or thinking homosexual, and more typically just meaning "you're an ass" in regards to the later or "that's bad" in terms of the former, or at worse perhaps effeminate.
Do some still use it as a means of slurring homosexual people, or comparing someone to a homosexual (of which they think is "bad"?). Sure. But many people simply use is a a colloquialism now. You'll find younger kids in their teens and even 20's go "Wow that's really gay" not because "Wow that's really like a homosexual" or "Wow, that's really bad like homosexuals are bad" but simply because "Gay" has became slang now.
If someone is cut off by a guy in a car and goes "Damnit, what a faggot" is he somehow implying that homosexual people are bad drivers? Are they known to cut people off? Is there something about enjoying another man that makes one prone to cutting people off? Or is it simply a derogative term that has became derogatory almost in its own right, not because its necessarily the purpose of the person using it to specifically reference a homosexual.
Does that means they're somehow no longer slurs, when its became so colloquial to use them now that many people who use them are not in any way, shape, or form intending to use it as a disparaging way towards homosexuals?
I don't think most people who say that the outcome of a football game that ended on a bad call was a "Gay call" are thinking about homosexual people when they say it, but does that somehow make it less of a slur?
While they are comparable, it's only in a vague way. When people say "niggar", it is with the intention of making a racial slur(with the exception of some in the black community who have taken it over in a way that gays have tried to take over the word "queer"). I think intent does matter.
Is it though? Do you somehow know that whenever anyone that's not black uses the term nigger they are automatically meaning it as a complete and utter racial slur? That they could not say be a younger kid who happens to agree with say, the Chris Rock "love black people, hate niggers" rant, and are saying it in reference to a very specific type of person...be they black, white (hated the term wigger), etc...rather than a blanket statement about black people.
And more to the point...
If this person stated it without the intent of meaning it as a negative towards all black people, but a particular stereotypical subset whose actions and attitudes don't necessarily require them to only be black, does that somehow make it not a slur?
I also think that making the comparison to "niggar" here is over the top, because as you point out, it is worse...much worse to my mind. It's kinda like this type discussions "Godwin rule", when talking about insults, some one has to go to the big one to exaggerate the point.
Honestly, I would see "Gay" or "Faggot" as a closer one than nigger. Nigger simply was an easy one to use, not because of the Godwin effect, but because I knew of a good satirical piece using it to give an example right off. It was used, initially by me, simply to show that in society even a slur that is as offensive as Nigger, when used in satire, can be laughed at and not viewed as immediately offensive.
It was only when Jack decided to say that they are not comparable at all, implying that retarded is somehow not a slur, that it began being discussed regarding the "levels" of a slur.
It wasn't brought up to exaggerate a point, but more due to the fact that Chris Rock's sketch is perhaps the most famous satirical use of a slur outside of something by Carlos Mencia and I don't want to touch anything from Carlos Mencia
While I agree that "Niggar" and "faggot" are worse, I think intent is important. Let's use another common phrase these days to compare. The word I am thinking of is "gay". When some one makes a comment "oh god, this is so gay" meaning lame or the like, I don't think they are thinking about gay people for the most part. Yes, it started from there, but these days, in this context, it's not about gays, and in fact I know a couple gay people who have and do make the "this is so gay" comment.
Ha! Teaches me for responding then reading. Yep, I agree with you here. And as I stated earlier on in this thread, I don't really have an issue with the use of it. I think Rham should've known better given his position, but I don't think he needs to be fired or anything....
But...lets even say gay....
If someone seriously used Gay as an insult and the gay community came out and some spokesman for it had a hissy fit about it I would happily come out and say that I can kind of respect why it offends them, but they're over reacting...much like I feel with Palin.
If someone then did a PARODY of it, performed satire....even if it was tasteless and tactless and crude....where they called a bunch of things gay and that same organization didn't say anything about it and right wingers were complaining about the hypocricy, I'd be making the same argument then.
You can not compare someone saying something in a way meant to be insulting, even if the intent of them wasn't even thinking of it as a slur, and someone who is performing SATIRE or doing a PARODY. They are not on the same level of wrongness, nor is it reasonable to expect someone to act exactly the same towards both offenses.
In reality, my issue in this thread is not necessarily with what Rham Emanuel said. I think its a bit tactless and insensitive, and a bit stupid for a high ranking official to be saying anywhere but the most private of places, but I don't take offense to it. My issue is with people trying to imply that Palin is somehow this giant hypocrite for being offended at and upset about Rham Emanuel's use of the term to insult but that she's not reacting the same way toward Rush Limbaugh's use of the term in satire and parody.