Are You Retarded for Saying "Retarded"?

April 2009

Every now and then I forget where I put my reading glasses, scour my apartment for twenty to forty-five minutes, and then finally discover them—on the bridge of my nose.

“Jesus,” I will invariably say, smacking my forehead with disgust, “I am so retarded.”

Such a comment is entirely self-deprecating, similar to President Obama’s recent Tonight Show gaffe in which he disparaged his bowling skills. You’ve probably said it too at some point. Now a Special Olympics campaign, which debuted earlier this week in schools and media outlets nationwide, is comparing “the R-word” to racist and homophobic slurs such as the N-word or the F-word. Scrubs co-star John C. McGinley and rageaholic Bill O’Reilly—a name widely associated with sensitivity and tact—have lent their voices to the cause. (Note to self: do not make any Chromosome 21 or Irish jokes in this article.)

“[W]hen you use the R-word you are hurting millions of people around the world with Intellectual Disabilities,” the campaign proclaims via Twitter. “End the R-word!”

There is obviously a good reason (or 7,000) why the word “retard” is considered insensitive. Mocking and taunting the less fortunate is petty, cruel and boorish, the standard behavior of bullies in coming-of-age movies. But should society place a zero tolerance policy on this insensitive word, stigmatizing those who let it slip without hostile intent as if they were the vilest of bigots?

Even mainstream comedians have taken heat for uttering “retard,” most famously Ben Stiller for his film Tropic Thunder, which featured a Forrest Gump-like caricature. I’ve even had a personal run-in with the trouble it creates: when my political humor book Retard Nation was announced, the publisher received pushback from the major chain bookstores. I had to repeatedly explain that I had nothing against disabled people, only stupid people, although the difference should have been obvious to anyone who isn’t… uh… stupid. (Ultimately I changed the title to Dumbocracy, partly for commercial reasons and mostlybecause offending those with Down syndrome and their families seemed like a bit much, even for a professional asshole like me.)

Actually a cousin of mine has Down syndrome, and she is one of the most kindhearted and optimistic people in the world. If some insecure prick called her “retard” to make himself feel superior, I would gladly reduce his face to bite-sized pieces, and then bite them with A1 Steak Sauce because it’s like the tastiest thing in the world. And yet, the “Spread the Word to End the Word” campaign seems mildly creepy in that strident, incontestable GIVE ME TOLERANCE OR GIVE YOU DEATH 1990s way.

“[A]lways watch what you say and do,” the campaign advises on its website. “If we reduce this right [of equality] by using inappropriate words toward any population, it negatively affects all of us.” On its Twitter f eed, the campaign expresses a desire to “delete the R word from vocab's” (sic), and asks: “Can you believe the amount of people using the R-word on twitter right now? Shocking!” To a member of the South Park / Family Guy generation, this comes across like some preachy religious whacko typing, “Can you believe the amount of people watching R-rated movies on Netflix right now? Shocking!”

A document on the Special Olympics site contains “scripts” for students to recite when their friends use the R-word: “Dude, that word is so uncool and hurts. Try the other R-word—RESPECT.” (Dude, that script is so uncool it hurts.)

Although it would be fantastic if students with intellectual disabilities felt more respected, these shaming techniques will probably be as effective as New York City's proposed ceremonial banning of the word “bitch.” Anyone who has ever met—or been—a teenager should know: stigmatizing a behavior makes it a forbidden fruit; teens are statistically more likely to dive into a swimming pool if a “no diving” sign is posted. Many college students love to scream ethnic slurs because it feels dangerous and pisses off the sanctimonious scolds, even if those slurs are intellectually and morally indefensible.

Luckily the campaign’s organizers also encourage students to make friends with the special ed kids “who sit at another table at lunch,” which more admirable—and will be more effective—because helps far more than censorship when it comes to “build[ing] a more accepting and inclusive world.” I didn’t stop saying “that’s so gay,” another popular expression for “that’s so stupid,” until some of my friends came out of the closet. (And they usethe phrase “that’s so gay,” although I suppose they’re entitled; on a related note I wake up every morning and howl “Shylock!” out my window for the hell of it.)

Words should only qualify as “hate speech” when the intent is hateful; otherwise a temptation arises to police the language without rhyme or reason, which simply gives liberal and conservative demagogues more excuses to whine (which necessitates columns like this, and who wants to read this?). You can erase words, but it’s a wasted effort if you don’t bother to soothe the underlying attitudes. Ignoring the motivation for harassment—while merely focusing on “cruel and offensive” syllables that have no inherent meanings beyond those we collectively assign them—is not a roadmap for tolerance; it’s a recipe for resentment from people who probably lack any malice in the first place. And there is such a thing as a harmless joke when the victim is the perpetrator.

To put it another way, the only word we should really ban is “ban” itself. And “Twitter.”