Using ableist language as insults is always bad, even if the words seem innocuous. Some may reference the "euphemism treadmill" to try to justify their behavior, but it's crucial to understand that the treadmill is merely a linguistic observation. It does not exist to normalize ableist behavior.

what is the euphemism treadmill for those who dont want to google

more reading if bored

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] PugJesus 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

The people making insults under our analysis.

See, but I'm talking about the broader issue that you've reduced these insults to a basic principle in order to extend it to other language, while any such extension of that basic principle results in a worldview that is either entirely incoherent or entirely without merit.

All of this is predicated on the assumption either that none of the things we're talking about are negative things, or that all negative judgements are disallowed; which would also disallow any positive judgements. And as someone who is disabled, with physical and mental ailments, let me assure you that disability is a very negative fucking thing. Which leaves only the latter.

im seeing the answer was “no.” i fear i cannot explain any more clearly how it is possible for me to value an athlete’s skill without casting shade at any single quality of any other person.

Then I'm afraid you don't understand what valuation is or means, unless the valuation you're talking about is entirely empty of any real meaning and is the praise-equivalent of a participation trophy.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

your valuation is the praise-equivalent of a participation trophy

…and yours isn’t? [for the sake of argument i assume that you aren’t a gymnast or esteemed individual in the field either] the meaning of my praise is probably an insignificant drop in the bucket to most gold medalists. the fact that you operate under a different model of value relationships doesn’t make your praise any more significant than mine. the athlete, as the recipient of praise, is the sole determinant of the relevance or emptiness of that valuation. it would be woefully self-absorbed of me to claim i created the value of my congratulations.

[–] PugJesus 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

…and yours isn’t? [for the sake of argument i assume that you aren’t a gymnast or esteemed individual in the field either] the meaning of my praise is probably an insignificant drop in the bucket to most gold medalists. the fact that you operate under a different model of value relationships doesn’t make your praise any more significant than mine.

Expressions of praise, under ordinary circumstances, are meant as value-judgements. You can say your opinion or mine doesn't matter, but it is still an expression of value - when you praise someone's singing, you are necessarily at the very least comparing them to the bottom-of-the-barrel with a relative positive judgement. If I say "Good singing, Tom!" and what I mean is "But no better than anyone else's", that's not praise of any real sort, and if Tom had any clue that I meant that, it would be a hit to him probably much harder than if I explicitly denigrated his singing. On the other hand, if I say "Good singing, Tom!" and what I mean is "Your singing was better than at least some others", that is a value judgement that, if Tom understands correctly, will likely please him (at least, dependent on how many 'others' I am suggesting he is above-average by) - but is also necessarily a denigration of less-talented singers in the realm of singing relative to him.

the athlete, as the recipient of praise, is the sole determinant of the relevance or emptiness of that valuation.

And all the other people who are implicitly judged by your praise? They have no relevance? That seems rather contrary to the argument you apply to voiced denigrations.

it would be woefully self-absorbed of me to claim i created the value of my congratulations.

You express the valuation you feel. That's the purpose of praise and denigration. Or, at least, the purpose that is received; obviously dishonest expressions of valuation are possible to inflate or deflate others, or to burnish a particular reputation.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

looking back at your edit im not caught up

All of this is predicated on the assumption either that none of the things we’re talking about are negative things, or that all negative judgements are disallowed

No it’s not, I do not accept either option into my predicates, you made that assumption.

I hate to repeat myself but I gave an example of a negative judgement I think is perfectly allowed hours ago.

For example: “I see you’ve chosen confidence over accuracy again.” This critiques someone’s approach or behavior—being overly confident while wrong—without targeting their intelligence or abilities. comment

Plenty of negative judgements are non-ableist and hence “allowed.” Plenty more of positive judgements are non-ableist and hence certainly “allowed.”

RE: the rest of this comment… yeah your points are kind of boiling down to “yeah but thats not how i do it.” which is fine, but im asking you to try to imagine my position;since you are asking for explanations, my explanation is that i do something different that i have absolutely no mental barrier over. when starving i eat my mcdonalds big mac and enjoy it without casting any judgement on any real gourmet or home cooked meals i’ve had. somehow, i do two things at once. neuroplasticity and empathic behavior is crazy potent, just try imagining? otherwise i got nothing else. sorry.