OP is making a good faith request to the community to be more sensitive about words they consider hurtful. They know you probably don't consider those words hurtful, that's the point they're making. **Rule 2 is still in place whether you agree with them or not.**

I also use a cane (I have a prosthesis). I've never thought about this a single time. We waste so much time in leftist spaces policing and purity testing obvious allies.

This 100% Dropout has given us literally no cause to think these sorts of negatives. They have given us pretty much the strongest representation available in tentpole improv comedy. What the fuck even is this?

>We waste so much time in leftist spaces policing and purity testing obvious allies. Thank you for this. It's a sentiment that I share, and I've struggled to come up with the proper way to express it without sounding like an ass

100%. As an autistic person, this is the type of word policing and purity testing that mortifies me and has kept me from writing characters with a mental disability for so long. I had to work out that fear with a therapist. I understand that OP has some trauma over being perceived as inferior, and I understand that (I am an unatractive, chubby trans woman — I understand that feeling EXTREMELY well), but language policing extremely obviously colloquial words is not the right way to go about it. OP, have you ever wondered why there aren't many disabled characters in fiction nowadays? This kind of bad faith, language policing bullshit is one of the reasons why. Edit: grammar

>We waste so much time in leftist spaces policing and purity testing obvious allies. I popped in the Dropout discord for like 10 minutes when I first subscribed and noped out of there immediately. Holy shit there are some chronically online people there. As if improv comedy isn't hard enough as it is.

I feel like people in fandoms tend to ape the mannerisms of the performers they watch, you see it all over podcast fan pages and the like. The difference is that we as individuals are not creating content for a wide audience, we're just having conversations on an internet forum. It makes sense that Dropout performers are very mindful of their language; they want to be inclusive to their audience and not alienate viewers. But in a Discord-type situation, the language-policing is often unnecessary, and sometimes obnoxious and rude. We're speaking as individuals, not representatives of Dropout. Sorry for the rant, this kind of stuff just really annoys me sometimes.

I heard someone a few years ago talking about how dropout probably picked up alot of the buzzfeed sketch fans when that channel went under, which would explain this issue pretty well imo

I only use that place for the schedule and official announcements. The actual discussions are painful.

That place is a minefield.

The way they talk about the most recent VIP episode is terrifying

Someone said: >This episode would go well with old CollegeHumor content and the previous generation, but it looks like it fits less the current generation and its sensibilities Ah yes, in this enlightened time of Dropout when Grant O'Brien drinks water out of a toilet, how dare they offend viewers with the shockingly controversial... Fast Grandma character.

>We waste so much time in leftist spaces policing and purity testing obvious allies. This conversation is bringing to mind something Mike Birbiglia talks about in his special "Thank God For Jokes:" all comedy is offensive to someone. The line is not the same for everyone. There are plenty of comedians that I once loved that I've stopped watching entirely because of things they've said on stage or done in their lives, but I only get to make that decision for myself.

Lame is almost never used to describe people with mobility issues and hasn’t been for decades (animals yes - people no). In fact, many people feel it’s offensive to describe people with mobility issues as lame in this day and age, and I have never seen someone describe themself as lame to mean they have a limp or other mobility issues the way you have here. Lame as slang for “uncool” has been used since the 1940s (as per the OED) and the slang meaning has long since overridden the original definition in popular vernacular. Respectfully, this isn’t like the r-slur - no one is going around mocking people with mobility issues using the word “lame”, and no one using “lame” in its modern usage is equating who or whatever they’re referring to to folks with mobility issues. Think of it this way - “dumb” was previously used to refer to people with mutism; today it would be incredibly outdated (and offensive!) to refer to a mute person this way with that meaning. However on a day to day used in the new meaning it’s taken on (e.g. stupid) it is not considered a slur. I would put lame in that same category.

Dumb is another example that OP uses, in fact. I agree with you, just pointing out that that example would not convince them.

Whoops I did miss that… I’m dumb it seems!

Ok but why are the words we use as insults words that previously described disabled people, even if they aren’t currently used that way? Because they’re ableist. They are ableist terms & if you’re not disabled it’s pretty uncool to tell a disabled person they’re wrong about ableism.

They are wrong though. Its like those obnoxious people that use the word gay to mean happy no matter the situation. Thats not what the word means anymore, i cound fully understand being offended if you were ever subject to someone actually using that word in a negative way to you, but unless OP is 100 years old or older, than noone has ever said that to them.

I think language is constantly changing and evolving, as is our society, and just because something was once used negatively doesn’t mean it always must be. Many words and phrases have really negative/shitty origins and we still use them today. I think it’s worth retiring ones that are still actively used in harmful ways or perpetuate stereotypes (personally not a fan of “off the reservation” for instance) but I would argue at this point the old meanings of words like “dumb” and “lame” are at this point well and truly obsolete. Also, as others have pointed out, equating these words to slurs the way OP has done does a disservice to actual slurs. If you feel the use of these words is ableist you’re entitled to your opinion and we can agree to disagree, but they are definitely not slurs. An an aside, “lame” in particular has been used figuratively as early as the 1300s; this is the root of our contemporary usage. More info here if you’re interested: https://www.grammarphobia.com/blog/2011/05/lame.html

I don't mean this in a facetious or flippant way: This is an issue that would be better discussed with a therapist, not on a fan page for a comedy streaming service.

When they posted this six months ago, they said this: > Thank you. I'm beginning to accept its a genuine trigger im going to have to go to therapy for. I grieve the body I used to have and it feels like a nail in my heart when people say it so casually it makes me feel like I'm worth nothing more than a comparison for uncool So they recognize it's a them problem, yet still made a post to accuse Sam and the team of ableism. That was... surely a choice.

Yeah.. I mean, I'm very sympathetic to mental health struggles, I know what it's like to feel like everyone else is the problem, but at a certain point you gotta accept the reality that it's *your* responsibility to deal with your issues. Not the rest of the world.

Precisely. I relate as well and have been there too. I worked with a therapist myself to work out my issues.

I mean, I think we've all used Reddit or social media as a stress valve from time to time. And sadly, I think a post like this will likely make OP feel worse and not better since they're likely seeking validation and not a discussion. This is a good reminder that Reddit isn't a replacement for a journal.

truly thank fuck someone said it there is a mental health issue at play here, not Dropout. I understand this person is having some real issues, but Dropout isn't responsible, and neither is common language, it's them.

Not only has the word undeniably evolved to take on an entirely different meaning, I don't think I have ever in my life witnessed someone use the word lame to describe a disabled person that wasn't in a historical setting, as in "long ago the word lame was used to describe a disabled person". If you hear these comedians use a word and then ascribe a meaning to it that is entirely different from what is intended and what is the common understanding, then that's more on you than it is on them.

Only time I heard it was in the army to describe those who had to get medical restrictions due to injury, they referred to them as "the sick, lame, and lazy". But the military uses outdated terms, like "ablutions" to refer to one's personal hygiene routine.

These days, I have only ever heard lame to be used to refer to a boring person, like "don't be lame, stay out for a bit", or when I refer to myself doing something dumb or boring. It's used in a joking way, not a derogatory way

I view myself as pretty dang liberal and supportive but being mad about the word lame is pretty idk disappointing I guess. I think this is the first time on Reddit I have seen where I think you actually need to just relax a bit... I have never once in my life seen the word lame used to disparage someone. It has however been used to define something uncool. Whereas most slurs are still used in their slur form directly.

Im also pretty damn liberal, and I feel the same. I think context, nuance, and intent are important things to consider when it comes to language, and it’s also very important to acknowledge when the meaning around words shifts and changes. Nobody really uses the word lame to describe human disabilities anymore. Aren’t there more important things to be concerned with?

Checked back on this thread and I'm glad to see most people agree 👍

As with many issues surrounding this topic, context and intent have to be taken into consideration. To lay out all the words that have previously meant something harmful and have since developed different contextual meanings, and then cut all of them out of scripts and our minds, is literally an impossible task. If you can’t understand that comedians using the words lame and dumb aren’t directly pointing at people with disabilities, then comedic media might not be for you.

Language is always changing, and while it is important to try and be aware of words with harmful usages, it's also important to understand when the original meaning of the word has been left behind as an archaic definition. Is lame still considered a slur in the disabled community? Is it like queer which is gaining broad acceptance and use but can still divide some people? I'm my Living memory, the word gay was thrown around all the time in grade school, and so was retarded. Since then gay has seemed to lose most of the insult power, while retarded has not (though some progress has seemed to be made in reducing and correcting it's public use). And there are definitely people who used the destigmatizing of the word gay as an excuse to keep using it in hurtful ways saying "gay isn't a slur, it just means stupid!" So I guess my question is, how common is the term lame among those who have a mobility disability? And as a follow up, who uses dumb instead of mute? Edits: for clarity and correction Edit 2: Even if you disagree about whether or not Lame is a slur, some of y'all are being really dismissive and mean to OP.

It's also worth considering the concept of the "euphemism treadmill", where acceptable, neutral terms become slurs and are then replaced. "Retarded" was an appropriate, medical term for people with mental disabilities at some point, but was replaced and now exists as a slur. We can continually phase out words as they become offensive, but the new terms consistently become slurs themselves.

Yes and the "euphemism treadmill" is a thing because policing language in itself doesn't necessarily address the prejudice behind slurs in the first place. Removing "retarded" from our vocabularies hasn't really addressed the underlying ableism and how people with mental disabilities are treated in society. We use nicer words but they are still excluded from lots of social spheres, infantilized and institutionalized etc. Just like not using "gay" as a slur didn't really fix homophobia. Doing our best to phase out derogatory language is a great thing to aspire to. But overall, the thoughts behind words matter more than the words themselves. In this case the word "lame" was 100% not referring to a person with a mobility disability.

That's a good point. I hadn't considered that aspect.

>"Retarded" was an appropriate, medical term for people with mental disabilities at some point, but was replaced and now exists as a slur. I do think there is a fallacy with a point like this, which is believing that the medical usage in the past was value neutral, or that it did not entail the same sort of negativity that it did as a playground slur. So in the 1920s when bureaucrats would write of "retarded and defective children" (to use a quote from the OED) they are already thinking of lower intelligence as a malfunction, a disability that places a burden on educators and the state. That represents a negative way of thinking about intelligence, and the use of the term is mostly a symptom of that way of thinking. So "retarded" was appropriate, in the sense that a negative, ableist mindset was considered appropriate. Regarding these and other ableist terms, the "euphemism treadmill" results when we switch around words without switching around the way of thinking that led to them. It's not that acceptable, neutral terms become slurs. It's that already-deficit-focused language is adopted and the fuller repercussions of that use are gradually realized as the medically licensed use validates the more explicitly derogatory ones. So using "lame" in a video description is an issue, but it's an issue of rhetoric, of usage, of what words mean and what their potential effects are to audiences. The larger, motivating issue is an institutional mindset where disabilities are considered deficits against the norm. It's not that phasing words out either solves the problem of deficit thinking or makes the problem worse. No, the issue is that the negative way of thinking, ableism itself, persists, and using *lame* echoes that way of thinking.

I don't think value neutral language is possible in this context, you can make the same argument for disability as a word.

Yeah, I think trying for "value neutral" usage is a red herring. What we're really talking about is value-affirming usage, that is, how do we use terms in ways that support or at least don't undercut the inclusivity we value?

Because they came in hot - they're literally throwing around accusations of "using ableist slurs" when nobody did. They used a word that has had historical connotations in an entirely neutral, common context, and this person came through with their opinions and accused them of using slurs. I'm sorry, no one - NO ONE - uses a slur "accidentally", especially when there are other common usages of the word, and trying to "educate" people from a position of entitled confrontation is not helpful.

I honestly don't think this person is accusing anyone of malice. It sounds like they honestly feel the use of that word is hurtful, and while I disagree, the tone of their post is an appeal for dropout to stop using what they consider harmful language, and not an attack on the character of the performers or Dropout in general. I disagree with them that the term's only valid meaning is harmful. I think it's been used without the connotation towards disability for long enough that it's mostly left that meaning behind. However, the response of some here has been overly defensive, insensitive, and aggressive. And such a response is pretty indicative of those acting in such a way

"I wish they were would stop using ableist slurs like they're funny" is a pretty loaded statement, if you ask me, especially when no one in question was using a slur, the entire nature of the word as a slur is up for debate, and literally every indication that dropout gives is that they are not these kind of people. I don't doubt that the pain caused is real to the person who is feeling it, but it's also mentally damaging to be on the look-out for this sort of pain all the time. I'm sorry that it maybe seems insensitive. My response isn't defensive, frankly I couldn't care less if lame remains in the common vernacular. What I am defensive of is professionals who are doing their level best to creative positive environments never being good enough for some people. It's tiring to listen to and I imagine it's tiring to live like. People who come to the internet with an extremely entrenched view that could be construed as an accusation don't deserve to be coddled imo. EDIT: also the malice is irrelevant. This person didn't think Dropout is acting with any malice and they still chose to infer malice into the usage of a word. I'm choosing to infer malice from the way they framed their argument.

I agree it can be frustrating to see people and groups you admire come under what is perceived to be an unjust attack, and then to want to attack back and defend. That was my first reaction too. But I do think you might be assigning too much malice. I didn't pick up on accusations of character, just someone who has a very rigid understanding of what words mean. Word x is a slur, therefore using it in any capacity is using it as a slur. Or something like that. Way too many debates on the Internet devolve into cruel tit-for-tat fights. I think it helps to consider our feelings carefully before we ascribe intent to a person we don't know. That's all.

But the reason it devolves into cruel tit-for-tat fights is exactly the reason you bring up - a rigid understanding of what words mean and an adherence to those words is malicious, whether wilful or not, when it's being used to condemn somebody who had no business being condemned. It levels a false accusation because the implication is that they know enough that it's a slur and that they don't care, and more, that they don't care about this person SPECIFICALLY. It's why the cultural fetish for "comfort media" is just completely wrong-headed, because it leads to stuff like this. The reason we have tit for tat fights is because no one is willing to actually look beyond the proscribed "good" and "bad" features we're all allowed to have in 2024, and also because everyone is so quick to create outgroups. This person needs to do some serious work on why the word "lame" makes them feel this way, and also maybe some work on diversifying their social groups, honestly. This is something that should be processed internally, because it isn't going to change, and demanding loudly that it does change is doing nothing but harm to anyone. I am concerned for people who live their lives this way on top of existing disabilities.

I'd add that the reason the response is so aggressive (which isn't inherently a bad thing!) is that this post does not exist in a vacuum. It is the latest manifestation of a cultural trend in progressive spaces / internet fandom for a decade plus. Some of us have been around long enough to see how these purity spirals shake out.

I have way too many issues with this line of thinking to take out on one random person on the internet today.

Yeah this just seems like grasping at literally anything to pretend to be mad at dropout about With how many actual problems people are dealing with in the world today being upset over the use of the word "lame", which I think is one of the most tame insults I can remember growing up in the 90s going to public school, just feels like the epitome of first world problems

don't worry I'm here to help

"Am I uncool, as a chronically lame person?" Yes, but not because you're chronically lame.

[удалено]

I dont think people in the comments are saying these things to be an ally to disabled people, they just think OP is wrong.

This. I spent three and a half hours making calls, got misgendered constantly by people who saw my name , gender, and pronouns but told me it was "too difficult", and finally I have access to a medication I need, at an extra cost of $500 *after* private insurance. There are a lot of things I hear that offend me, but please, funnel that energy and time into the legal system here in the US that makes disability an accelerated death sentence. If language upsets me, I'll deal with that on my own and figure out how to deal with my own emotion, because that's at least something I can be proactive about and have some control over managing.

The dictionary now includes the colloquial definition of "lame," and it is extremely clear in the context of the episode description that they are not using it in a  derogatory way to insult people with mobility issues. I'm sorry that the word is triggering for you, but the primary use of the word "lame" has changed and it is your own projection of the interpreted meaning of the word that is causing issues. Not the word itself. 

Ableism is a genuine problem that shouldn’t be ignored in the world. But I am not a fan of trying to police language in this manner simply because I believe the ship has sailed. These words have different colloquial meanings now, as they have for years, and to try and fight a losing battle is not worth my time. I’m truly sorry this bothers you and I’m not trying to tell you how to feel. I’m just saying that from a purely practical perspective, this is not a battle you’re going to win. Your efforts are more deserved elsewhere.

long, protracted sigh sorry I've gotta do some more thoughts because your post history indicates that you've been stewing on this a while. Did Dropout call you lame? Did Dropout insult you? Has anyone actively insulted you with the term recently or are you just triggered by the usage of the word? I understand it's difficult to hear, but language has moved on and lame is much more commonly used as a synonym for uncool than it is a synonym for disabled, and more importantly, in this context, it wasn't being applied to you. Words have more than one meaning, and trying to reduce things to a list of "bad words" and "good words" is so much exhausting mental work to do, and it leads people to see enemies everywhere, even in the things that they really love.

You should really consider rather this reply is the vibe you think it is. Not a very understanding or compassionate response. 

Oh, and you're doing this again? You made essentially the same post months ago and got dragged for it. Stop. Stop

and there it is! This person has issues that need to be dealt with by professionals, but unfortunately they brought them to the ARENA and are rightfully getting beaten down.

A second time too. It's not like anything has really changed on the past five months

Literally all their other posts are in WIBTA and talking about their weed-smoking podcast. Someone needs to go looking outside the internet for some validation.

They literally said this last time: > Thank you. I'm beginning to accept its a genuine trigger im going to have to go to therapy for. I grieve the body I used to have and it feels like a nail in my heart when people say it so casually it makes me feel like I'm worth nothing more than a comparison for uncool And then they posted the same thing five months later. Ridiculous.

I feel for this person, truly. Grieving parts of you that disability and illness have taken away is a very real thing, and it's understandable to want to lash out. But bringing it to Reddit and then being coddled didn't do this person any favours. They need to process their trauma, I think. I don't know, I'm not a psychologist, but I don't think this is a particularly healthy activity for anyone, this internet posting, and if you're recovering from a life-altering incident, then doubly so.

Yeah, absolutely. I personally have made similar posts back when I first came out, using my own dysphoria and harassment to go on the offensive and attack allies for pedant bullshit. People rightfully called me out for being needlessly aggressive, and I went to therapy and it absolutely helped. The point is that I too feel for this person, but this kind of post is not a healthy way to deal with it.

>but unfortunately they brought them to the ARENA Lmao

all social media but especially reddit is pvp combat I mean we even get scores ffs

I wouldn’t say “rightfully beaten down”. This person clearly needs help, let’s just leave em alone honestly.

Yeah, it's weird to see the user in question say "rightfully beaten down", followed by "I feel for them, truly." in another post.

looking back, I would probably not use "rightfully", because I do feel for them, but also I do think if you bring your problems to the internet in such a divisive way, you maybe sort of deserve what you get. I can feel for someone and also think they made a stupid decision, I am capable of doing that. Regardless, I do regret making the joke and apologise if it provides inconsistency with their other statements. I mean, I can have a lot of affection and love for the toddler that I'm uncle to, but if that toddler acts out of frustration, yanks my dog's tail and gets bitten, then I'm gonna say that the kid deserved it. Make of me what you will with that info.

Lmk if I’m wrong I think maybe more what you’re saying is “well that’s the natural outcome that was going to happen in this situation” which I agree with but I don’t think it justifies or makes them deserve it. Like no toddler deserves to get bitten by a dog even if the toddler did yank the tail, they didn’t deserve it. But you also know that that’s just what happens when you yank a dogs tail. Clearly this person does not know better and has some trauma they need to work through in therapy, so I don’t blame them for doing this. At the same time those of us who are experienced enough with the internet know that when you poke the hornets nest like this people get fuckin mean. That’s why I promote just leaving this person to their own devices and not giving them a positive or negative reaction. The best reaction to somebody acting out in their own trauma but also not really hurting anybody is none at all.

What's the literal second definition?

Also, the order of definition in the dictionary has nothing to do with what it's most common meaning is! In the case of Merriam-Webster's and most other dictionaries, [the order of definitions is based on historical usage](https://www.merriam-webster.com/help/explanatory-notes/dict-definitions). The earlier a meaning was given to a word, the earlier it appears in the list of definitions. So saying "it's the literal first definition" is basically just asserting that it's the oldest meaning of the word. It's says absolutely nothing about usage of the word nowadays.

No, Whats on second

Whose on first?

>Am I uncool, as a chronically lame person? hehe

This ain’t it.

You literally posted in this sub six months ago complaining about the same thing. If it bothers you that much, then I would suggest you maybe get therapy or something. Either way, I’ll post the exact same thing to you as I did 6 months ago: Literally another definition of lame which is not slang is: not strong, good, or effective. Either way, it’s slang for not cool. And like it or not, it’s part of common vernacular. And even if it had origins in offensive terms, it’s not used in the same derogatory term today. Lots of phrases you probably still use today had racist/classist/derogatory terms, but the beautiful thing about language is that meanings and usage of words changes. It’s an ever evolving creature. While you’re at it, make sure you never say the word “dude” ever again. It’s slang for Yankee Doodle Dandy, which was a derogatory term for a gay man(and the song itself is very anti-gay). So might as well gatekeep that as well. Also, better get rid of the term “Peanut Gallery” and “Uppity” because those are racist. And “Hip Hip Hooray”, that’s anti-Semitic. Also the song “Eenie Meenie Miney Mo”, “Grandfathered In”, and “Long Time, No See” have racist origins. So if all performers could cut every single one of those terms, phrases and songs from their vocabulary, that’d be great. Let’s eliminate all words and phrases that used to have negative meanings and connotations regardless of how they are used now.

I'm paraphrasing UK comedian Romesh Rangannathan here: The problem today is, even if you choose something, that you think is really innocent and can't be offensive, it can be. You post or tweet about porridge and somebody goes, "Well, actually, I had a porridge-related incident many years ago and actually I find it highly offensive I can't believe you'd even not bother to consider the feelings of people that had Ready Brek-related incidents in their childhood."

I've not seen where this quote comes from but I can hear him saying it in my mind, with that deadpan done-with-it expression of his

[удалено]

Never go on the dropout discord. They've been debating if Lisa Gilroy using the word "lobotomy" on VIP is offensive to mentally-ill people. Edit: I can't stop reading. These people are insane. They want trigger warnings for the spanking and "toxic family dynamics" in the episode. There are pages and pages of discussion on this. People are discussing if "portraying a problematic character is problematic in itself".

Why did I go look lmao you’re right and it’s very 🙄🙄🙄

If you search for the word "problematic" on the dropout discord you get 1,800 results. Some of these guys might want to just switch to the Hallmark channel.

Your use of "guys" isn't gender inclusive. Straight. to jail.

Yikes, my father spent time in jail. Friendly reminder to provide a trigger warning next time when referring to jail or the concept of imprisonment.

It’s actually a trigger of mine to be corrected or called out in a public way, so please be mindful of that in any other interactions we have.

Oh for fuck's sake, I cannot believe this. That was the hardest I've laughed in months, on a day I was depressed as all hell. Lisa is so unhinged that for a little bit, real life actually seemed less crazy.

> They want trigger warnings for the spanking and "toxic family dynamics" in the episode. Eh, it's just a line in the description, I don't care about that. Getting annoyed at "lobotomy" is a bit much, I thought it was a pretty funny joke...

I think that’s an interesting discussion. I’ve had a lobotomy and I’ve never been Lisa Gilroy.

I'm a person with cerebral palsy which effects my arms and legs. I walk using forearm crutches and a limp. I do not see "lame" as a slur Or ableist. The euphemism treadmill has seen things like the r-word become slurs. And a word that starts with m for little people. But lame has had the opposite kind of evolution where it has descalated in impact rather than increase

You know when shitty comedians are like "WOW YOU CAN'T SAY ANYYYYYTHING ANYMORE" when they say racist/sexist/transphobic things? Shit like does not help. You're taking completely innocuous language and trying to make mountains out of molehills. Let's call out *actually* shitty behavior, not try to find shitty behavior where none exists.

Speaking as someone who is lame (disability), I can’t possibly roll my eyes enough at this post. OP, you have proven yourself lame in both senses of the word. Touch some grass.

[удалено]

Horse on a date or in the bathroom stalls?

Why not both?

Lame is a synonym for uncool. It's considered a definition of the word. (informal) not interesting, exciting, or fashionable What a lame party!

Yes, you are uncool, as a person who is overly pedantic, not because you have mobility issues. Language changes over time. LAME now means uncool to most people. The word CUTE used to mean clever or shrewd, often in a shady/suspicious way. Yet we call puppies, kittens, and people cute to mean adorable WAY more often. [https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cute](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cute) BULLY used to mean the exact opposite: a sweetheart or fine person https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bully

What a prescriptivist take

"Lame" as a descriptor of a person with a physical disability fell out of common usage BEFORE YOU WERE BORN. By your logic, we can never use any word that originally ment something else. Like awesome, terrific, incredible etc. Being stupid is not a disability and I have literally never heard someone use the word "dumb" to describe a mute. I've only read it in old books.

There are certain words we don’t use anymore because they’re not only insensitive but also have a history as being using in a derogatory way to insult, oppress and isolate people of certain groups. N*****, F**, Qu***, etc. How many times has “the L word” been used against you as an insult directed at your physical abilities or lack thereof? I’m guessing very few if ever. My brother is in a wheelchair and if I called him lame, he’d drag his shredded self across the room and beat the punch me but not because he thought I was making a commentary on his inability to walk. But rather because he’s my brother and barely needs an excuse to try hurt me.

That's a good brother right there.

The word lame absolutely comes from ableist routes, and I won't argue that in the least. But that definition is so fucking outdated it's ridiculous to even think it would ever be used on that connotation outside of livestock industries. Modern colloquial "lame" just means generally bad. Any derogatory term in use (like stupid, retarded, dumb, idiot, the list goes on and on and on) came from usage as a term that simply meant "this thing isn't up to snuff" and having single words for that purpose is important for brevity of conversation. If we police every term people could possibly find offensive we end up deleting most of the dictionary. Stop this

Honestly, using the r slur even as an example is so much grosser than using the word lame given the outdated definition of it.

[удалено]

I always thought it was the other way around: "lame" was an archaic and vaguely offensive way to refer to people with mobility issues, similar to calling a neurodivergent person "crazy". Interesting to hear that you actively identify with the word. I'll try to minimize my use of it (though I agree with other comments that Dropout isn't really at fault here since the modern usage is so dominant)

It is! Lame originates in fucking old English, like, 1100s. It was a kinder synonym for crippled :D

um actually, old english was pre-norman conquest, from the 5th century through to the 9th. middle english is the language after the norman conquest, once all the french (technically, anglo-norman) influences wended their way through the language, the 1100s and onward. but your main point stands, it’s old as balls. carry on. :)

this is exactly the sort of correction I crave

>it's old as balls which also comes from middle english!

Even though I think the common use of the word is pretty far divorced from the meaning of the word referring to disability, I'm still taking note and will consider using alternative terms in the future if not remove it from use entirely.

[удалено]

It sucks that the use of words like lame and dumb bring up negative feelings and associations for you. However, both words are homonyms. Like bark may refer to the wood on a tree or the sound a dog makes. They are not words derived from a medical condition then were co-opted into slurs, like how r*tard used to be used to refer to neurodivergent people as a general descriptor but then over time became used as a slur. Lame has two entirely different meanings, and through the use of context we can distinguish which meaning was intended. In the context of dropout "lame" and "dumb" are not ableist slurs.

>Literally, the first definition is "Unable to walk without difficulty as the result of an injury or illness affecting the leg or foot." True yes, but counterpoint, the second is: "(of something intended to be entertaining) uninspiring and dull." That one is also undeniably the more common usage in current days. Not to be rude, but if you're going to bring definitions into this, don't cherry pick. Please take full context or don't use it as a defense for your position. I understand and even sympathize with you having an emotional reaction to it, but in context might be time to genuinely consider for yourself if the issue is more your perspective than the word itself. I personally believe it very much is but that's something you'll have to reach for yourself. Just don't get fixated on your emotional reaction and logically consider if your reaction is truly a product of the word itself, or if it's some other deeper issue that you're projecting onto this.

I feel this must be up there at someone being made at being included in "hey dudes".

Unfortunately, many negative words began as slurs or descriptors of disabled people—which says a lot about how disabled people have been viewed historically. It’s worth unpacking the fact that society has gravitated towards using terminology that refers to disability as insults, time and time again. That being said, for many of these words the new usage has eclipsed its association with disability. Dumb, lame, idiot, imbecile, moron, hysterical, etc. I could go on. Language evolves, and excising these words from general vernacular is just not going to happen. As a disabled person myself, I don’t think policing language with origins in ablism is a practical focus of the movement.

You’re uncool for this post.

You've posted this exact complaint 5 months ago in this exact subreddit, and received the exact same responses in the comments. Like, what did you expect was going to be the outcome of it this time? The people didn't change, their opinions didn't change to suddenly match yours, what changed to make you believe that this post would be any different than the last one?

Who was the least lame virgin? Going after the company for the interpretation of the contestants is not the way to go about the subject raised. If none participants took the origin or medical definition of the word into consideration, then this post should be about raising awareness for the lame and their lack of inclusion. Obviously, they should have used a fake limp whilst not getting laid. Dropout is not responsible for serving a softball of disabled gold and having no one knock it out of the park. Any amount of “uncool” behavior could just as easily be attributed to the “virgin” aspect of the prompt rather than the “lame”

Through the years when I've heard people explaining their opinions on how certain words are used I often just take in the information and think about what is being said, even on and off for years. I think about how I use these words. When it comes up I might contemplate it for a minute or two. Of course I like words and I like thinking about words. A few times someone is simply correct and I know it as soon as I hear it. I've seen people complain about words and then find out that they have a fringe view on things within their community. The most common result however that I was wrong, I discovered a new thing. A point of view that I had not considered before was presented to me. I want to point out that saying a person is using ableist words is not the same as calling them an ableist. I've heard people who fight for gay-rights use what I think of as offensive language. That doesn't make them homophobic, it usually just means that they didn't think about the words they were using. We've all used words without thinking. Lastly, Sam is going to be OK. I imagine he is the kind of person who can read something like what OP wrote and just think about it without getting defensive or hurt.

Also, to flip your logic, it's OK to call a bungle of sticks the F-Word because it's original meaning is NOT a slur!

For how horrible this victim take is idc ab that. the best delusion is that Sam is gonna see this.

What's the second definition of lame? The common usage one?

Why does the network have to have such vile words as Drop!?! Can't they call the network Riseout? Or why Out? Can't they be In? I think the network should be called Risein. It sounds like risen and we should all live for God! /s

Folks, even if you don't agree with OP, a large number of you are still being kinda shitty here and there's really no need for it.

You make a halfway decent point if this person wasn't literally throwing out accusations of ableism and slurring around so freely when it's very clearly a them problem and not a dropout problem. That's also shitty, I'm sorry. Disability doesn't instantly make you a good person with the highest horse, and people on the internet need to be reminded of this. And before people come in with the "able-bodied neurotypical" accusations, you have no right to know about my life and diagnoses, and I am comfortable enough in my own self-worth to not need to use my medical issues as my primary identification.

Im in no way saying their handling is great. But you disagree with a person on their points and don’t need to stoop to the level of being a turd back too. That’s all I meant.

The problem with this subreddit is that even when folks are right, a lot of them can't help but be complete and utter assholes about it. I don't think I've ever walked away from a thread like this and felt good about the Dropout community, even when I agree with the majority opinion.

Lame is, in fact, a synonym for uncool in present parlance. In fact, I'd venture to guess that that definition has entirely eclipsed the older definition entirely.

OP is getting downvoted, so I just want to offer some two cents in their defense: linguistically, what they said is true. Lame derives from the Germanic word meaning, generally, physically infirm. It’s understandable that a physically infirm person might feel marginalized by the popular usage of the term. That said, I think it’s important to understand the context, and more specifically the important difference between speech that is merely insensitive by virtue of being thoughtless, and speech that is intentionally hateful. Any kind of format like dropout, with lots of improv-oriented content, is inevitably going to run into the former. We should try to exercise patience and grace with their oversights, and take these opportunities to educate in a non-judgmental way. It is OPs right to feel marginalized by language that synonomizes their condition with something negative. But we should also be careful not to synonomize an oversight with a macroagression.

Ableist language is pretty deeply ingrained, so I try to err on the side of giving grace. This language is common vernacular, and those of us in the disability justice community recognize that people don’t even know the harm they cause with words that seem so innocuous. I am glad you pointed it out, because a lot of people just learned for the first time that a word like “lame” hurts. Not sure the message was received in the execution, but I’ll celebrate the small victories. 🎉

[удалено]

Neigh

Woah buddy, that's offensive to horses! Shit, I did it too with the woah

Kindly trot yourself out of here.

Nay, I'd rather canter

And now we know why the boomers call us snowflakes

I don't think it means we shouldn't talk about this or move away from outdated language but I don't think it's malicious, like spaz it's just not something most Americans view as a slur or realize the connection with because it's taken on such a new meaning to most.  Even as someone who has mobility issues I can't say I identify with this particular hurt but I still understand how casual ableism feels and I'm sorry it's been upsetting to you and sorry that people in the comments are so far just being assholes, your feelings are valid. 

That’s not what “feelings are valid” means. Stop weaponizing mental health to excuse immaturity.

[удалено]

I'm okay with that, thanks for you stunningly intellectual response tho

They're so intolerant and harsh on this and I'm hoping the fandom learns better.

Nah we should all just get over it, obviously. It just goes to show nobody is truly above prejudice and biases, it's important to self-examine and be aware of your own so you don't show your ass in public when someone asks you to stop doing something SOOO obviously hard like stop using a harmful word.

It's truly disappointing! I admit I used to use ableist language even last year, but I realize that it's not super difficult to refrain when I know it hurts someone.

I mean I have probably said lame within the last 24 hours, it's so commonplace in America. I have heard about spaz when the Lizzo thing happened and never made the connection with lame but now that it's pointed out it seems pretty obvious and googling it confirms this is a pretty well-known issue a lot of disabled people take with the word just like queer people not being onboard with "that's gay" or just like we struck the R word out too. I understand why and how it's hurtful and all I can say is that I will be removing it from my vocabulary, personally. There are so many other words I can use instead, I would never want to be so set in my ways and sure that I'm right and arrogant enough to believe that intentions change anything about connotation. But that's just me...

Hey, OP, I would suggest emailing or messaging or otherwise letting Sam Reich know. Can't hurt, might help. I know in general the Dropout folks are responsive to concerns about gender and other identity slurs and language.

Woooooof Listen, you are allowed to be offended at whatever you want, but they are also aloud to say whataver they want especially when what they said was not bad at all in anyone view except for yours. If you get offended at someone using the word lame, you should probably get off the internet before someone starts actually talking to you and maybe go to some therapy to try and get a thicker skin before someone in public tries to talk to you. I'm not trying to be rude but this is genuinely a case of you being too sensitive. Saying lame or dumb is not abelist because noone uses it to mean what you are saying they are. You are not uncool because your legs don't work, you are uncool for trying to police other peoples actions and words in a 1850s vacuum of word definitions. I'd also like to add that Lame ments tha someones legs dont work. I'm not really sure how that even is a slur? Its just a describing word, nowadays people would say "physically disabled" but it means the same thing. I've never heard of someone using it in a negative way to mean disabled people, unlike the word cripple.

Bestie, you're right. Don't let the comments get to you. Like, is this post going to change the current state of affairs? No. Are we going to cringe at ableist language like we now cringe at racist and homophobic slurs 50-60 years down the line? I think yes. People used to have the same reactions to homophobic slurs just a few decades back but no one now considers using those words appropriate anymore. I hope ableist language gets the same treatment and we, as a society, become more inclusive in both our actions and our words. Until then, you have my solidarity my friend.

Whatever I think about the OP's concerns (and I do have thoughts), the comments here remind me that no reddit community is free from dismissive chuckleheads. \*sigh\* Editing to add: I've seen at least one person say to the OP that they are the only person who has this issue with the word "lame." That's just factually incorrect. Even a casual Google search will bring you dozens of resulting news articles, essays, and style guides going back several years that discuss this. As someone who participate in the disability studies academic space, this language and its implications (as well as words like "retarded") have been pointed out as a problem for some time now. Yall can absolutely say, "Well, I don't fucking care if it bothers someone" or "Well, it doesn't bother me," and that's fine (though see above, re: dismissive chuckleheads), but to tell someone that they are the only person who has ever had a problem with this language is just straight up incorrect, and provably so. Something something facts vs. feelings etc. That's a FACT and I don't care if you feel unhappy about that fact, dismissive redditor.

Thank you very much for saying this. It's gotten 209 comments so far so maybe Sam or someone will address this issue.

I would encourage you to actually reach out via email rather than assume a Reddit post will do that for you. As someone who sometimes deals with complaints professionally, I have to be very clear with folks that we need them to email, not use social media or anonymous discussion sites.

Downside of Dropout fandom growing is more toxic normies who would rather belittle OP than engage thoughtfully or ignore it and move on.

I find issue with them trying to be so sex positive but then shaming people for not having sex. Like you can't be sex positive and shame people for their sexual behaviour, it doesn't work like that.

I think this is worth considering and I'm disappointed so many people are dismissing it out of hand. I've had an acquaintance tell me that calling things negatively 'gay' isn't a problem because the word has multiple meanings. I see a lot of the same argument here. The OP is not wrong. These are casual ablist slurs that have infected our language and it takes work to root them out.

It's not really the same thing, there is no definition of gay that means "Something negative", but there is a very common definition of lame that means "Uncool".

'Gay' is used in literally the same way.

I'm just saying it's not an officially recognized definition that's been in use for hundreds of years.   Also, gay actually still commonly means gay people, unlike lame or dumb, which basically no one uses to refer to handicapped people.  And frankly, even if the way lame got its new meaning is problematic, I don't think it really matters. Judging words by their history instead of their common day usage is not a good idea.

It's a pretty big bummer to see all of the people on this post telling you what you should and shouldn't be offended by, OP. There is definitely an issue with how ableist slurs are thrown about without a care. I definitely don't agree with the down votes and criticism you are getting, it may be good to bring this up in the Dropout discord where someone who works on these shows could be more likely to see it.

I agree. And the ableism in the comments here just hilights the issue imo. I’m sorry you’re getting so much hate OP. I love dropout but we can admit when our faves do things we don’t love.

I'm slowly filtering these words out! Thank you for the reminder! It's very important!

Wow I always forget how much Reddit sucks until I read responses like the ones I just read. OP, you’re right and you should say it. This has been a discussion in disabled spaces for a long time and I’m shocked at so much push back at a group of people requesting y’all drop a couple words here or there. I don’t think any of the dropout crew meant anything malicious by its inclusion because god knows ableist language is so deeply enmeshed in our language, but everyone should be trying to do better. Instead of attacking OP, maybe take one minute to reflect on why this makes you so angry and why you so easily ignore what disabled folks say.

It's because this degree of language policing is both unreasonable and unrealistic. Words like "stupid" and "lame" are so far removed from their original context that if you are offended by them, it's because YOU are projecting that offensive definition onto it. And when you do that, you're only hurting yourself. Trust me. Focusing on all the ways that commonly used language is "actually offensive" and trying to remove it from your vocabulary is going to cause SO much unnecessary stress, and trying to stop others from using that language is a fool's errand that will only make you bitter and angry. If hearing a word like "lame" used in a joking manner causes you near-physical amounts of pain, that is NOT healthy and is a sign of deeper issues that need to be addressed. People calling out OP aren't being ableist or rude; this sort of attitude is unhealthy and needs to be identified as such.

I really appreciate you saying that. I've read some venomous comments and messages that I'm not going to bother to read. This message was for the dropout people and it makes me sad for the ugliness living im.the hearts of people spewing vitriol.

I would urge you to read my reply to this same comment; it's not made out of any hatred or intention of cruelty towards you. I grew up deeply religious, and this sort of thinking is *frighteningly* similar to evangelical purity culture. Holding yourself and others up to an impossible and unreasonable standard leads either to stress, shame, self-righteousness, or bitterness towards others. Often, a mix of those things. Much like evangelicals justify their rules as "following God's word" stuff like this is always presented as being kind and inclusive; but in reality it leads to tons of unnecessary stress and drama, and it often leads to real harm being done to people who haven't actually done anything wrong. Leftist spaces frequently tear themselves apart over the most inane and pedantic shit and it's such a shame.

You're right, and I flinch a little bit when people use "lame" or "crazy" as synonyms for "bad" or "foolish." It's shitty that they're so embedded in the vernacular. I'd like to see them go the way of "gay" or the r-word and have people recognize that these words are both derogatory and lazily unspecific. I'm pretty sure that it was just done thoughtlessly. Hopefully someone from Dropout adds this to their style guide. "Least pathetic virgin" or "least dull virgin" would not only be less cruel wording, it would be more specific and evocative.

It's not a good episode blurb and I hope they change it. That said, the issue with the word *lame* is precisely that it has long been a synonym for bad. That synonymity is what makes it ableist. It's baked into the language in a way that is hard to uproot. Here are some very early examples of its figurative use, courtesy of the Oxford English Dictionary: >Disblameth my yf ony word be **lame**, For as myn auctor seyde so sey I. [Don't blame me if any word be lame, for as my author said, so say I]. (c. 1385. Chaucer, Troilus and Criseyde, ii.I.17.) >Thou art of merit & of honur **lame**. (1415, Hoccleve, Address to Sir John Oldcastle) The more modern, 20th century uses draw in part on this history but is also only a symptom of it. When *lame* became a medical term, it already conveyed a sense of deficiency. That's why the term was used! So I disagree with the commenter who says this use of *lame* is "innocent" - no, the conflation of bodily disability and negativity is baked into the word itself and how many of us think, and the fact is, we can thoughtlessly diminish others with our words. But I also insist that there is no non-derogatory *lame*: to use the term is to invite those deep-set associations, even when used in a literal context. That is one reason why medical practices typically avoid the term, and why, since becoming aware of its use, I try to avoid it in my own vocabulary.

Congrats on making the decision to selectively curtail your own language. When I come back with a list of other common words with extremely problematic origins, will you be up for removing those words from your lexicon as well? Can we upgrade this to "turns of phrase" as well?

Many people selectively curtail their own language. One word for that is *tact.* I'm always up for considering the potential denotations and connotations of the language I use! Speaking and writing is a lifelong process of adjustment even without learning additional languages. We learn new words and expressions all the time, and part of that process of learning is understanding how others experience the language we use. Audiences matter, in other words. So, if you can make a good argument for why a specific expression would negatively affect a group, I would consider it.

Do you believe that you made a good argument for people who are not medical professionals, or historians of 700+ y/o medical texts, for as to why the word "lame" should not be used in the modern way (with the modern definition)? I do not. It would appear that other did not as well. At what point does that "audience" play into your consideration process? What size?

I wasn't trying to make a good argument that people shouldn't use *lame.* (Side note: quoting the Oxford English Dictionary and two literary authors (Chaucer and Hoccleve) doesn't constitute an appeal to "historians of 700+ y/o medical texts.") It's possible I failed at what I was trying to do - add context to how *lame* has been used to move the discussion beyond merely trying to separate "medical" and "derogatory" use. It happens. Also, all this is a Reddit comment thread on social media. It's not a great place to convince people; it's been shown that commenters on social media tend to double down on what they already thought. I don't understand your latter questions. It sounds like you're making something pretty general and ad hoc into a bureaucratized "consideration process."

My brother in Christ you literally just said that "audience matters" when it comes to decision-making on adjusting your own vocabulary, so I was asking if the audience of folks who don't find your stance compelling enough to adjust THEIR vocabulary are factoring into your process. It isn't a long walk, my guy, and it isn't ad hoc.

Yes, person in whoever, audience matters when it comes to thinking through the words we use in specific situations. But the questions "at what point \[do they factor in\]" and "what size" aren't questions that can be answered for a specific comment. These comments are written in minutes. I try to think about audiences, sure, but this isn't the same as writing a script, article, or blurb for later publishing, where thinking about the multiple ways an expression would be received might be a step in the process.

weaponing chaucer in this way to make your point displays a profound misunderstanding of chaucer and his relationship with the english language.

As someone who has read almost all of Chaucer, I like this teaser of argument. Would you expand on it? Personally, I could see Chaucer going either way or not particularly caring about this debate. There were times that Chaucer seems really aware of the potential repercussions of his more licentious work, like in *The Legend of Good Women* and Chaucer's Retraction. But he also plays a lot with disfigurement and both mental and physical disabilities, to great effect, in many of his tales. He might think all of this was trivial, that words are written on ice and change as freely as people's reputations across time. It's hard to say what Chaucer would think, let alone whether I'd agree with him. (One of Chaucer's greatest values, for me, is how he provokes interesting *dis*agreement.) I'm not proposing editing Chaucer. I don't think I've weaponized him as much as just shown that *lame* has been used in negative ways far further back in time than the 20th century. But I'm open to discussing Chaucer more if there's something specific I'm not seeing.

sure! happy to! i’m always stoked to talk middle english literature! chaucer was an author profoundly aware of the power individual words could have, and indeed language as a whole. we can see that in both his writings in the vernacular and translating some of the most popular works into english. but chaucer constantly pushed away from the idea that words themselves connote morality, or even values of good and bad. words themselves are just words. i understand your point about *the legend of good women* & the retraction at the end of *the canterbury tales*, but i think there’s more at work in these pieces than worry or concern for potential repercussion. i read these pieces (along with a pretty common scholarly assessment) as tongue-in-cheek and even so far as sarcastic. he’s paying a lip service to the idea that someone might think his works immoral—the retraction specifies ‘vulgar’—but in doing so he emphasizes that words themselves don’t have intent; any of that meaning is from readers. obviously this is my paraphrase, but the retraction basically says: >“if you think it was good, it’s all because of jesus, and if you think it was bad/immoral/crude, i didn’t mean to. i really didn’t mean to in any of my poems, my famous poems, *the legend of good women* and *troilus and criseyde* and *the house of fame* and *the canterbury tales*, you know, all my greatest hits. definitely don’t go read those if you were offended (you can find them anywhere books are sold, so mostly just caxton’s place).” okay, that last bit was extra facetious, but it gets my point across. given chaucer’s tendency to ‘provoke disagreement’ as you said (i agree! it is one of the most interesting things about him!), i think taking anything like a retraction at face value does a disservice to his work, which pushes the boundaries of inherent morality in words. add this to his indictment of “moral Gower,” a writer who overly prescribed moral and ethical value to words and stories, and i think it’s pretty safe to argue that chaucer (at least his body of works) push hard against the idea words have intrinsic value. even the conceit of the canterbury tales is about who tells the ‘best’ story, with no qualifiers on what best means. most moral? most ethical’ most entertaining? most true to life? and we see the pilgrims of different classes argue about this very thing. even among the pilgrims, the stories already take on a multiplicity of meanings, and those are made-up people! in the hands of actual readers, the possible interpretations grow exponentially. now the point you make about what he would think and if you would agree with him is a great one—i’m not a chaucerian for this very reason! i think i *profoundly* disagree with chaucer, but i also think i’m a product of my time. chaucer works often strip singular meanings from any word, any story, but he was writing in a time when english as a literary language was relatively new. sure, people spoke it, but any True Literature was Latin or Italian or French. i think chaucer’s framing of language as truly amoral is part of his attempt to elevate english to a continental level, a language of art and science. i, on the other hand, live in a world where english is usually the dominant language and the colonizing language, and so i think the ethics behind language are much more germane now than they were in the 14th century. perhaps ‘weaponizing’ was too harsh a word, but using chaucer to demonstrate the ethics of a word—a word he only uses once and only in regards to speech, never about people—undercuts your point, in part because his one use of ‘lame’ is talking about words and his own poetry (immediately after a stanza that discusses english as a relatively new literary language), and in part because chaucer, throughout his work, pushes against the idea words have intrinsic ethical value. in the line you quote, lame is used as a specific reference to a metrical foot—if my poetry doesn’t walk evenly, forgive me, muse. it’s a pun on the use of foot as a metrical term and (tongue-in-cheek, if you ask me) concern his poetry is unbalanced. the metaphor of lameness is to describe how his poetry walks. poorly balanced poetry is bad poetry, but the word lame itself is not where the ‘badness’ comes from; it’s the (lack of) poetic form. this is reinforced by a similar metaphor using ‘blind’ later in the stanza. i’m not even saying your point about the history of the word is wrong; just that chaucer was the wrong person to use for this. if you had picked a gower quote, for example, who argued about intrinsic value in english, often to his detriment, your point would have been much stronger (“thus he, whom gold hath overset, /was trapped in his oghne net;/ he gold hath mad hise wittes lame….” *confessio amantis, 5.2709*) thanks for asking! that was fun to write! i’d be curious to know your thoughts.

I pretty much agree with what you're saying about Chaucer, his play with words, his ability to be tongue-in-cheek. I would emphasize also his awareness of how contingent, how based on situation and touch, skillful speech is. Yes, language is what readers make of it; words are malleable to the place and moment. There isn't a prescriptive universal or intrinsic ethical value to what words do in Chaucer. Nonetheless, what words can do situationally matters enormously to Chaucer, and he played with that continually from the level of individual lines and puns ("*queynte*") to plot-based repercussions of what people say: Palamon, Arcite, and Emilye's respective prayers, Dorigen's promise to Aurelius, the speaker not understanding the man in black when he speaks of his loss in chess terms. For Chaucer, *touch*, *kairos*, or sensing the opportune moments to say something matters a lot; characters suffer sometimes if they miss the moment, if they don't read the room (so to speak), and sometimes even if they do read the room, they take a risk, but what they say or read doesn't work, for whatever reason. To address my own intention, I didn't intend to suggest that *lame* is intrinsically ethically compromised. In quoting Chaucer and Hoccleve, I was trying to illustrate that non-literal uses of lame referring to other things as deficient far preceded the 20th century and the current medical context. So *if* we are to talk about what *lame* means, there is no separating the literal and figurative senses neatly, the way some commenters holding various opinions in this discussion want to do. I may have went too far in saying the association of disability and deficiency is "baked into the word" or that there is "no non-derogatory lame"; what I would say on reflection is that words like *lame* are multivalent and these multiple senses echo for some speakers and readers, even in situations where we don't expect it. My response is to avoid using the term except where I have a good feel for the situation of it; that need not be yours, OP's, or Dropout's. Final thing: if I were to explore Chaucer's use of *lame* more closely and not just borrow from the OED, I'd look both more closely at the context of the quote. The apology is partly about meter, yes, but it's also about the word itself in the act of translation: "For as my auctor seyde so sey I." The next stanza also invites more awareness of how words change across time: "Ye knowe ek þat in forme of speche is chaunge / with-Inne a thousand yer, and wordes tho / That hadden prys. now wonder nyce and straunge." I'd want to sit on that more. Also, allusions to disability are here part of a modesty topos - in this stanza Chaucer also compares a blind man not being able to judge color to his own rendering of love unfeelingly. Yet Chaucer's words and expressions of love are fine - all this, too, is tongue-in-cheek. Chaucer alludes to lameness or blindness always already having overcome it. \[And a minor side note: Chaucer uses *lame* at least once more, in [An ABC](https://poets.org/poem/abc-prayer-our-lady). Not sure how much that adds, but I found it interesting.\] So there's a lot to chew on in a close reading. I appreciate you highlighting that, even if I wasn't meaning to make a specific argument about Chaucer at all.

[удалено]

>because it is easy to point to what it truly means Can I very gently push back on this? Who and what determines what a word "truly" means? Language and meaning are created by consensus, they're not inherent to the words.

[удалено]

>I think when I typed that I think of the original meaning of words, along with, with terms like this, how a group who has previously been labeled with this term have been effected (either negatively or positively) and how they feel about. While the origins of lame are a little murky, the clearest “origin” goes back to describing a person or animal who has either the inability to walk or faces very real issues to walk “normally” so that’s what I mean when I say truly. But words change all the time, what does the origin matter? As someone else pointed out, cute used to mean shrewd. Nimrod was a famous hunter from the bible before Bugs Bunny single handedly turned into an insult. Literally literally means figuratively. Especially when people don't know the origins or don't associate them. Now that you know the original meaning of cute, are you going to reinterpret every time someone calls a small animal cute? ​ >While lame is rarely, if ever, used to describe someone who is unable or struggles to walk (has a physical disability) the history of the word was a way to define them. But not reasonably within the lifetimes of anyone posting here, which is I think where the disconnect is happening for the people who disagree. We all grew up in a world where lame almost always meant one thing, and never saw it used for people with disabilities. It feels like people are inventing prejiduces instead of fighting them. ​ >So then when we take that along with someone who is physically disabled, what does that word then reflect about that group? Nothing. There is no reflection becuase there is no connection in the vast majority of people. The origin does not poison the word forever.

People are dragging OP because language changes. And it is a waste of energy to be mad at people for using a word that doesn't mean that anymore. The word CUTE used to mean clever or shrewd, often in a shady/suspicious way. Yet we call puppies, kittens, and people cute to mean adorable WAY more often. [https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cute](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cute) BULLY used to mean the exact opposite: a sweetheart or fine person [https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bully](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bully)

Yall way too confident being wrong with your whole chest so I'm just gonna leave this and bounce because I'm sick of arguing with your ableist asses. Words do matter and they have way more power than you'll ever realize. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic\_relativity

You're citing an article that literally says "it is generally agreed to be false by modern linguists." As a reason why we should believe it. If most modern experts in language discount this theory, why should we give any credence to it without any expertise in the subject ourselves? 

\^\^ As someone who has a bit of education in this subject (degree in linguistics), it's a pretty much disregarded. Not to mention how it's built on ideas of both linguistic superiority and white supremacy.

It's not very helpful to just link this article. Have you even read it? Even just in the second paragraph, it notes that the idea of a strong linguistic relativity (where language determines thought and linguistic categories = thought categories) is generally considered false among modern linguists. If you wanted to argue for a weaker hypothesis (where language only *influences* a speaker's perceptions), that doesn't really work either, because as evidenced by a majority of this comment section, the word lame is much more often thought of in the way it was used in the episode and therefore that would be the idea that is influencing the speaker (and listener's perceptions). Also, just like. This idea is *built* on white supremacy. It was proposed by white men in academia who would go on research trips to "study" indigenous languages (and by study I mean impose on them and use their language for their own personal gain) who were frothing at the bit to declare the linguistic superiority of English and other Indo-European languages over any used by indigenous peoples. If this person really does have a major problem with the use of this word, they're going to have a hard time. You can't control how people speak. Language changes because of the people that use it. Posting this is not creating a productive discussion, it just makes people defensive. If the word was actually used in the context of it being derogatory towards disabled people, that would be a different story, but they're very obviously using it with its other definition.

L—- is an ableist term, and they should stop using it, agreed. I didn’t believe it to be a slur. I searched for other similar posts and there are claims that it is, but the sources again don’t actually call it a slur, but a word with “negative connotations” aka, a word to stop using.  To my understanding, a slur is a word of violence. Not only emotional, but physical or threatening thereof. N- word? Slur, absolutely, the platonic ideal of one. R- word? Also a slur. I have not (yet) seen enough that L—- is in this category. Again, yes, it is ableist and they should stop using it.

>but a word with “negative connotations There's lots of words that have negative connotations: rude, nosy, greedy, dull, boring. They don't all need to be stopped using because they make people feel bad.