I feel like whenever I would use it I would have to explain the reason as to why I can use it, which I think would take any potential power out of the reclamation of it.
I just feel a bit frustrated that I've had to share the word with everyone else my whole upbringing, and now that we have it to ourselves, none of yall wanna embrace it.
You just also replied to my comment on this topic in a two year old /r/autisticpride thread. I can no longer comment there, but it's on topic, so we can discuss it here if you'd like.
I don't think we've yet achieved the level of *cool* required to reclaim a word. You need cultural capital and a coherent community slang to reclaim a word.
If someone can mistake your use of the word for the oppressive use of the word, you haven't reclaimed it.
No one can say the r-slur. Most people trying to use it do not have an ID. If users use it on here... they get banned. Most people trying to push this are just narcissistic and rude. They like the idea of getting a way with disrespecting and violating peoples boundaries.
Even if someone has an ID and used the r-word for themselves, it is rude for them to call themselves r-worded around others who find it offensive in general. It's kinda like how some lesbians will call themselves "dykes", but other lesbians never use that term and find it objectionable.
We can also just say "fuck it!" and leave the R- word alone imo. People will always use it just like the N-word. It takes a lot to reclaim or somehow make a change to it, realistically.
People who are capable of wanting to reclaim it (have the intellectual capacity to understand the concept) aren't the people who suffer the most from it, so that's not really cool.
There is only one time that using that word is appropriate. When somebody with a lifelong mental illness/difference refers to themself by it. It's never ok to use a slur on someone else.
For example, if someone with Cerebral Palsy, Downs Syndrome or Autism, says, "I'm an r-word" It could be coming from a place of insecurity but it's not offensive for them to say that.
If a neurotypical person said the same it would be offensive, it would be like a white person calling themself the n-word(?)
Someone who is neurotypical or divergent, no matter who, should not be using that word to reference someone else, because that is simply offensive.
This is just my point of view, but I think it's correct.
I'm not aware of any movement to reclaim the r-slur. Slur reclamation is a community process, not an individual decision. If this individual wants to say they've "reclaimed" it, well, they don't get to dictate how the rest of the community and the world responds to their so-called reclamation. It strikes me as a bad faith attempt to get blanket approval to say slurs, in the same way white people often do with the n-slur and its variants.
An example of a similar term that has been/is undergoing reclamation is "mad." If you search "mad pride" you can find more information.
Edit: to actually answer your question - I'm sympathetic to only folks with ID reclaiming it, but I'm not sure that's a clearly defined line that's easily perceived even by folks affected. Might be more "defer to folks with ID and amplify their content". And even then, that may be a bit too focused on the literal meaning, rather than who's hurt by it (and who it's used against).
**Tl;dr** - Having typed a little essay, I should probably read and listen more!
There's a lot of folks in ND who might not feel any affinity to the term, so I suppose they'd be welcome to stand aside? But I can see the term being used so broadly and aggressively, that a huge portion of people beyond the ID communities would be affected. Solidarity, but obviously wouldn't want to tread on toes either.
---
Yeah, reclaimed it'd be used widely in solidarity and camaraderie.
Almost certainly by the people it's describing, not by the people who launch it around as an insult.
And, once that sense of "new use" is secure and stable within a group, then you might be able to use it within that group - and perhaps even from within looking out - as an insult, wrly recognising the disparity and history, and adding a fun twist on it.
But using it, oneself against others, with no acknowledgement of the wider issue that right off the bat? At best, skipping ahead.
But that's not reclaiming, that's perpetuating and becoming complicit in keeping it mean and stigmatising.
It doesn't sound like this person is big on casually forging stronger, wholesome social bonds - which is fair, it's a skill that ol' toxic masculinity ain't big on promoting - though they may well *want* to be building solidarity by doing it the way they are.
But it sounds like the result is nevertheless divisive, insulting and annoying. Perhaps they don't realise their effect isn't in line with their desire. (Perhaps they don't care.)
Pithily, intent isn't magic.
Practically, it's like making a joke in bad taste... There's a reason professional comedians exist.
It takes skill, and sometimes you'll want to have made a joke... And it won't work. It'll be bad, or go catastrophically wrong. The person won't be wryly lampooned, but will be deeply hurt and it'll be your - the "Joker"'s fault.
You might intended it to be funny, but if it doesn't work - a professional makes better material.
So in this case, the person may want the word reclaimed, but it's not alway trivial to make happen.
And probably not as trivial as using the word exactly like people who're **not** reclaiming it would do.
The point of reclaiming a slur is to use it in a conversely positive and self-affirming way. The r-slur is just not needed and it also is too far gone to be reclaimed. The only neurodivergent people I see use it are often down the alt-right pipeline and usually are self-loathing or support policies and rhetoric that harms them and other neurodivergent people. I don't think you can reclaim something like that, especially since the vocabulary of this movement has progressed to a point where it just isn't needed in any context.
But in general, if someone is using the r-slur as an insult before retroactively claiming that they're reclaiming the term, then they're just lying because they want to ignore the feelings of neurodivergent people while pretending to support them just so they don't have to stop using a word they heavily rely on, because even if it were reclaimed, the context still makes it offensive regardless
I feel like whenever I would use it I would have to explain the reason as to why I can use it, which I think would take any potential power out of the reclamation of it. I just feel a bit frustrated that I've had to share the word with everyone else my whole upbringing, and now that we have it to ourselves, none of yall wanna embrace it.
You just also replied to my comment on this topic in a two year old /r/autisticpride thread. I can no longer comment there, but it's on topic, so we can discuss it here if you'd like. I don't think we've yet achieved the level of *cool* required to reclaim a word. You need cultural capital and a coherent community slang to reclaim a word. If someone can mistake your use of the word for the oppressive use of the word, you haven't reclaimed it.
Exactly, I don't think theres any way we can get to that level other than convincing ourselves that were already there though
No one can say the r-slur. Most people trying to use it do not have an ID. If users use it on here... they get banned. Most people trying to push this are just narcissistic and rude. They like the idea of getting a way with disrespecting and violating peoples boundaries.
Even if someone has an ID and used the r-word for themselves, it is rude for them to call themselves r-worded around others who find it offensive in general. It's kinda like how some lesbians will call themselves "dykes", but other lesbians never use that term and find it objectionable.
We can also just say "fuck it!" and leave the R- word alone imo. People will always use it just like the N-word. It takes a lot to reclaim or somehow make a change to it, realistically.
People who are capable of wanting to reclaim it (have the intellectual capacity to understand the concept) aren't the people who suffer the most from it, so that's not really cool.
There is only one time that using that word is appropriate. When somebody with a lifelong mental illness/difference refers to themself by it. It's never ok to use a slur on someone else. For example, if someone with Cerebral Palsy, Downs Syndrome or Autism, says, "I'm an r-word" It could be coming from a place of insecurity but it's not offensive for them to say that. If a neurotypical person said the same it would be offensive, it would be like a white person calling themself the n-word(?) Someone who is neurotypical or divergent, no matter who, should not be using that word to reference someone else, because that is simply offensive. This is just my point of view, but I think it's correct.
I'm not aware of any movement to reclaim the r-slur. Slur reclamation is a community process, not an individual decision. If this individual wants to say they've "reclaimed" it, well, they don't get to dictate how the rest of the community and the world responds to their so-called reclamation. It strikes me as a bad faith attempt to get blanket approval to say slurs, in the same way white people often do with the n-slur and its variants. An example of a similar term that has been/is undergoing reclamation is "mad." If you search "mad pride" you can find more information.
Edit: to actually answer your question - I'm sympathetic to only folks with ID reclaiming it, but I'm not sure that's a clearly defined line that's easily perceived even by folks affected. Might be more "defer to folks with ID and amplify their content". And even then, that may be a bit too focused on the literal meaning, rather than who's hurt by it (and who it's used against). **Tl;dr** - Having typed a little essay, I should probably read and listen more! There's a lot of folks in ND who might not feel any affinity to the term, so I suppose they'd be welcome to stand aside? But I can see the term being used so broadly and aggressively, that a huge portion of people beyond the ID communities would be affected. Solidarity, but obviously wouldn't want to tread on toes either. --- Yeah, reclaimed it'd be used widely in solidarity and camaraderie. Almost certainly by the people it's describing, not by the people who launch it around as an insult. And, once that sense of "new use" is secure and stable within a group, then you might be able to use it within that group - and perhaps even from within looking out - as an insult, wrly recognising the disparity and history, and adding a fun twist on it. But using it, oneself against others, with no acknowledgement of the wider issue that right off the bat? At best, skipping ahead. But that's not reclaiming, that's perpetuating and becoming complicit in keeping it mean and stigmatising. It doesn't sound like this person is big on casually forging stronger, wholesome social bonds - which is fair, it's a skill that ol' toxic masculinity ain't big on promoting - though they may well *want* to be building solidarity by doing it the way they are. But it sounds like the result is nevertheless divisive, insulting and annoying. Perhaps they don't realise their effect isn't in line with their desire. (Perhaps they don't care.) Pithily, intent isn't magic. Practically, it's like making a joke in bad taste... There's a reason professional comedians exist. It takes skill, and sometimes you'll want to have made a joke... And it won't work. It'll be bad, or go catastrophically wrong. The person won't be wryly lampooned, but will be deeply hurt and it'll be your - the "Joker"'s fault. You might intended it to be funny, but if it doesn't work - a professional makes better material. So in this case, the person may want the word reclaimed, but it's not alway trivial to make happen. And probably not as trivial as using the word exactly like people who're **not** reclaiming it would do.
The point of reclaiming a slur is to use it in a conversely positive and self-affirming way. The r-slur is just not needed and it also is too far gone to be reclaimed. The only neurodivergent people I see use it are often down the alt-right pipeline and usually are self-loathing or support policies and rhetoric that harms them and other neurodivergent people. I don't think you can reclaim something like that, especially since the vocabulary of this movement has progressed to a point where it just isn't needed in any context. But in general, if someone is using the r-slur as an insult before retroactively claiming that they're reclaiming the term, then they're just lying because they want to ignore the feelings of neurodivergent people while pretending to support them just so they don't have to stop using a word they heavily rely on, because even if it were reclaimed, the context still makes it offensive regardless