[Closed] Is stupid still an acceptable term?

I reckon less than 50% have lower intelligence than the norm so you would be picking on a minority.

I seem to remember that it is okay to hate a particular minority as long as you don't discriminate against them or act on your hatred.

Sounds a bit stupid to me

[i]Don't we all have our place in society, whatever our capabilities ? [/i]
No.

is it fair to discriminate against them and ridicule them,

Yes. Like fat people and the religious too.

Next!

As I look at the world I live in, with its greed, its status obsessions, celebrity and consumer culture etc, I think that stupidity is an ASPIRATION, not a negative.
( I'm not admitting to being any better BTW, I'm as fick as the best of you! 🙂

I can go along with that.
I think there's lots of people out there who are thicker than stupid and so for whom stupidity would definitely be an aspirational IQ target .

😉

WCA

I reckon less than 50% have lower intelligence than the norm so you would be picking on a minority.

Reckon not; I'd say that EXACTLY 50% have below average intelligence so its not a minority [b]or[/b] a majority ....

Is there a word for that (an equality maybe :o)

Yes. Like fat people and the religious too.

well, one might argue that there was at least a degree of choice about those attributes, but one cannot will oneself cleverer

Reckon not; I'd say that EXACTLY 50% have below average intelligence

my understanding of how a mean is calculated might not necessarily result in an exact 50/50 split, however, I think this is beside the point - even if the people being discriminated against for some characteristic were in the majority, would this then be any more justifiable ?

On the official* scale:

A person with an IQ of 0-25 is an "idiot".
A person with an IQ of 26-50 is an "imbecile"
A person with an IQ of 51-70 is a "moron".

No idea where "stupid" features on this scale.

 
[size=1]* the long deprecated Goddard scale that is.[/size]

Im too clever to reply to this troll, but too stupid to come up with a witty response. A bit 50:50 really.

Reckon not; I'd say that EXACTLY 50% have below average intelligence so its not a minority or a majority ....

That rather depends on which definition of average you are using. To give an example, more than 50% of people in the UK earn less than the average (mean) wage.

My children genuinely think "stupid" is a swear word. My 7 year old complained of someone using the "S-word"- turned out he meant "stupid" rather than any other profanity. This wasn't something I'd discussed with him before, so must have been re-inforced at school!

No idea where "stupid" features on this scale

well, I was implying inclusion of any any term implying reduced intelligence...

How would you define stupid...we have all done stupid things. Even very clever people can be stupid so stupidity is not necessarily a measure of intellligence. So I reckon its acceptable to call someone stupid if thats what their being. So dont be so stupid 🙄

How would you define stupid...we have all done stupid things. Even very clever people can be stupid so stupidity is not necessarily a measure of intellligence

or to quote Forrest Gump "Momma says stupid is as stupid does"

Stupid will be banned soon. Remember when people were mentally retarded, well now they have learning difficulties. Soon that will be banned and we will have to call them something else. Perhaps it will go full circle and they will be called morons.

My favourite has always been "hard of thinking"

Im too clever to reply to this troll

while I'll admit it's partially a sideswipe at ernie and junkyard who seem much exercised about racial descriptors but relaxed about accusations of stupidity, it also reflects the outcome of my epiphany over fattism last week

simonfbarnes, gonefishin.
I was (obviously) using the definition of "average" that implies that what I said is completely correct.

To do otherwise would be .. well .. you know 😉

The 50% thing - If there is one person or more who is exactly on the 50% mark then there will be less than 50% of people more stupid and less than 50% less stupid.

It is a bit like the fact I have more legs than the UK average. Well it isn't but I love confusin statistics.

I'll admit it's partially a sideswipe at ernie and junkyard who seem much exercised about racial descriptors but relaxed about accusations of stupidity

Well a quick search of the word "stupid" under all posts by ernie_lynch, reveals that I last used the word 10 days ago to describe Nick Griffin (with reference to his performance on QT)

Has my criticism of Nick Griffin 'capabilities' being playing on your mind ever since ?

WorldClassAccident
You can use the definition of the median without having to get caught up in the practicalities of calculating it.
(odd numbers of people, skewing effect of Daily Mail readers, people who can't be measured because they ate the pencil (see reference to Nick G. above), etc etc).

I like "stupid" as a word, it is, almost uniquely just about rude enough, but still not such a swear word that you can't use it when your Mum's in the room.

Well a quick search of the word "stupid" ...

I was thinking of these terms:

You really are a goof-brain Berm
You really ain't the full ticket mate

Has my criticism of Nick Griffin 'capabilities' being playing on your mind ever since ?

my point being not that some people shouldn't be insulted, but that if they are the terms used should not disadvantage other, unrelated groups. As far as I could see NG is of normal intellect, however nasty he may be.

I am comfortable with the fact that around 95% of the population are more stupid than me. It isn't too burdensome.

Im comfortable with the fact that ourmaninthenorth is more stupid than me.

😉

Is it acceptable?

Not if you're the one being called stupid!

So much variation within intelligence.

I asked one guy to stop calling a Halfords staff member 'thicko' as he was so ammused at this. He stopped laughing, then I ridiculed him-which made his GF laugh and he walked off red faced!

Treat others as you wish to be treated. No need for insults.

Im comfortable with the fact that ourmaninthenorth is more stupid than me.

Excellent. At least we all know where we stand, eh! 😀

I was thinking of these terms:

And yet you conveniently miss out that this was in response to me being called the "Thought Police".

A term which was used to describe me because apparently, I had the audacity to suggest the word "half-caste" wasn't "racist", but "merely impolite".

And incidentally SFB, it's hardly an example of me being [i]" much exercised about racial descriptors "[/i] as you claim.

🙄

[i]Don't we all have our place in society, whatever our capabilities ? [/i]

Don't be stupid. Oh, errr...
😉

I only needed to get to the 3rd and 4th posts to see the answers I wanted to see. It was all summed up in those 2 posts, well done. 8)

Ian Munro - Member

Don't we all have our place in society, whatever our capabilities ?
No.

Stoner - Member

is it fair to discriminate against them and ridicule them,

Yes. Like fat people and the religious too.

Next!

BTW SFB.........how do you know that the term "goof-brain" is offensive ?

It is a term that I had never heard of before, which I simply made up myself, for that particular post.

And do you know what "not the full ticket" means ?

And do you know what "not the full ticket" means ?

well, one might surmise they were not intended to be complimentary

It's ok so long as you spell it STOOPID of course

Thick is a better word than stupid............
stupid can mean too many things....
stupid as in a person is stupid
stupid as in stupid actions...........
and we all do stupid things simon, dont we........... 🙄

....not intended to be complimentary

And it's not intended to be in insulting either - merely an observation. In the same vein as "a sandwich short of a picnic".

And btw, it was in reference to him waffling on about prince Charles not being allowed to marry a Chinese Catholic, on a thread which asked if the term "half-caste" was ok to use.

think we need to differentiate between calling someone stupid and saying they have stupid ideas - first implies incapable of logic and moral reasoning - the second that they have corrupt logic and morals

And yet you conveniently miss out that this was in response to me being called the "Thought Police".

Brilliant : I think you've made a bit of an assumption there that that phrase was aimed at you ernie. If you check my orignal use of the term there is no reference to you, in fact by your own posting we were actually in agreement on the salient point. However, you then weighed in telling me what I may or may not think. . So I guess from then on its a case of if the cap fits you should probably wear it with good grace.

Now about this stupid business........ 😉

this thread reminds me of...
[img] [/img]

🙂

[i]is it fair to discriminate against them and ridicule them, making their lives less happy - and to use words describing reduced intelligence as insults ?[/i]

3 points:

- Ridiculing people is generally over-done and the world would be better if it was done rather less.

- "discrimination" is a negative thing when it is done for reasons we regard as irrational in the context. If you are choosing soldiers to award the VC to, it is unjust to rule out those who are ginger, but perfectly just to rule out those who are cowardly. Much of the way our society organises itself rewards (a certain degree of) intelligence (definitions of which vary). Stupidity/intelligence is not an arbitrary characteristic. The individual may have little control over it, but it is not irrelevant, it is a fundamental determinant of how well the individual does at many things. Compare this with, say, being black. All else being equal, a black man may fail at somethign because obstacles are placed in his path by bigots. A stupid man will fail because he cannot achieve what he needs to do. Stupidity is a predictor of whether someone can do particular things. Blackness isn't.

(There are other circumstances, other societys in which brute strength or savage cruelty or physical courage are similarly important. But again, in such situations, weakness, cowardice or execessive scruples are actually predictors of whether the individual can do something necessary for success, not arbitrary).

3 - Many people are abused not for [i]being[/i] stupid, but for behaving in a stupid way. I quite agree that bollocking someone with mild learning difficulties for being "stupid" is horrible, but doing the same to someone who should be thinking better and isn't is not the same. A huge number of instances of ridiculing for stupidity are of this type - the stupidity being criticised is discretionary denseness.

I reckon. 🙂

All else being equal, a black man may fail at somethign because obstacles are placed in his path by bigots. A stupid man will fail because he cannot achieve what he needs to do

the exception being the public school system where a bunch of bigots manage to promote sufficient self confidence in stupid people that they can be successful

its all contextual - as said discretionary denseness deserves attack - a kid who is a poor reader with low self esteem never deserves to be called stupid

Berm Bandit - Member

I think you've made a bit of an assumption there that that phrase was aimed at you ernie.

Too right I did. You said, quote :

"[i]I can't ever remember any person to whom those non PC words apply challenging their use, its almost invariably a plain clothes member of the thought Police.[/i]"

You are very clearly saying that anyone who suggests that the term "half-caste" is impolite, is part of the "Thought Police".

What you think matters more than what you say. If you take offence to things I say I reckon your stupid to be upset by someone elses point of view. Thats quite different to taking offence to racial discrimination say in the form I encountered while growing up in South Africa and Zim.

We should encourage open and frank debate without the cencorship of banning words etc. Get it out, discuss it and then make up your mind based on good rational debate.

Banning the word fat for example, so we have to substitue it for large is plain stupid.

And it's not intended to be in insulting either - merely an observation. In the same vein as "a sandwich short of a picnic".

I think that sounds disingenuous, in the same way that saying someone had ‘A touch of the tar’, merely implied they had a nautical ancestry. It's certainly meant to convey some kind of deficiency.

3 - Many people are abused not for being stupid, but for behaving in a stupid way. I quite agree that bollocking someone with mild learning difficulties for being "stupid" is horrible, but doing the same to someone who should be thinking better and isn't is not the same. A huge number of instances of ridiculing for stupidity are of this type - the stupidity being criticised is discretionary denseness.

but by using that word (or any other reflecting some level of reduced intelligence) one is also disadvantaging people who [b]are[/b] stupid and cannot help it. Much in the same way someone on here recently called themselves a 'girl' because they weren't bold enough to do something, simultaneously implying that all females were cowardly too, which is obvious nonsense and derogatory to that sex.

Instead of calling someone stupid or '2 apples short of a picnic' it would be better to use a word of no clear meaning like 'numpty' or 'cockweasel', or even better just say they were misguided or confused.

But wont the word Numpty when being substituted for Stupid just be the same thing ? Or worse because it a nice way of saying stupid.

If its stupid, say so, dont beat around the bush causing confusion or blurring the meaning. Unless of course your comments are untrue, or ill founded or irational.

But if someone is stupid, well then they are stupid. Coming up with another word for it wont make them less stupid. Or am I being stupid now ?

Right, Im off now for a nice wet night ride. Some would call me stupid for riding in the dark and wet, but I reckon Im stupid enough to enjoy it.

What you think matters more than what you say.

I disagree, only you actually know what you think, possibly - often people are confused about their own motivations, opinions and beliefs. All anyone else can know is what you say and do, and the conclusions they draw from those

If you take offence to things I say I reckon your stupid to be upset by someone elses point of view. Thats quite different to taking offence to racial discrimination say in the form I encountered while growing up in South Africa and Zim.

I'm thinking more about people unable to defend themselves due to lack capacity or status

But wont the word Numpty when being substituted for Stupid just be the same thing ?

my interpretation of numpty is someone being silly or not using what facilities they have properly. It doesn't seem to imply any particular level of intellect. Imagine Einstein trying to open a door the wrong way 🙂

It's certainly meant to convey some kind of deficiency.

And ? .......... why should "some kind of deficiency" be necessarily bad or unacceptable ?

If I happened to point out that a man was deficient of one leg, despite the fact that two legs is the normal minimum requirement, would that be necessarily a bad or unacceptable thing ?

Of course not.............indeed a one-legged man has a huge advantage over a man with no legs at all.

let's not start insulting amputees...

Insulting ?

You see ............ you automatically assume that having only one leg is a bad thing 😐

And yet you conveniently miss out that this was in response to me being called the "Thought Police".

um, I don't thing being insulted justifies whatever you say back

And incidentally SFB, it's hardly an example of me being " much exercised about racial descriptors " as you claim.

well, as I mentioned before, your position appears, to me at least, to change so capriciously I have a hard time working out what you do mean, or if, indeed, you mean it. Judging by the number of posts you've made you must be exercised about something?

ton: and we all do stupid things simon, dont we...........

say rather illadvised!

I don't thing being insulted justifies whatever you say back

Well that's a given isn't it SFB ? Because as everyone knows, you are a pacifist who doesn't believe in hitting back. Although you clearly relished belittling others ......to the very highest competitive standards.

...your position appears, to me at least, to change so capriciously ...

Well it shows just how daft you are then - doesn't it ?. My position did not change one iota - why don't you check ?

Judging by the number of posts you've made you must be exercised about something?

Out of 261 posts on that thread, how many are mine - a dozen maybe ? You yourself quite possibly posted more than that.

Of course I probably would have been perfectly happy with my first 3 or 4 posts, but some geezer came on rabbiting on about the Prince Charles, the British class system, the Church of England, Diana Spencer, and accused all those who disagreed with him, of being members of Thought Police. Which caused things to drag on a little 🙂

Pillock is a good word:
Noun 1. pillock - a person who is not very bright.

Although you clearly relished belittling others ......to the very highest competitive standards.

yes, but I've stopped.

My position did not change one iota - why don't you check ?

because my attention span is insufficient to the task 🙁 And also because I find your remarks kind of slippery, leaving me wondering what you meant, and, as I said, if you really meant what you appeared to be saying (which is praise of a kind)

You yourself quite possibly posted more than that.

I never claimed I wasn't exercised

because my attention span is insufficient to the task And also because I find your remarks kind of slippery, leaving me wondering what you meant

Well let me help you then. This is what I said in my first post 4 days ago, quote :

[i]"Getting back to 'half-caste', whilst it was once acceptable, I don't think it is anymore[/i]"

Later on I said, quote :

[i]"Half-caste is merely impolite - not even racist imo, and it is a term which I've known some mixed-race people themselves to use."[/i]

And then went on to say in another post, quote :

[i]" IMO 'mixed-race' is fine, but half-caste whilst maybe not that offensive, isn't very nice."[/i]

You find that [i]slippery[/i] and you can't work out what I mean ? .... .. a bit stupid are we ?

You find that slippery and you can't work out what I mean ? .... .. a bit stupid are we ?

no, that's clear enough, but I have a feeling there was a lot more too. Perhaps in future you should just post the edited highlights for us attentionally-deficienters ?

and of course I'm not stupid, but that doesn't remove the sting felt by those who may be less intelligent, and are constantly reminded of the fact by such gibes 🙁

3 - Many people are abused not for being stupid, but for behaving in a stupid way. I quite agree that bollocking someone with mild learning difficulties for being "stupid" is horrible, but doing the same to someone who should be thinking better and isn't is not the same. A huge number of instances of ridiculing for stupidity are of this type - the stupidity being criticised is discretionary denseness.
I reckon.

the stupidity being criticised is discretionary denseness.

which is a different thing - but by calling it stupid, idiotic, whatever, how do those denied the luxury of discretionary blunders by their genes feel ? It would be different if there were no other way of expressing the criticism, but you could label it mistaken thinking (which is what it is).

Cockweasels.

sorry footie time missed this completely ..like being back at school when you were off sick this.

I used the term dimmer than I thought in reference to BermBandit who posted that only the thought police objected to the term half -caste in that thread ...despite the thread already containing posts from mixed race people saying they did object to the term. I said you are dimmer than I though you must try harder in response to that post .

In deference to you SFB[ who would have thought you were so sensitive to others feelings ?] I will use the phrase [b]mistaken thinking[/b] from now on but I think it will look a tad pompous and the recipient will be equally unhappy.
I have never called anyone on here Stupid nor been abusive to anyone on here. I dont even think I have ever called anyone dim before[ just checked and no] In fact I usually complain when discussions become abusive and agree STW is generally a bit overly ranty and abusive.
Right off to get my SFB flamed me badge took a while but finally got it.Now if I can only get TJ to give me advice on consumer rights I will have the STW set.

PS only two reference to me and stupid and one is your post SFB this is the other bit

The question was not is everyone who uses the phrase half-caste a racist - in which case the answer is NO some are just ignorant / stupid / uniformed or yet to be caught by the thought police in your view.

Which would seem an OK use of the word , and notaimed atanyone, but I now realise I should have said mistaken thinking 😉

I think this thread is stupid.

[ who would have thought you were so sensitive to others feelings ?]

quite the reverse, I have to mimic empathy through intellection 🙁

one is also disadvantaging people who are stupid and cannot help it

What a stupid question!

Sillyoldhector - Member

Cockweasels.

I was called a cockweasel and c*kmonkey by barnsleymitch, I think it was justified though.

Dullard, dimwit are both good as well.

Mummy, please make it stop.

Mummy, please make it stop.

the solution is in your hand...

Dullard, dimwit are both good as well.

surely both synonyms for stupid ?

@junkyard

I used the term dimmer than I thought in reference to BermBandit who posted that only the thought police objected to the term half -caste in that thread

What I actually said

Been reading through this thread, and a thought occured to me..... Now then, it was only the one, so leave it right there! ........ Being an old farty and all, I am prone to the odd moment of innocent-PC-lessness, in much the same way that I still think in terms of feet and inches. For that reason, I've had more than my fair share of the sound of sharp sucking in of air through teeth. However, and at long last this is my thought...... I can't ever remember any person to whom those non PC words apply challenging their use, its almost invariably a plain clothes member of the thought Police. Isn't that strange?

My reading of that, is that its not so much the words that cause offence, more the meaning behind their use.

To which you replied

you are dimmer than I realised you really must try harder.
Perhaps when no else challenges it they dont see the point as they realise everyone there is a bunch of ignorant f@ckwits, ever considered that as the reason? why not ask your wide array of diverse mates what they think of the terms 1:1 and report back.

For my money a somewhat vitriolic rant from which the rest of the thread then developed. In short apparently I'm not allowed to have that thought, and you again apparently as a self appointed member of the "Thought Police," along with Ernie have immediately resorted to online bullying to overwhelm my absolute right to both have and to express my opinion regardless of whether it is right or wrong. Rather proving my use of the term.
At no point have I said the term half-caste is either right or wrong, merely stating that words themselves are innocent, and that there are much more serious issues, which become overwhelmed by the nit picking about relatively insignificant issues. If I were trying to sideline you, I'd be very happy to push you off to that argument over semantics. Simple enough?

Thats the last post I'm going to make on the subject as I am truly fed up with the ignorant repetition and recycling of a non argument.

You lot are now being stupid. Stop going on and on and enjoy the sunshine while it lasts.

It's raining here and has been for the past few days. Proves how much you know moron. 😆

BB

again apparently as a self appointed member of the "Thought Police,"

online bullying

The whole thread is pretty unedifying for all of us andfrnakly makes us all look like pr1cks.

the truth will out :o)

I'm a bit puzzled by the 'online bullying' thing in this context. I've experienced quite heavy condemnation and many personal insults on this forum, but I've always found it highly amusing and never felt in the least threatened or disadvantaged, perhaps as I don't set great store in the personal opinions of me held by a lot of remote strangers, particularly as the ones I've subsequently met are pleasant or self effacing. Let's not encourage a victim culture here!

Is every thread now essentially about Berm Bandit's paranoia that his opinions are somehow "forbidden" rather than just "daft"? 🙂

I think its all a conspiracy.....

I'll make a note of that.

You checking up on me ? 😯