golfrewind.com

LOL, that's also part of Carlin's routine. He says that there's nothing wrong with the word cripples, especially since there are Bible translations that say "Jesus healed the cripples", etc. He says that he has heard them called "differently abled." He says you can't even call them "handicapped." If you do, they'll respond with, "We're not handicapped, we're HANDI-CAPABLE!" LOL. I seriously always thought he was making something up about the "differently abled" part. That's pretty funny that they are actually using that term.

PC? There is an obvious difference between 'toilet paper' being replaced with 'bathroom tissue' (as noted below) and using the word 'retard'. If you feel avoiding these derogatory descriptions of physically and mentally challenged people is over-the-top and unnecessary political correctness, keep going around referring to people as retards. Sooner or later you will say it to the wrong parent and find out the hard way. Good luck.

I am going to log off now and go home before I get myself any more infuriated than I am already.

I've heard his routine on this. It's very funny. That part about the differently abled is true, though. I don't know how many people they've convinced/coerced into using it but they are serious for sure.

No, calling someone a retard is deragotory, but calling them " mentally retarded" is not in my opinion, at least if you are being dead serious and not meaning it in a joking way but rather in the actual way. There is such a thing as telling the truth and not trying to hide things behind soft language. Calling them mentally challenged does NOT change the condition (another rant by Carlin) and it never will change the condition. As he points out, by changing the "shell shock" condition and trying to soften its harshness as much as possible, we ended up pretty much ignoring many veterans after Vietnam - which is truly unfortunate. We may have good intentions, but sometimes being blunt in describing things helps to prevent such things or aid progress against those things (whatever they may be).

Having said that, I agree that using the term "retard" is very derogatory and it's wrong in my opinion.

I moved this over here. We've moved pretty far away from any golf talk. I agree with Dormie that using the term "retard" is a rude slur and unacceptable , especially when used to describe someone with a mental disability, though I have to agree with TTU that the term "mentally retarded" while maybe not medically accurate in many cases, should not be considered derogatory. The best course, IMO, is to call folks what they want to be called, regardless.

Not necessarily, because we can only bend over backwards so far in our efforts not to offend someone. Some people are so "offendable" that they will actively seek out ways to be outraged, and I have no desire to try and talk around these people's feelings. My right to free speech is Constitutionally protected, their right to not be offended or have their feelings hurt is not. Polite society dictates that I make some effort to be sensitive, but in the end, it all comes down to the above.

As far as the word "retarded" goes, I understand the feelings some people have towards that word. I've done a lot of work with the Special Olympics, and am sensitive to the issues surrounding it. That said, I think you are seeing a change in the word's meaning, partially because a whole generation now has grown up not being able to use it in its original meaning. The word "retarded" to them (me), just means "Stupid" with no mental handicap conotation. The sensitive person will try not to use it, yes, but for many people of my age and younger, the word doesn't have much connection with a mental condition because society has tried to hard to break that connection. In other words, society is kind of a victim of their own success here.

There are other similar words, such as s-u-c-k-s (I hope the mods let that stay, I feel this is an appropriate way to discuss the word), which used to have a very sexual connotation, but to Gen-X and younger, now just means "stupid." Many kids, especially, don't even know how it would relate to sex, but they do know it means stupid, and use it as such. The other word is "g-a-y", and therein has the same situation: we have come up with so many euphemisms that the original word (along with q-u-e-e-r) no longer means, in many young peoples' minds, what it does to others, and they see little problem in using it.

I think this is a problem the PC crowd has brought onto themselves. In their efforts to "stamp out" certain words, they have only changed their meaning, and made them even more common. I think that people need to be sensitive in how they use the words, but at the same time, the PC crazies need to consider that the meanings have changed, and not go completey nuts whenever the words are used in their "new" context.

If David Duval had said in a press conference that he played like a woman on the first day, would all the women be up in arms?

And what would Hootie say to that?

All over the world the same phrase can mean different things, so to keep everyone happy lets just say nothing. HAH!!!!!!!!!!

Any attempt to sterilize the English language so that nothing we say will ever offend someone is doomed to fail. Especially with so many regional and international differences.

I learned this lesson when I was 11 years old. We had been living in South Africa for about 2 weeks, and I was just getting used to the new school I was attending, an English speaking elementary school. We were playing rugby during lunch break one day, a first for me, and during a scrum one of the guys got popped in the nose with a flying elbow. He was bleeding profusely, so I ran to get a teacher.

When I found the lady watching over the playground, I told her, "Miss Lotz! Peter has a bloody nose!". Well, her face went white as a sheet, and she grabbed me by the arm and marched me to the headmaster's (principal's) office! It took several minutes, 3 strikes with the bamboo handle of a feather duster, and much hemming and hawing for them to finally explain how terrible the word "bloody" was, and that it was not to be used by boys my age, or gentlemen of any age! I have no recollection if anyone ever helped Peter with his bleeding proboscis!

At least Tiger didn't give the "OK" sign (index finger to thumb, other 3 fingers outstretched) to the media. There are many cultures where that is quite an inflammatory gesture! In fact, we could probably do a whole thread on things that have mixed meanings in various cultures! Might be interesting!

I don't read the red bannered tabloids but did notice that headline in whsmiths whilst in the queue to pay for my latest golf magazine & my reaction to their reaction of Tigers comment was "So what".

Political over correctness has gone way too far in this country. I mean, you are not actually supposed to call spastics spastics any more anyway & it was common years ago if someone did something really daft & stupid to call them a spaz or spastic, it wasn't actually anything to do with anyone with the Spastic condition itself.

**** never mind the likes of the Sun, Star & Mirror, I probably wouldn't take a great deal of notice of any opinions in the Daily Mail or Express either.

I think Tiger can quite easily ignore British gutter tabloids & assume that golfing fans, whether or not a fan of Tigers will make their own minds up about anything he says or does & will also ignore the silly & petty opinions of newspapers that are far from guiltless on any quarter.

"...don't say retard. we prefer to be called 'little people' because there is
nothing wrong with being mentally challenged."

Just tossing in some Peter Griffin wisdom to (hopefully) lighten the mood.

Yeah, the biggest problem I have with this so-called newspaper is that they don't even understand Tiger's Arnie impression being a joke, so they obviously don't understand American culture in the first place. That right there really kills their credibility. The fact that everyone seems to consider them a tabloid puts them in the negative category in terms of credibility with me. If they understood American culture, they'd know that Tiger didn't mean to offend anyone. Like I said before, he's probably like me and has grown up with that sort of word in the culture and does not know that it has such a negative connotation from the past involving a bad disease.

Anyhow, I wonder what would happen here in America if a British golfer were to say that he was going to smoke a fag or something? That could easily be taken out of context, but hopefully our press (even the tabloids) would be more responsible and understand the cultural differences (I can't say American journalists would be more responsible, given the fact that they feed us garbage every day of the week LOL).

I agree with you Chris.
there is a acquantance who was going thru a sexual transformation over a period of time- from female to male. I refered to this person as "she" when in a conversation. I later heard that "he" was apalled and disgraced that I referred to to "him" as "she". Human nature took over as emarrasment and guilt engulfed my conscious. Then, after a short period I realized how silly these feelings were. Why should I feel bad about calling a she a she? From then on I made a point of saying "he" to him. Then I had no problem. But this, after he acted in anger towards me- and raised a stink about it that,in turn, got other people involved.

Now, I look back and wonder if I'm the one who should have been angered by this. I think that people like him also have a responsibility to tolerance, a tolerance that people might not understand - where there intentions are in the right place. if someone would only put those feelings aside and take a moment to educate, instead of finding ways to be insulted, alot of these "mistakes" would have some kind of resolution, and make both parties better people in general.

I see the story's now on BBC Online. I'm surprised he said it, to be honest.

"American culture", my guess is, no-one who's spouted this narrow-minded tripe works at IMG. Tiger's a giijillionaire because he's a WORLD icon - he'd get a lot less from his endorsements if he were merely a US-only sports figure. If you're going to get paid by the world, best learn how to communicate it.

Also, the English golfer saying he's going to "smoke a fag", though lifted from my light-hearted post, is skewed also - try this on : S Garcia - "Yeah, I hit the ball well, but putted like a fag.". Then there'd (rightly) be an uproar.

This, to me, goes a little beyond PC (simply nixing words from common language in the off chance they'll cause offence) - Tiger used the word to illustrate that he didn't just putt poorly, but he putted like a flailing sub-human. It's WHY he used the word, though not consciously knowing what he was doing (I say this with all conviction, because, love or hate Tiger Woods, he would never EVER knowingly cause offence in this manner). It was a faux pas, nothing more. Newsworthy, perhaps. Hanging offence, no.

My mom actually works with special needs high school students, and that's what she calls them - special needs. IMO any description or label using the word "retard" should be considered derogatory; "retard" means "slow" in French, the origin of the word, and I can't think of any instance where it is a positive denotation to call somebody "slow". Thus, any use of the R-word isn't kosher by my PC standards.

I'm normally the most anti-PC person you'll meet, but that's one thing I won't let go of; a) because of my mother and her job, and b) because people with special needs can't defend themselves when faced with slurs like that.

Having worked in special education for over 14 years, it is amazing how many times the terms for children with exceptionalities have changed. When I first started out it was acceptable to refer to someone as "handicapped". Then they decided that "handicapped" might imply that the person was some sort of beggar on the street with with a cap in hand asking for money. Then we used "disabled", but I forgot what uproar that caused so they changed it to "whatever-challenged". Now in my school district it is "exceptionality".

Each time a change was made for special ed classifications, all the old forms had to be thrown out and new ones made. The problem is, when we fill out all the many, many documents for the student's records, there has to be a doctor's diagnosis involved to classify the child. Of course, the doctor's diagnosis is not made in PC terms - the child maybe diagnosed as mentally retarded, so they have a team of educational experts that have to decide how to fit the diagnosis into the "correct" terminology for the school records. All of this is a huge expense in the school system's budget. I wish I had stock in the company that gets to revise the forms every couple years.