>Why would you think I'd continue to say it after realizing I'd inadvertently hurt the kid's feelings?

I don't think you would continue using it, that was the point I was making and it sounds like you now agree with me that we shouldn't be knowingly offensive.

▲

chucksmash 2 hours ago | parent [-]

And my point is that I went out of my way not to use it any more in that circumstance.

Yet in the years since, I still talk about poor decisionmaking, poor luck, poor performance, and poor word choice. Because it would be poor logic to go through life auditing everything I say just in case a middle schooler with a somewhat poor vocabulary might mistake my meaning.

▲

slg an hour ago | parent [-]

Which brings me right back to "there is a very obvious difference between the offensiveness of 'poor' and 'retard', you obviously know that."

"Poor" has non-offensive uses so you can continue to use it in other ways. You don't need to advocate for the non-offensive uses of a slur. You know regardless of the context, some people will be offended by its use.

▲

chucksmash an hour ago | parent [-]

Mercy me, a slur? Retarded also has a non-offensive meaning. It just means slowed.

In fact, while I wasn't around at the time I'd wager that "mentally retarded" came into an official usage specifically because it was a clinical, sterile, bloodless, and utterly anodyne descriptive term. Moron, imbecile, and idiot all were once clinical terms. And then people throw them back and forth at each other to call each other stupid, they gained an offensive connotation and new terms were needed.

In 20 years will you find it absurd if people say that "differently abled" is a slur? Will you say "this is nuts, we literally came up with that term to avoid offense?" I will!

	▲	slg 3 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Try calling the next Black person you see “negro” or “colored”. The idea that nomenclature can’t evolve is bizarre.