I think the “slippery slope fallacy” is itself a fallacy. Nothing about a “slippery slope” necessarily leads one to conclude that because X happened, Y will happen.
A “slippery slope” simply means that the slope is slippery. One might slide down it, and one might hold one’s balance. Because X happened, Y MIGHT happen, and it MIGHT NOT.
@fallenchemist has used the term “slippery slope” appropriately and there is no “slippery slope fallacy” to be invoked here. Restrictions upon language MIGHT lead to unintended consequences, and it MIGHT NOT. The slope is slippery, but no one has slid down it yet.
And, I apologize for making the ^^^^ off topic comment. I agree that we should stay on topic. This is not a topic about the meaning of a “slippery slope” and any “fallacies” attributed to that phrase.
Actually, I just learned in a podcast I was listening to about a month ago that the term “Jew’s Harp” is a mangling of the original name of “Jaw’s Harp”. So I guess whether or not using the term Jew’s Harp would be offensive might require trying to find out if the changing was intended with malice or has had ill will associated in the time since. Which is a good example of exactly what the problems can be.
The mentally ill/challenged and rape survivors may very well be present in many mixed audiences. (less likely for murder victims) So, no, they are not the same.
We are constantly in the presence of people with real, true troubles. Rape victims, murder victims (family members), cancer sufferers, victims of torture (there’s another word that can be used in many trivial ways)…And we most often do not even know that these people are in our presence when we speak.
There is no one panacea for this situation, and recommending that one refrain from using a handful of words will not help. Words like, “gyp” or “n…”, etc., on the other hand, have only ONE meaning and it is bad. Most other words, not so much.
Therefore, AGAIN, the best advice is to speak with sensitivity whenever possible, and to learn through the course of trial, error, experience, to use language properly in the given context, audience, environment.
Murder is by definition the felonious homicide of another person - so yeah, I’d say it’s probably better to not say a test murdered you or you murdered a test. Killing on the other hand is a less specific/connotation heavy term so while I would personally would say “that test killed me” is ok - I would still say “that test made me want to kill myself” is less ok because now you’re moving into suicide territory which is a more specific idea with specific connotations.
To say something is a cancer - well in that case I would understand if people felt it was trivializing of cancer victims and would cease to use it in that way (although I actually already don’t) if it was brought up that way. But probably the reason why it hasn’t is because cancer and rape are two very different things. First off, one is a crime the other isn’t. Second, the victims of one are treated very differently than the victims of the other. While I’m sure it still happens with cancer victims (and probably more so with certain types of cancers vs. others), the following certainly don’t happen as much as they do for rape victims: victim blaming (how often have you heard someone ask “how do I know he didn’t want that cancer?”), questioning the victims integrity (“he’s probably just upset at her so he’s just saying he has cancer”), use of the experience as a threat of punishment (e.g. much more common for a woman to receive rape threats than cancer threats).
I completely agree with you in your last point and so does the campaign. Which is why, as I said earlier, the campaign isn’t called “don’t say these words or else you’re a bad person” it’s “words matter” and “think before you speak”
The complexities of human speech, and all the connotations that go with every single word, cannot be summed up in any campaign.
The message should simply be that each and every one of us should be careful with our speech, as we may unintentionally hurt others, even unknowingly.
Some of the examples given are silly, unfortunate, overreaching, and ineffective in my opinion. That’s where the campaign falters. It invites a bit of ridicule…but it also [HOPEFULLY] invites hearty debate and that, in itself, has value.
also, I’ll throw this out there: you just self censored the word gypped, but if you wanted to, you could write it on these forums with no repercussions. You can’t write a 4 letter synonym for feces or a 7 letter synonym for anus and go unpunished. Surely feces and anus aren’t offensive. Everyone defecates and (barring certain medical conditions) everyone does so from their anuses - yet certain synonyms are banned from these boards - not only in the sense that you can’t use them because they’ll get starred out but you’ll get punished for doing so. Yet gypped and jewed can just sit out there for everyone to see.
Does the board censor the “N” word? If so, words such as “gypped” and “jewed” could certainly fall in the same category. As well as a host of other racial and ethnic epithets.
*The problem with banning those words at this time is that discussions like this couldn’t even take place. The “g” word and the “j” word? I don’t think that works too well. Perhaps once this is a settled issue in society then banning those words makes sense. Having said that, when used inappropriately such as towards another member that person will be warned or banned. In fact I just severely warned a member who used the word “gook” as a pejorative. I strongly encourage anyone that sees such language to report it. However, I can tell you now that I won’t be warning anyone for saying to someone else “that’s just crazy”, at least not because they used the word crazy in that context.
As far as “cuss” words like @iwannabe_Brown refers to, while the use of those words in public is certainly greater than pre-1970’s, the convention is still that they are not used in open social settings such as this. Certainly people are free to start a thread challenging that notion if they wish, because also certainly there are sites that do not censor those words. The discussion might be difficult with constant euphemisms like “the f word”, but it could be had. At this time, at least, it is the decision of the owners of this site that such language is inappropriate for the types of discussions that dominate the forums.*
I laughed when I read the title and thought it was a nice joke. Until I checked the calendar and realized it wasn’t April 1st, then I facepalmed.
Dumb. Waste of money.