Quizzes & Puzzles10 mins ago
"Nutters" - an alternative view ...
65 Answers
EB (in her thread here - http://www.theanswerb.../Question1123029.html ) got a bit of a kicking for using the word "nutters" in the thread title.
I was going to defend her there, but hi-jacking that thread would mean she would not get any more useful answers to her original question - so I'm flying a kite here instead.
I'm a bit grumpy about the responses she got for two reasons.
* Firstly *
"nutters" is a perfectly good word and (certainly in the context in which it was used) is not demeaning of people with mental health issues. It quite nicely describes a particular type of megalomaniac, who exist so far beyond any concept of normality as to be utterly 'out there'.
The parallel with use of the 'n' word as an offensive racial epithet is just bonkers (which is, by the way, another word which I don't intend to have removed from my vocabulary by any sort of phony "eek you can't say that" hand wringing).
Context and tone are everything - "nutters" could be an offensive word in some situations, but as used by EB I don't think it should have even caused a raised eyebrow, let alone a public smacking of the legs.
* Secondly *
I especially dislike responses which seek to give themselves added value/weight by making claims on behalf of a whole community/category of people. I have (many years ago now) had my own MH problems and I was not then (and am not now) precious about the use of these words. Please don't speak on my behalf without consulting me.
I have worked extensively, both as a volunteer and professionally, supporting others with organic and functional MH illnesses and I don’t recall anyone ever taking offence at the word used by EB – in fact many people use it as an ice-breaking, tension removing, humorous self-description in otherwise difficult situations.
Yes, we have to root out bigotry and the use of language as a weapon to demean/threaten other people - but the English language is a rich store cupboard of quirky, useful, interesting, entertaining vocabulary that we should celebrate rather than seek to emasculate.
This sort of knee-jerk "compulsory blandness" risks neutering our communication and we will all be worse off if we don’t defend our right to express ourselves.
I was going to defend her there, but hi-jacking that thread would mean she would not get any more useful answers to her original question - so I'm flying a kite here instead.
I'm a bit grumpy about the responses she got for two reasons.
* Firstly *
"nutters" is a perfectly good word and (certainly in the context in which it was used) is not demeaning of people with mental health issues. It quite nicely describes a particular type of megalomaniac, who exist so far beyond any concept of normality as to be utterly 'out there'.
The parallel with use of the 'n' word as an offensive racial epithet is just bonkers (which is, by the way, another word which I don't intend to have removed from my vocabulary by any sort of phony "eek you can't say that" hand wringing).
Context and tone are everything - "nutters" could be an offensive word in some situations, but as used by EB I don't think it should have even caused a raised eyebrow, let alone a public smacking of the legs.
* Secondly *
I especially dislike responses which seek to give themselves added value/weight by making claims on behalf of a whole community/category of people. I have (many years ago now) had my own MH problems and I was not then (and am not now) precious about the use of these words. Please don't speak on my behalf without consulting me.
I have worked extensively, both as a volunteer and professionally, supporting others with organic and functional MH illnesses and I don’t recall anyone ever taking offence at the word used by EB – in fact many people use it as an ice-breaking, tension removing, humorous self-description in otherwise difficult situations.
Yes, we have to root out bigotry and the use of language as a weapon to demean/threaten other people - but the English language is a rich store cupboard of quirky, useful, interesting, entertaining vocabulary that we should celebrate rather than seek to emasculate.
This sort of knee-jerk "compulsory blandness" risks neutering our communication and we will all be worse off if we don’t defend our right to express ourselves.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by sunny-dave. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Sunny / Evian, the only time this word annoyed me is when I was out with an ex Driver ( Brainless in his case) & his wife that worked within the NHS where I worked, I supported persons with L.D. this Pratt asked me do I still work with the N------s, due to hi ignorance I replied, you don't know how close you are to been like these people, he could not understand my meaning until I said, you could have an accident tomorrow & end up Brain damaged, he did not like what I stated, his wife let rip at this plank, its the way the term & place where this word is used not in hearing distance of the carers that accompany these lovely people about their daily activities.
Thank you all for the thoughtful responses - I haven't been ignoring anyone - just cooking a (day late) Sunday Lunch and then washing down the rib of beef with a rather nice rioja crianza.
I remember the story of a school who had to explain to an Ofsted Inspector that it was now against school rules for one child to say to another the single word "Your" - this was the outcome of a series of bans (and the children's way of circumventing them).
Initially the school banned "Your mother is a sl.g", then they had to ban "Your Mother is a" then "Your mother is" and so on until "Your" became the insult of choice and was duly banned.
I think the whole thing keeps coming back to the intentions of the person who uses a vernacular word and "context, context, context".
< dave potters off to finish the bottle and have a think about life, the universe and the vagaries of the English language >
cheers xx
I remember the story of a school who had to explain to an Ofsted Inspector that it was now against school rules for one child to say to another the single word "Your" - this was the outcome of a series of bans (and the children's way of circumventing them).
Initially the school banned "Your mother is a sl.g", then they had to ban "Your Mother is a" then "Your mother is" and so on until "Your" became the insult of choice and was duly banned.
I think the whole thing keeps coming back to the intentions of the person who uses a vernacular word and "context, context, context".
< dave potters off to finish the bottle and have a think about life, the universe and the vagaries of the English language >
cheers xx
Latest Posts
ChatterBank18 mins ago
I Wonder Why This Number Is Rising So...
Politics19 mins ago
Film, Media & TV21 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles30 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.