'The Case Against Banning The Word Retard'
Summary of “The case against the banning of the word retard”
In Christopher M. Fairman’s article “The Case Against Banning The Word Retard” for the Washington Post in 2016, he urges people to analyze the issue on the word “retard”. The author explains why removing the word from our society is something that we should not take lightly. Fairman a professor of law has been researching taboo language and its interactions with law for many years argues that the different and ever changing uses of such words basically render self-censorship campaigns unnecessary. The professor argues that restricting speech comes with a price that we should think twice before paying.
Fairman argues that if the history of offensive terms in America is used as a
In Christopher M. Fairman’s article “The Case Against Banning The Word Retard” for the Washington Post in 2016, he urges people to analyze the issue on the word “retard”. The author explains why removing the word from our society is something that we should not take lightly. Fairman a professor of law has been researching taboo language and its interactions with law for many years argues that the different and ever changing uses of such words basically render self-censorship campaigns unnecessary. The professor argues that restricting speech comes with a price that we should think twice before paying.
Fairman argues that if the history of offensive terms in America is used as a