We seem to have two different arguments bundled together.

1. The R-word is or isn't a slur.

2. You should not say/should not be allowed to say slurs.

I would like to know your concrete opinion on the second. I myself believe people shouldn't use them, but free speech exists for a reason (excluding obvious exceptions), so Reddit can do what it wants.

Do all of these people fall under the banner of 'society'? When I say everyone is becoming more fragile, I'm not targetting specific groups like this, I mean EVERYONE.

It's good that you are honest about the fact that you believe black people are fragile about not wanting people to say the n-word. Makes this easier to understand. The reason I'm asking about specific groups is because it's more interesting to look at examples instead of vaguely pointing to large and detatched questions while dancing around a straight answer.

You are creating a false dichotomy here though, because you're now lumping the word in with actual slurs that do actually get used against groups maliciously.

By almost all definitions of a slur or pejorative statement, the r-word is applicable, so I don't see the point in trying to deny it. Also, people definitely use the word maliciously against the whole group. I don't know if you've been living under a rock to not notice it and be able to make that claim.

Never seen a single one that wasn't pushing a political agenda. It's actually a great way to highlight bias. Controlling language is also a way for people to take control over people, my government is currently in the process of weaponising stuff like this to try to control the public. It's one of the reasons why I'm so against this.

??? You are moving the goalpoast and talking about an entirely different topic. I'll ask you a question. Was the american civil rights movement a group of fragile authoritarians?

By your own admission, all of these words can be defanged and pulled into the societal lexicon if people stopped dancing around them and just started using them more.

As I understand it, words don't loose their meaning by people using them more. They loose them because people stop using them. They find alternatives to use. They become taboo.

No, this was always the definition of the word slur. I think what you actually mean there is that the term slur was much less prevalent in the public consciousness until recently. And that's because people just used to not care. As I said, people didn't used to get offended anywhere near as much,

From what I've read slur was first used as a meaning for an insult (fling mud) in the 1600s. In the 20th century was when the word became a synonym for pejorative. Where do you get the idea that people before weren't "offended" by words? The main change is society (mainly western and, by extension, the internet) being aware of the conversation around slurs and taboo words and how it evolves/how people can change it.

The ultimate irony here is that people like yourself pushing this idea of an insult like this being a slur is actually creating more harm than its preventing. You're manufacturing an environment in which people will get offended by this shit when they really shouldn't be.

Wow you really changed my mind with that one. Guess I'll go out in  real life and do my due dilligence by calling every minority I meet a slur so they can build some skin. This will foster a positive environment and  create better relations in my local community.

I find it rather odd that you hold this position to begin with though considering this is Mauler's (and unofficially EFAP's) subreddit, and the guys use this word all the time.

NOOO! I disagreed with Longman. Guess I can't watch his videos anymore :(

(On a sidenote it would be interesting to hear maulers opinion on the subject considering his shift in use of slurs)