Everyone knows at this point that the United States is currently undergoing a very harsh and very fast cultural regression. What has been pejoratively described as the moral “excesses” of 2020 liberal politics, has now given way to a period of incredible social conservatism across the board. I’d agree with many right-wing pundits that it seems like a large portion of the country grew tired of those 2020 politics.
The use of the R-word, which has been making a surprising comeback in recent months, is a good example of this ongoing trend. Especially in recent weeks, with President Donald Trump publicly calling Minnesota Governor Tim Walz “seriously re——” — the R-word has become a flashpoint in discourse regarding our changing use of harmful language.
It’s hardly a new trend though; sources have been warning about its resurgence since Joe Rogan said on his podcast in April, “The word [re——] is back, and it’s one of the great culture victories.” It’s even possible to measure this on a macro level, as word usage statistics from Google search and social media platform X show that multiple forms of the word have been steadily rising since the end of 2022. In contrast, it shows a high spike in usage of substitutes like “r-word” or “r word” during 2020-2021, but a steady drop off ever since.
Yet, this comeback doesn’t just exist in the worlds of Joe Rogan or Donald Trump — it’s been a cultural shift in more liberal spaces as well. The liberal bastion Jon Stewart responded to the Trump rant in a segment on “The Daily Show”, spouting off the word and continued to make jokes about the “playfully re——.” Yes, comedy is supposed to make light of the “taboo,” but Stewart interspersed all his cracks at Trump with repeated punches downward toward “the ‘tard community.” Anecdotally, this same type of humorous use of the word is what inspired this article. I’ve noticed it pop up more and more often recently among white, privileged and liberal or progressive acquaintances in my daily life, which I found very strange.
It is this contradiction in question today: why does the group which claims to care about social harms in most cases not seem to care as much in this one? It seems that among portions of the liberal sect of society, this type of behavior is once again becoming permissible, helping fuel the renormalization of it writ large. As far as my diagnosis is concerned, there appears to be three main reasons for this.
First is the failure of liberals to properly integrate socially progressive values. In 2020, when it was popular to care about “wokeness” and social justice, it was easier to stop calling people slurs. As a result, this type of language overall becomes less normalized — given the notable exception of far-right strongholds who will always be outwardly racist, sexist, ableist, etc. However, many of the people who aligned themselves with this time period never truly adopted those values for the long term. So, once it stopped being popular, they left it behind.
Second, the idea that holding socially progressive views permits someone to make regressive statements. I think there’s an unspoken belief among some liberal types that some inner moral character or established social capital excuses them from certain harmful actions. It’s different if they say a slur than if a stereotypical backwards country bumpkin does. One is supposedly on the “right side,” and so they’re able to transgress boundaries in ways others cannot.
These two reasons are enough to show why many privileged, progressive types can be contradictory in general, but this still leaves the question of why it’s happening in this case. The answer lies in how the social problem of ableism is seen in the eyes of society. This is to say that certain forms of discrimination exist differently in the public sphere. To make a comparison to racism, this is an example that is clearly visible at all moments. All people are racialized in America and visually sorted into categories, so (among other reasons that this non-exhaustive analogy doesn’t address) it is incredibly salient in society. This is exactly the opposite effect of ableism, which inherently erases the presence of disabled people in society. A society built around a lack of accessibility will inherently remove from the public sphere anyone who is not able to conform, whether that refers to people who are immunocompromised, have physical disabilities or, as in this case, cognitive disabilities.
When it becomes “invisible,” it becomes talked about less and eventually is taken less seriously or deemed “less important” than other social ills in our society. This is the ultimate reason for this contradiction around the use of the R-word. The lack of knowledge or empathy for the history of the discrimination and structural erasure of people with disabilities has set the ground now for this comeback of demeaning language against them.
So, if you’re a liberal or progressive and claim to care about social injustice, stop treating ableism as some less-than issue. Sorry to be that one friend that’s too woke, but the R-word should not be making a comeback.