Would you be offended if someone says "you sperg!" to you?

Post Reply New Topic

How do you think about the word "sperg"? Is it offensive to you? If yes, how much? Do you think that the word "sperg" is derogatory and (or) insulting?

The word has epomymic etymology - from the surname "Asperger" which was used later to form the name "Asperger syndrome", the word "sperg" was formed by shortening of the word "Asperger". In southwestern Germany, near Stuttgart, there is a city named Asperg (dweller of Asperg is... Asperger ). What are relationships between the name of this city and the surname of Hans Asperger?

When was the earliest use of the word "sperg"?

Yes. To me it sounds a lot like a racial slur.

If that is all the other person says or does, then "definitely no." It is just "woooords" as George Carlin reminded us.

If the other person used more aggressive words or actions ... well, then, I would act "differently."

I may like using the word "sperg" to describe myself. It is then a funny word for me. But I want not to name anyone else as "sperg", especially lower-functioning Aspies - it would be rude.

i would just look at them funny, then forget all about it.

i didn't know that was a word used.

Someone who tells (or even shouts) "you sperg!" may have bad intentions - to humilitate an Aspie, to offend his or her strongly. The word "sperg" may be really offensive, it may be "hate speech". Using of it may be an act of discrimination of people with disabilities or be something like racial slur. It may be a form of contempt to Aspies.

i've heard "wow you're stupid, are you autistic or something?" and that made me think a lot less of the person.

Yes, context would define how the other individual meant the word. But, having been an early hate-crime lobbyist and federal adviser, I know that "hate speech" was never meant to be criminalized and rise to the level of "'fighting' words" as defined by the U.S. Supreme Court in its unanimous opinion about Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568 (1942). In fact, the laws that I worked to adopt focused on actions (assault and battery) and avoided the so-called crime of hate speech altogether because of its questionable constitutionality. In other words, many legal scholars believe that hate speech is protected speech. But, I agree that, more and more, the two categories of speech are considered blended. Too bad, in my opinion. While hate speech could become intimidating enough to earn a spot among fighting-word speech, but I disagree that they are one in the same when an individual merely criticizes another for being, say, a "sperg." Again, context.

Maybe the word "sperg" was formed to insult Aspies? To mock them, making fun of their problems, to humilitate. It may be malicious. Someone who says "you sperg!" may have obvious want to insult an Aspie. It may appear to denote people with lower functioning forms of AS especially and maybe to mock especially them, who suffer more because of their AS. This word may be associated with hatred, contempt, humilitation, offensiveness etc. It appears to be strong, malicious insult.

Yep, it might. Others, including those even within this topic, might mean no offense when they use it in humor and jest. I wouldn't consider it offensive without other evidence suggesting that it is. That is why the "fighting words" doctrine isn't the one-size-fits-all legal remedy that certain hate-crime advocates wish it was. Today, as well as when the doctrine was articulated, people have differing opinions about whether such words in one community mean the same as they do in another community. That is why judges look seriously at an individual's intent and the other individual's reaction to determine if certain speech should be excluded from protected speech. Between the two parties, there is almost always a disagreement of intent and reaction, so such interpretation by a prudent court to restrict what would otherwise be free speech tends to be rare; thus, protecting speech except for the most egregious use. In my opinion, that is exactly the kinds of courts we should want to have.

Nah. It sounds like something the ignorant teen would say. Ranks up there with a recent generation calling things "gay". It's a linguistic trend, and most linguistic trends pass after a few years. Getting incensed about something like that only shows that both parties are prone to looking for any reason to be incensed.

i would find it intriguing if someone called me a "sperg" because not many people in australia know about asperger syndrome, and no one "on the street" has ever identified me as one, and so i would consider them to have unusual insights and background knowledge and i would show attention to them with inquisitiveness.

I get it potentially being used insultingly, much like people have used the term ret*d(incorrectly on their part but same thing guess its just cooler to replace it with autism/aspergers now among some circles....but don't get the racial slur bit as aspergers is not a race.

Not yet.... Hahahaha! [evil laugh]

Sorry, the sci-fi part of my brain took over there. "Rise of the Spergs!"

And what do you thing about the adjective 'spergy'? Or phrase such as 'spergy one'?

No.