Many, many people have pointed out how hurtful, bullying and wrong this is, how it's a step back to the time when people with Downs Syndrome were seen as less than human. I recently read the excellent Westwood by Stella Gibbons, written in the 1930s which conveys rather chillingly the distaste and disdain felt for Downs Syndrome children.
I have a particular hatred of the word 'spaz'. In the UK, it's generally recognised as a derogatory term for people with Cerebal Palsy, people who used to be known as spastics. When I was at school, spaz and spastic were very regularly used cruel insults. As the sister of someone with cerebal palsy, I feel sick when I hear those words.
However, in America, 'spaz', while coming from the same root, has evolved to mean - apparently - a geeky or clumsy person. It's explained here. And as British teens hear the American use of the word on American TV shows, it's gradually coming back. Which horrifies me.
Part of me feels that we should be robust enough to cope with language as it is used, and not censor ourselves too much. I thought long and hard about whether to use 'gay' as an insult in When I Was Joe, and felt it was so much a part of why Ty was who he was - and did what he did - that it was unavoidable.
My writing group (female, middle-aged, politically left-leaning) would sometimes complain about my male characters' sexism (so very mild compared to, say, The In-Betweeners), and I'd defend it, in the name of realism.
The In-Betweeners is a great example of offensiveness rendered very funny by its framing. Does it still offend? Does it matter?
So, readers and writers of YA fiction, how offensive is too offensive? What should we reflect, what should we censor? And can our decisions make a difference?
