Spreading the Meaning to End the Meaning:

A movement and metaphorical criticism

“And the bass keeps running, running and runnin runnin', let's get retarded ha, let's get retarded in here”, sings the
lively Black Eyed Peas, referring to “getting stupid” and “let's get ignorant, let's get hectic”. As the hit song circulates, so
does the normalization of the word “retarded”.

This happens again when famous rapper Iggy Azalea sings her song “Fancy” in 2014, “Can't stand no haters, and honest,
the truth is that my flow retarded, each beat dear, departed”. No thought passes society as they sing these lyrics and
dance along to the catchy beats of both songs. However, there are people that recognize the word being sung in both of
these songs. They recognized it so much that they began to stand up for the ending of such a word (retarded), and
chose to abbreviate it how society chooses to abbreviate other “off-limits” words. They choose to call it the “r-word”.
In order to get their campaign across they created the textual artifact, Spread the Word to End the Word, with the intent
to spark a movement that ends the usage of the r-word.
But does this campaign really connect with its audience enough to spark a movement? Does the public understand its
direct referral to one thing by mentioning another?
The discursive campaign Spread the Word to End the Word serves to spark a movement by young activists, using
language that allows them to think twice about their interactions with the r-word.

To achieve this, I will be using two types of criticisms, as well as an ideological lens to guide them:
- Metaphorical Criticism and Movement Criticism
- The ideological lens of Health:
- Intellectually
Spread the Word to End the Word should be observed through political, social, and cultural lenses as well. Looking
through these lenses is immensely important:
- Politically: The text is asking for an “end” to the r-word, however, if there is no legal action that can be taken to
back it, i.e. the United States First Amendment that blockades legal action from hate speech, credibility can be
put up for question.
- Socially: This text is circulated mainly by teens and young adults who are involved in school clubs that focus on
ending the word. These same people begin correcting others including adults and by an oath of the petition
begin to share the complications with that word in society.
- Culturally: The abbreviation of “the r-word” compares it to other “the x-word” slurs that are inappropriate to
say in our culture.
Case Study:
Broader Scope on these Lenses:
- Politically: The textual artifact associates itself with other slurs that could be considered a form of hate speech,
asking its audience to end the r-word. This lens allows its audience to see what the text is asking through the
First Amendment. The First Amendment, which protects the rights of free speech and free press, tends to also
protect these same slurs. This lens recognizes that although this campaign cannot fully achieve an end of a word
through the law, it may do so in other ways. One example of this is the fight against putting an end to “the
n-word”, among non-Black people.
- Socially: This campaign, moves within the social context of educational institutions, and is later spread by
students correcting their peers and adults who use it amusingly or as an insult. This circulation starts with the
actions of these students signing petitions and taking oaths in which to educate and change the people (society)
around them. This educational institution’s ideological lens shows how students take action on their own when
hearing this phrase and choose to put on special events due to its meaning.
- Ex: High schools like Farragut Highschool participate in this campaign in different ways, such as
gathering together in rallies with the theme Spread the Word to End the Word and later uploading them
to media platforms to spread the word, quite literally.
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPSEfN1kvsQ
- Culturally: The phrase Spread the Word to End the Word uses this kind of subtle language in order to connect how,
as a culture, we react to hearing words that are phrased as “the x-word”. As a culture when we see, hear, or read
“the n-word”, “the f-word”, and “the d-word” we are forced to associate that same pattern with the notion that,
that particular word is inappropriate or hurtful towards others. Turning this word into “the x-word” phrase
familiarizes the association between an inappropriate word and an r-word.
Spread the Word to End the Word was created back in 2009 when college students Soeren Palumbo and Tim Shriver
volunteered at the Special Olympics Global Youth Activation Summit. There, they came up with the collective idea of
starting a campaign that would be consumed and encouraged in organizations, communities, and schools and “rally
people to pledge respect toward all individuals, making the world a more accepting and inclusive place for all people”
(https://www.bestbuddies.org/ ). Spread the Word to End the Word was intended to encourage awareness for society to
stop and think before using the r-word. According to the Spread the Word to End the Word website, their purpose is,
“...with a focus not just on the elimination of a word but on the creation of a new reality: inclusion for all people with
intellectual and developmental disabilities.”

Spread the Word to End the Word is especially notable:

- “Spread the word to end the word”, is doing the opposite of what people might think of ending a word that is
under the political correctness categories.
- Instead of saying “don’t say the word “retarded” or use it as an insult, instead the campaign is to spread it and
make it no longer used as an insult.
 - They are trying to normalize the word just like how we should normalize people that have developmental
disabilities.
Text and contexts details and restraints:
- This text is rather new, and something that has been circulating around the public such as schools and the
community of families of and persons with developmental disabilities since 2009
- The context of this text brings to question how people respond to the phrasing of it.
- How do they respond to the fact that the text says that we should be “spreading the word” (retarded)?
- The “spread the word” phrase could mean a lot of different meanings due to the approach, which could be a
restraint.
- Are they trying to normalize the word?
- Are they trying to spread the word’s definition in order to stop its usage of it?
- Is their goal to make it a common word in our vocabulary in order to get people with developmental
disabilities not insulted anymore?
- The context poses an “opposite effect” and can constitute a world of meanings.
- Serves people with special needs
- Speaking to people that use the word as an insult and as a general term
- Power in speaking about it and having an open discussion
Methodology Section:
I will be analyzing this discursive campaign from a healthy ideological lens, and movement and metaphorical
criticism.
Health Ideological lens:
- Methods applied by: Chunchun Wang uses this lens when discussing a person’s story of their own
disability. He uses this to keep in mind what that person is going through and why they might perform
certain acts.
- Why use it?: This will give insight into what stigma surrounds the r-word, and gives a lens to how
individuals with developmental and intellectual disabilities already face discrimination and adversity
within their communities. For instance, they often suffer bullying, sexual violence, workplace
discrimination, and even murder at times, just for having developmental and intellectual disabilities.
Movement Criticism:
- Methods applied by: Rachel Alicia Griffin and Bernadette Marie Calafell do a good job using this in
their criticism of Black Masculinity and (ln)visible Whiteness in the NBA. Here, they use movement
criticism in order to show how some movements can come from miscommunications,
white-priviledge, and new authorities.
- Why use it?: Applying movement criticism I will be able to assess its cultural impact on the people
involved in the movement and evaluate how it appeals to the public symbolically through essential
events and actions that are included in the movement. In order to accomplish this, I will highlight
specific patterns, themes, and other tactics that give volume to the movement’s achievements and
downfalls.
Metaphorical Criticism:
- The method applied by: Suzanne M. Doughton in the Quarterly Journal of Speech who published a
metaphorical criticism of FDR’S inaugural speech, where she highlights patterns FDR uses that relate
to other meanings such as creating a reality of similarity between religion, war, and economy.
 - Why use it?: Metaphorical criticism will allow me to analyze if the text contributes a compelling enough
metaphor for there to be some sort of action taken because of the text. It will also allow me to focus on
the powerful and hidden metaphors at play in the text.
Analysis Section:
Movement:
The Spread the Word to End the Word movement is known for its interrelations with the school systems. The
campaign is mainly presented on high school and college campuses, with clubs made around it. These schools have
presented the text and educated on the meaning it has against people with developmental and intellectual disabilities.
The students are then asked to sign a petition and get involved with speaking out and correcting others when they hear
this insult being thrown around. This pattern stays the same at many schools. The text offers the students the to spread
the word (r-word). By using the word “spread”, it quite literally asks them to spread the word and the impact it has on
individuals with developmental and intellectual disabilities. It encourages and allows these students to be teachers to
others.
The text happens to be quite catchy as well. Something that flows easily through the ears catches on quickly. The
use of language the text inhibits contributes to its ability to be remembered and further connect with its audience. In
addition, the texts use vague language like, “the word”. It does this in order to raise questions about the meaning and
thus becomes interactive with an audience.
The text is powerful and is able to spark a movement because it’s able to become a trend. The trend is educating
others in order for them to stop and think for a moment that they are hurting others while using the r-word. The text
Spread the Word to End the Word accomplishes its goal by using techniques like patterns of involvement through
language and the literal actions of signing petitions and speaking out against the usage of the r-word.
Metaphorical:
As I said before, this campaign uses wording that makes the reader think twice and question the meaning
behind it and beyond it. By doing this, the text is able to convey subtle meanings that guide the assumptions and
understandings that compare it to other slurs that are not socially acceptable today. By using the subtle language “the
word” in the phrase Spread the Word to End the Word, the comparison of other slurs such as “the n-word” “the f-word”
and “the d-word” come to the audience’s mind and thus forces readers to see a pattern of the phrase over time. Using
the same phrase that is compared with other inappropriate words, that we as a society abbreviate, implies that it is a
“bad” word or a slur that makes others feel disrespected. This, in turn, sparks an emotion in an audience that makes
them feel as though they should not be using a word that is in the category with those same slurs. This normalizes the
r-word for holding the same “bad” meaning as the slurs we have already abbreviated in society.
Furthermore, referring back to the catchiness of the words at play (spread and end) creates a catchy terministic
frame of normalization for the termination of the word. As I previously stated, adding this catchy rhyme makes the
phrase stand out, however, metaphorically it pushes the audience to think beyond the surface of the phrase. The
audience may find it questionable to “spread” a word in order to “end” it. But while seeing this in an environment that
very clearly displays the goal of extracting the word, the audience could further their idea of the meaning of the phrase
in order to conclude a more meaningful mission. While they hold on to the catchiness, they would also be able to
examine that the campaign’s real mission is to teach that “spread” the word, means not just the word, but its meaning
and the implications it holds. This resonation is what leads teenagers to cling to this phrase and encourage it in their
communities. The idea of them being able to explain to their peers why a word is hurtful, and not just shutting down
the person in front of them for saying it, gives them a sense of knowledge, and humility.
 However, there are some implications with this wording usage. It brings to question the true mission of the text
by only stating to “spread the word”, instead of “defining the word” or “educating about the word”. Stating “spread the
word” can be slightly contradicting in a way that might seem to encourage others to use the word. What saves it from
accidentally promoting the wrong idea, is the ending phrase “to end the word”. Without this last phrase, not only would
it not have the same catchiness, but it wouldn’t give its audience a clue as to what its mission is.
Evaluation/Discussion:
Overall the discursive text Spread the Word to End the Word does its job by encouraging people to stand up
against the r-word and thus end it. The text is very fitting for what its mission is. It does a good job of making
its audience educate and think. It is benefitting society by starting at a young age and letting them spread
their knowledge to their peers and adults who may not understand the implications of the r-word. The text
has done things such as spark movement in rallies at schools, implementing a special day, March 6th every
year, for awareness, and clear confidence in society for these youth to talk about it. This can be seen in a
study done by the Special Olympics that reveals that in 2017, “70 percent of teens said they vocalized the
wrong and demeaning use of the r-word when it used in conversation. Contrast that with 2009, when only 48
percent of teens spoke up against it,” (specialolympics.ca). I believe the phrase is encouraging students to
show their support not only in school but in society as well. Examining it from a societal lens, it seems to me
as though it is beginning to translate into the larger part of society through youth influence. This evaluation
and discussion of the text are important because socially it gives individuals with developmental and
intellectual disabilities respect and pride in their identity. Evaluating this from a health lens, the text is
extremely meaningful to all with intellectual and developmental disabilities because of how it stands up for
them and their identity. After working with many of these individuals, I can recognize how much they
appreciate the respect and thought that goes in for caring about them and their wellbeing. Culturally, this
evaluation contributes to a focus on the elimination of the r-word. It also creates a new reality that promotes
inclusivity for all individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities. The engagement the text
reaches in schools, workplaces, and other communities, allows these places to better respect all people
enduring these difficulties. This is the same politically. Texts like these spark movements that ultimately
reach community leaders around the world, and provide them with the education to be as inclusive as
possible.
Critical Reflection Section:
Biases- I am currently involved in a club at Gonzaga, Gonzaga University Special Recreation (GUSR), and have
volunteered for the past 4 years at a camp in which we spend an entire week with individuals with intellectual and
developmental disabilities. My cousin is also developmentally disabled and I know what she goes through on a
day-to-day basis. This is definitely a bias because I have such respect for her and these people, and a big passion for
educating people that use the r-word.
Other potential points of view- My criticism might not retain full credibility by some, because of biases on how much I
respect campaigns like this that support my passion for helping people with intellectual and developmental disabilities.
Some might call it “political correctness”, which diminishes the point the entire text is creating: respect.

In the future, one might take a different approach to analyzing this discursive text. Rather than look at the patterns within
words and trends in the language, one might look more into the situational side of the text. This would imply, why this
discursive text needs to be circulated in the first place. Furthermore, why there is even a need to tell people to respect
 others, and if this is a good response to those disrespectful people and the people being discouraged by the word? It
would pose the question, is it enough?
Video if interested: “When is it Okay to use the R-Word?”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0-WEOmQtrI