I agree with your description of events and classification of the admins.

I posted more out of curiosity and in the hope that not every objection to words offensive or potentially so would not be immediately dismissed or attacked.

I am not saying that the admins behaved well or treated fairly the user in question. Nor am I questioning how appropriate it is for you to bring this to greater light.

Thank you for your moderated response to my query.

Fanatics can be aggravating.

With the word 'retarded', does every person who objects to its use have to be an SJW? If a person uses the phrase 'jewed him down' but isn't referring to Jews, can people object without being SJW's?

I get that people don't wish to have their words picked apart in search of offense. It seems to me, though, that if a parent or sibling, recognizing the use of a term commonly referring to their disabled child or sibling being used as a way to disparage neurotypical people, they might speak up in asking people to consult their thesaurus before using what was once a clinical definition of various medical conditions to insult someone.

Is there a way this topic can even be broached without invoking the wrath of people who assume the only reason you are speaking is to be a pompous pedant instead of someone who might be concerned about how someone with a disability might be affected by other's use of the term.

I fully acknowledge that there are many cases wherein people take up the standards of causes they could care less about in the hopes that others might appreciate their righteous anger on behalf of the disenfranchised. But does every objection have to be an act of zealous warriors for social justice?