Media popularity? News media coverage? Politicians' opinions? Celebrities?
Example: "Lame" is not currently considered a slur despite a direct link to the disabled.
Media popularity? News media coverage? Politicians' opinions? Celebrities?
Example: "Lame" is not currently considered a slur despite a direct link to the disabled.
Well, the literal answer to your question is that each person decides for themselves.
I feel like you were asking about how so many people came to a consensus about slurs though. That's a lot more complex. It used to be a regional thing, as with all language. Now we all consume media (and narratives) from the same sources, so region isn't much of a factor anymore.
As for who decided which words to attack, that's a matter of dispute. Obviously mainstream news anchors get their marching orders from upstairs. Follow that chain of command, and you'll probably find a donor or organization that works directly with one of the two main political parties. Assuming that much is correct, why does a political party want words outlawed/suppressed? I think its because they're pandering for votes. They want some real-world changes that match their talking points so they can get entire demographics voting on lines of race/gender/sexuality, rather than actually considering the issues.
There's also a theory about federal propaganda, which I suspect might have a role in all the free-speech suppression. Step 1 when installing a totalitarian regime is making people afraid to speak their minds. Making words taboo, one at a time, fits pretty well with stomping out free expression in the long run.
Enough people started using words to berate people, and they came to mean that exact thing. The reason "lame" isn't considered a slur is because it began to be used so generally that almost nobody gives a shit that it used to refer to disabled people.
The person who decide they were ashamed when they heard themself called that word.
insufferable cunts do!