David wrote:
>I must make a comment about so-called politically correct language.
>Handicapped, challenged, disabled, and special are just as offensive to me
>(to hell with correctness) as nigger, boy, colored, chick, babe, faggot,
>oriental, and the list could go on.
I'm pleased you said this David. I have been thinking over the last couple
of weeks about these list 'policies' which aim to prevent offensive
language and 'flaming' of individuals who present unorthodox or complex
viewpoints. You've highlighted, yet again that 'offence' can be a highly
individual experience e.g. I'm not offended by the term 'disabled' (as long
as it's part of 'disabled people' - the collective term) but I am certainly
aggrieved when people call me Deaf (because I am not part of the Deaf
community) and I don't like the term 'people with disabilities'. To this I
would add that some people are more easily offended than others.
But there still remains, in my mind, a very fine dividing line between
reflexive critique and causing offence, and it is clear also that in the
academic field the importance of the former is now being highlighted more
than before. So, for example, we don't just have social theory and
discourse analysis now but critical social theory and critical discourse
analysis. I think this is an important step because it reminds us that very
few theories actually stand the test of time and space and disabled
people's experience.
But going back to the issue of offence, if the experience of offence can be
so individual, who decides what is offensive and how? Where are the
standards and the benchmarks? How can we know what is and is not acceptable
behaviour on this or other lists (because they are not all the same)? Is it
fair to strike someone off the list for 'being offensive' if these
standards are not there because individual list moderators will also have
their own views about what is offensive (no offence meant to our current
moderator - I am talking generally)?
I do think, however, that we have to be especially careful on this list
(and other lists that deal with social inequality and oppression) because
1. Some people's impairments genuinely cause them to behave unpredictably,
and it is disabling if we don't allow these people space.
2. Disability Studies (in the non-oppressive sense) has a number of fields
and these do not exist in an easy relationship with each other with some
being much more dominant and/or nationally specific than others. How do we
deal with this without being censorial?
3. If a discussion list is 'academic' or research-based what price
'academic freedom'? (If we hadn't allowed Singer's views on the mailbase -
and these are offensive to many - we would never have had the pleasure of
seeing some of the enlightened counter-analyses)
We had a wonderful TV drama over here recently based on the book
'Longitude' which is about the dual story of the man who invented the first
nautical timepiece and the man who much later in history set himself the
task of restoring the various prototypes without any full understanding of
how they worked. Both men were frowned upon by 'the establishment' because
they weren't 'scientific experts' - in the case of the inventor, because he
was a carpenter, not an astronomer - and both endured chronic illness and
often poverty because 'the establishment' wouldn't pay them their dues. I
think that's an interesting metaphor for the workings of academia.
Unfortunately it remains the case that though libel laws can be quite
effective on an individual level, many of us could not afford to take a
libel case to court, and the courts being so ignorant of disability issues
certainly won't help.
Best wishes
Mairian
Mairian Corker
Senior Research Fellow in Deaf and Disability Studies
Department of Education Studies
University of Central Lancashire
Preston PR1 2HE
Address for correspondence:
Deafsearch
111 Balfour Road
Highbury
London N5 2HE
U.K.
Minicom/TTY +44 [0]171 359 8085
Fax +44 [0]870 0553967
Typetalk (voice) +44 [0]800 515152 (and ask for minicom/TTY number)
*********
"To understand what I am doing, you need a third eye"
*********
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|