Russell
Why introduce the issue of "political correctness" when no one else
has? I can't understand why people are fixiated with such a meaning
less concept; but it does seem to upset those who are full of their
own self-importance.
In my opinion words such as "handicap" or "disabled" have to be placed
into specific contexts - no word is "unacceptable" - usage may prove
misleading or oppressive. Most of the arguments against using
"handicap" are groundless in my opinion. I reject using it as a label
because of the fact it is often misused to reinforce dominant value
judgements.
Bob Williams-Findlay
On 06/04/2012, Russell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Hi Keith.
> It's great that someone is saying this in public (other than myself).
> However, you are only halfway there!
> The primary mistake is (as you point out) the confusion between the terms
> "handicap" (i.e. "hand i' cap" or "hand in cap") and "cap in hand".
> "Handicapping" refers to attempting to equalise the chances in horseracing;
> the horse deemed superior carries the greatest handicap, i.e. carries the
> most weight.
>
> However, the secondary mistake is that the term "cap in hand" has nothing
> whatever to do with begging either.
> To go to someone "cap in hand" is to show deference, to acknowledge one's
> social inferiority to the other person with no implication of asking for
> money or anything else. The commoner doffs his cap to the noble. The noble
> doffs his cap to the monarch.
>
> I think there is confusion with the term "passing the hat" although strictly
> speaking this refers not to straightforward begging but to soliciting
> payment for an impromptu performance (originally collecting money for
> charitable purposes, similar to passing the collection plate in church or
> having a "whip-round" in the office).
>
> As an autistic person I find nothing offensive in the term "handicapped". I
> have deliberately used the word on occasion just to annoy the politically
> correct. I feel perfectly justified in saying something like "I feel
> handicapped by my social ineptness". This is accurate. I feel that I
> struggle (as an animal burdened by weights will struggle) when others
> experience no such struggle.
> "Disabled", on the other hand, does not connote struggle, quite the
> opposite.
> If one disables a machine (most commonly one "disables an alarm system")
> then the machine is entirely inoperative, kaput. It has ceased to struggle.
> I'm not too thrilled with the term "impairment" either.
>
> On a related theme;
> We are prohibited by political correctness from using the word "cripple" as
> a noun but we continue to use it as a verb or adjectivally (most commonly in
> "crippling pain").
> Some disabled people are attempting to reclaim the word in the way that
> American Negros have reclaimed the word "nigger" and homosexuals have
> reclaimed the word "queer".
> Misguided - not all disabled people are "cripples".
> If I'm referred to me as a "crip" then I might be moved to put a spoke in
> someone's wheel.
>
> I couldn't give a flying one for political correctness.
> Accuracy is all.
> Imprecise language leads to lack of clarity of thought.
>
> Russell.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: The Disability-Research Discussion List
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Keith Armstrong
> Sent: 05 April 2012 22:45
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: The word 'handicap'.
>
> Returning to William Bromwichs' text 'The handcycle corpus' in Discourse,
> Identities and Roles in Specialized Communication, Bromwich wrote:
>
> '... dating back to medieval times, we may speak of an exclusionary
> response in which people with impaired mobility were labelled as
> "cripples", to be kept outside the city gates and relegated to marginal
> locations, such as Cripplegate in London, or Bettlerkreuz in the
> german-speaking states where, cap in hand, they relied on charity.' p. 255
> Bettlerkreuz translates as beggar cross.
>
> One of the mistakes those new to Disability Studies often make is that the
> word "Handicap" is derived from begging, as in "cap in hand", (I have even
> heard this argument used by so-called Disability Awareness trainers). This
> is not true. Whilst the words "lame" and "cripple" have an Anglo-Saxon
> origin, the word "handicap" comes to us from the Medieval period and only in
> reference to games or sport. The 17th Century diarist Samuel Pepys enjoyed a
> game of Handicap.
>
> The word "Handicap" in connection to people with impairments can only be
> traced back to the beginnings of the 20th Century and then derived from a
> sense of disadvantage, in the sense of inequalities of race or gender, in
> horse racing and the game of golf. And even then it has no historical
> association with begging.
>
> Many beggars in the past did not have impairments. A simple search in
> Wikipedia will reveal that the term mendicant (from Latin: mendicans,
> "begging") refers to begging or relying on charitable donations, and is most
> widely used for religious followers or ascetics who rely exclusively on
> charity to survive. In principle, mendicant orders or followers do not own
> property, either individually or collectively, and have taken a vow of
> poverty, in order that all their time and energy could be expended on
> practising or preaching their religion or way of life and serving the poor.
> Many religious orders adhere to a mendicant way of life, including the
> Catholic mendicant orders, Hindu ascetics, some dervishes of Sufi Islam, and
> the monastic orders of Jainism and Buddhism.
>
> It is also stereotypical to make the assumption that even in ancient times
> all people with physical impairments were beggars. Many people with physical
> impairments were metal workers highly praised in ancient times. In fact most
> of the ancient gods who primarily worked in metal were also depicted as
> having physical impairments including Ptah (Egyptian), Hephaistos (Greek),
> Vulcan (Roman), Wayland Smithy (Nordic) as well as the Celtic Gods in
> Ireland and Wales are all described as having some sort of physical
> impairment in their story.
>
> ________________End of message________________
>
> This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the Centre for
> Disability Studies at the University of Leeds
> (www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies).
>
> Enquiries about list administration should be sent to
> [log in to unmask]
>
> Archives and tools are located at:
> www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
>
> You can VIEW, POST, JOIN and LEAVE the list by logging in to this web page.
>
> ________________End of message________________
>
> This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the Centre for
> Disability Studies at the University of Leeds
> (www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies).
>
> Enquiries about list administration should be sent to
> [log in to unmask]
>
> Archives and tools are located at:
> www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
>
> You can VIEW, POST, JOIN and LEAVE the list by logging in to this web page.
>
________________End of message________________
This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the Centre for Disability Studies at the University of Leeds (www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies).
Enquiries about list administration should be sent to [log in to unmask]
Archives and tools are located at: www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
You can VIEW, POST, JOIN and LEAVE the list by logging in to this web page.
|