For further reference I have lifted this discussion out of the first edition
of "In from the Cold" which is on deposit as a PDF scan in the Leeds
Archive. Given that is a straightforward picture scan of poor typescript I
think I am making fair use of copyright here in rendering a particular
debate more accessible. The original author is Merry Cross
"WORDS-ACTIONS-WORDS-ACTIONS
As you read this magazine you may be struck by the range of different words
we use to describe ourselves...the handicapped; people with disabilities'
the disabled; e etc., all phrases commonly used in society Does it matter
what words we use as long as we all knew what we mean?
It seems to me that it does. I reckon every human being is limited in their
thoughts and actions by the words available to them in the language/s they
use. Eskimos can think about approximately thirty different Kinds of snow
and act according to each, because their language contains this number of
different snow- words.
There were studies done (I seem to remember they were Americans on what
exactly adults and young people of both sexes imagined when they read the
word 'he' where it had been used to mean anyone, e.g. 'When a child first
goes to school he may not know how to play with other children'. It was
found that almost ever one imagined a male figure. Consequently it is argued
that our language steers us into thinking that women are less importa than
men, since they don't appear so often in what is said.
In my experience. we (let us for the moment call ourselves something wild
like people with sunflowers, to avoid any commonly used term) react very
strongly to the words used about us. Many of my friends who have cerebral
palsy can't be a the word 'spastic' since, apart from anything else, it has
become a word of abuse in common usage. I don't like to have my leg referred
to as a 'bad' leg as I don't think it is bad, nor do I think that the way
other people talk should lead me or them to regard an important part of me
as 'bad'
These more particular aspects of our language aren't too difficult to deal
with (e.g. I encourage people to talk about my short leg) but all around
mere people with different ideas about the best word or phrase to describe
people with sunflowers as a group. So I'm going to set out here some of the
words and phrases with the arguments far and against each, far you tic think
about. Before doing that though, I will point out that the one thing on
which the people involved in getting this magazine out agree is that any
phrase should begin with the word people'. First and foremost we are people,
members of the human race. and we believe that our language should convey
that. That said, here goes with the run-down. The pros and cons are only
once that I nave most commonly heard; there may he (in fact most certainly
are] others. My intention is not to provide an exhaustive list of arguments,
only to provide enough to form a springboard for discussion.
HANDICAPPED
PRO: If the word is taken to mean that we are at a disadvantage in the
able-bodied world as it is. than this is a simple statement of fact.
CON: The word originated at races where people drew straws from a hat to
determine relative disadvantages in the race. It suggests then, that life
must be competitive like a race, rather than co-operative. It has also, by
now, been tainted by the fact that it has been so often used by people when
they were saying something hurtful. This applies, in fact, to most of the
words or phrases in this list.
DISABLED
PRO: Members of the Union of the Physically Impaired Against Segregation
argue that we need two separate terms' one to describe the physical reality
and another to describe the result of the way we are treated in society.
Hence they say that the word disabled is good when it is used to mean that
we are dis-abled by society's attitudes, failure to provide us with Jabs,
failure to provide us with aids etc.
CON: Using a term that 13 already in use but not understood to be a
reflection on society won't change anything people will continue to use it
unwarily. Also continuing to use this word encourages the continued use of
the phrase 'The disabled' which conjures up images of a sort of jellified
mass of sub-humans that you might trip over out there if you don't watch
out! (This also applies to the phrase 'The handicapped.).
PHYSICALLY IMPAIRED
PRO: This is the term that U.P.I.A.S. use to refer to the physical
reality. It is thought to be a straight-forward term and is accepted by
some professionals in the field.
CON: The word impairment has many very negative associations (look it up
in a Thesaurus if you're doubtful) and lots of people say it conjures up
images of something rather nasty and morally bad!
PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
PRO: It puts the word people first and doesn't contain any cover-up or
denial. It also can't be shortened to 'the some-thing. The argument runs
that if you are paralysed from the waist down, then in fact you are un-able
to walk,.
CON: It does convey the idea that our lack of abilities is a result of
our conditions rather than the result of our treatment by society. The
direct argument about the person who is unable to walk, is that it is rare
that the objective is actually walking, and if the objective is to get from
A to D. then they could do so if society gave them whatever mechanism suited
them best (e.g. an electric wheelchair).
PHYSICALLY DIFFERENT
PRO: It has no linguistically inherent negative meaning, as do the
syllables 'dis' and 'im'. round in other words.
CON: The whole notion of difference is frequently the excuse for
oppression - 'women are, after all, biologically different. . Also every
person is physically different from every other, so it is pretty
uninformative.
PEOPLE WHO ARE DISVALUED
PRO: It is true that we are disvalued cold that this underlies some of
the oppression if people thought we could contribute to society. presumably
they would make it easier for us to do se).
CON: The term is rather general and applies to many different groups of
poop], in society.
That's it then_ I believe that we need a word or phrase that WE think up and
are happy with hero I'm talking about a reasonable consensus) and that in
all probability it will need to he something completely fresh. (Meanwhile,
perhaps I can leave you with a phrase that woo a Slip of the tongue on the
part of a friend of mine yesterday. She said 'people with POSSibilities.
Well, it has possibilities!
(Merry Cross).
WHAT DO YOU THINK?"
________________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.
|
