I now use 'disabled first' language, but when I wrote 'Disabled We Stand' in
1980-1 I used the term 'disabled people', which was the current usage among
members of the Liberation Network of People with Disabilities.
Back then, the term was not being used in opposition to 'disabled people',
but to terms such as 'the disabled', which were seen to be demeaning and
depersonalising. Both the forms under discussion now are what one might
call 'people plus'. I'm not sure that it matters hugely which one uses,
though 'people first' usages can become very unwieldy. It's awkward to
refer to, for example, 'People with Deafness'. The form leads one to
finding a noun where an adjective would be stylistically more appropriate.
That siad, it might be worth mentioning that a woman with whom I used to
carry out Disability Equality Training reckoned that 'people first' usages
aresometimes favoured by people who have acquired disabilities and want to
emphasise that the impairment has not made them a different person.
Best wishes
Allan
Allan Sutherland
'Neglected Voices', four cycles of transcription poems by Allan Sutherland,
based on interviews with disabled people.
http://www.disabilityarts.org/Neglected-Voices
----- Original Message -----
From: "James Overboe" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2012 2:15 PM
Subject: Re: People first language
>I would agree with Simi and perhaps carry it a bit further by stating we
> must affirm the materiality of disability - that which has been
> pathologized as impairment. As I argued back in 1999 'people first
> language' disavows the vitality of the 'lived experience' of disability
> and creates the category of able cripple as a goal to achieve (thanks
> Cheryl Marie Wade) that perpetuates ableism and its sibling disableism.
>
>
>
> James Overboe
> Associate Professor
> Sociology Department & Cultural Analysis and Social Theory M.A. program
> Wilfrid Laurier Unversity
>>>> Simi Linton <[log in to unmask]> 10/02/12 8:48 AM >>>
> It is my impression that the majority of dis rights folks in the U.S.
> and the vast majority of dis studies people use what i like to call
> 'disability first language'.
> I describe myself as a disabled woman.
> I think when talking about specific impairments/conditions the "with"
> term comes in more.
> All this in response to comment below about UK vs US practice.
> Curious as to others perceptions of this pratice. Simi
>
> Simi Linton
> Disability/Arts Consultancy
> http://www.similinton.com/
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Emma Sheppard <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 2, 2012 8:22 AM
> Subject: Re: People first language
>
> I think, at this point, however, it is worth including that "people
> first language" is often the preferred approach of disabled people (or
> people with disabilities) in the United States - in much the same way
> that social model terminology is preferred here; both are the preferred
> self-identifiers of disabled people/PWD, and there isn't a "better" one.
>
>
> I'd suggest that, with the language rooted in the Americans with
> Disabilities Act (ADA), it is both medically-based and socially-based;
> it is a linguistic difference in much the same way as American English
> vs British English gives us elevator/lift, faucet/tap, and
> eraser/rubber. I'd imagine that, if Alexander's mother were here, she'd
> refer to her son as a "disabled person", and there would be a great deal
> of protest from American disability rights campaigners telling her she's
> wrong to do so.
>
> ________________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.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.455 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/5303 - Release Date: 10/01/12
18:34:00
________________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.
|