Mairian wrote
> I can't give dates, but in the UK, I am certain that the term 'disabled
> people' pre-dated 'people with disabilities' and post-dated the
medicalised
> language of 'impairment', which was a term coined by non-disabled
> professionals in different fields. The initial use of PWD was also claimed
> by these professionals because it was 'nicer' language that distracted
BOTH
> from the 'nasty' word 'impairment AND from the 'nasty' word 'oppression'.
> However, I think that if we look at how language is actually used by a
> range of users, 'people with' language and terms like 'the disabled' are
> what might be called hybrid discourses which by their nature are ambiguous
> from the semantic point of view. So, 'people with disabilities' can NOW
> mean putting the person first AND it can mean distancing oneself from the
> social model AND it can mean internalised oppression. The key is then in
> how language use is contextualised, who is using the term, why etc. etc.,
> and also whether changing language means changinged attitudes which lead
to
> social change. I think it can if the language achieves the status of
> ritual, and we mean what we say. Professional changes in language about
> disabled people (which are usually cosmetic) only assume importance
because
> they have hegemonic status, but can we trust them or believe them? This is
> one compelling reason for using consistent terminology.
>
Excuse me using gay analogies again but I find it helps me to understand
oppression as an endemic thing. The observation that professional
terminology has dubious intent due to its hegemonic status is a fair cop. I
am reminded of those people who insist on using the pathologised word
'homosexual' rather than the obviously preferred gay/ lesbian/ queer. I
always get the feeling that when people use this word they are really saying
"I do not accept you therefore I will not legitimise you with the
popularisation of your language". Some folk insist also on accentuating the
H O M O sexual. My guess being: to bring attention to the polarity of
'hetero'. I think its fair to be suspicious of attitude and intent. My
other analogy is that I think that there are more homophic gay people
relative to homophobic str8s (straights).
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|