|
Post by zacc on Feb 16, 2023 19:04:35 GMT -5
Here's a spicy take, that maybe belongs in the other thread: as a millennial I deeply miss being able to call things "retarded." Oh, it was such a satisfying word!! It really packed the punch that was missing in its offensive predecessors: moronic, idiotic, lame, etc. The PC replacements are even more milquetoast. To say that something "doesn't make sense" or is uninformed, ignorant, baseless, ridiculous, wrongheaded, asinine...? I'm sorry but that's corporate-email-speak. I don't want to sound erudite in my assessment of something, bringing in vocabulary like that. When someone's bullshit idea is truly heinously wrong, to me (at least internally) it will always be fucking retarded. By all means we should not be using that term for anyone with an intellectual disability. It's a coarse word, to be sure, but sometimes we need coarse words to get a coarse tone across. And I personally think that if we were able to keep using "retarded" in the sense that I've defined it above, its previously association with "mental retardation" would slip away over time as it has with words like moron and idiot, which used to be specifically associated with point ranges on an IQ test. I think most young people today would be surprised to know what "lame" meant before it meant "uncool." It should be the same way with retarded. Edited to clarify: I'm not willing to die on this hill, I have adjusted with the times and no longer use this word (and probably won't in the future) but internally I do really miss it and think we didn't need to completely yeet it from our lexicon I strongly disagree It feels the same as the n word for black people. I would never say it because it just feels extremely offensive. I also had a stepsister with severe mental disabilities so maybe that makes me more sensitive about it, but I will tell people to use a different word if I hear them say it in public.
|
|
|
Post by ayla on Feb 16, 2023 22:52:38 GMT -5
Here's a spicy take, that maybe belongs in the other thread: as a millennial I deeply miss being able to call things "retarded." Oh, it was such a satisfying word!! It really packed the punch that was missing in its offensive predecessors: moronic, idiotic, lame, etc. The PC replacements are even more milquetoast. To say that something "doesn't make sense" or is uninformed, ignorant, baseless, ridiculous, wrongheaded, asinine...? I'm sorry but that's corporate-email-speak. I don't want to sound erudite in my assessment of something, bringing in vocabulary like that. When someone's bullshit idea is truly heinously wrong, to me (at least internally) it will always be fucking retarded. By all means we should not be using that term for anyone with an intellectual disability. It's a coarse word, to be sure, but sometimes we need coarse words to get a coarse tone across. And I personally think that if we were able to keep using "retarded" in the sense that I've defined it above, its previously association with "mental retardation" would slip away over time as it has with words like moron and idiot, which used to be specifically associated with point ranges on an IQ test. I think most young people today would be surprised to know what "lame" meant before it meant "uncool." It should be the same way with retarded. Edited to clarify: I'm not willing to die on this hill, I have adjusted with the times and no longer use this word (and probably won't in the future) but internally I do really miss it and think we didn't need to completely yeet it from our lexicon I strongly disagree It feels the same as the n word for black people. I would never say it because it just feels extremely offensive. I also had a stepsister with severe mental disabilities so maybe that makes me more sensitive about it, but I will tell people to use a different word if I hear them say it in public. I’d never say it in public, or even in private, anymore. I just miss it since I’ve never found something worthy of replacing it.
|
|
|
Post by darthoso on Feb 16, 2023 23:51:32 GMT -5
My general take on language is that it's a distract from really complicated issues involving PWDs, especially among ABs who are clueless on the systemic issues and use language to virtue signal. Even within the disability community I get frustrated by the lack of engagement on disability issues beyond the social aspect, particularly given the earth shattering problems on the horizon:
1. Medicaid is likely to be held hostage over the debt ceiling, those cuts will hit Home and Community Based Services first since it is an optional service for the states. 2. The US Supreme Court is likely to rule individuals can't sue states and providers over Medicaid civil rights violations, and that the Federal Government's only enforcement mechanism is to defund a state in violation. 3. The US Supreme County is likely to rule, once they get a case, that "unintentional discrimination" under the ADA doesn't exist, without that legal standard Olmstead (the right to be offered HCBS) collapses.
When these things hit I really hope the disability community shows up and not fighting over words.
|
|
hiiroller
New Member
Single
Posts: 13
Gender: Male
Dev Status: Disabled
|
Post by hiiroller on Feb 17, 2023 13:50:47 GMT -5
My general take on language is that it's a distract from really complicated issues involving PWDs, especially I tend to agree, I would even broaden it from language surrounding disability to culture in general. You can't control politics because politicians serve at the behest of lobbying groups and corporations, so you focus on what you can make an impact on: culture. You can't get healthcare or affordable housing or decent public transportation, so you complain on Twitter about the casting for a movie or certain words that a celebrity uses. That's not to say that all of those complaints or that the anger these marginalized groups feel are invalid, but not saying a TV show is "lame" isn't exactly going to pay for caregivers so I can live independently or give me accessible transportation. (Hope this didn't come off as combative, just my perspective!)
|
|
|
Post by devogirl on Feb 18, 2023 8:08:25 GMT -5
My hot take is that this actually matters more when ABs are talking to each other and there are no PWDs around. Most people try to be considerate to your face, but it's when the minority person is not around that prejudiced ideas get reinforced. On the whole I think it's a good thing that ableist language is being weeded out of daily usage, although I admit it's not easy. I still say lame, because I feel like that is drifting far enough away from its original meaning. Likewise dumb no longer means mute. I also had no idea until I was an adult that spaz meant someone with CP specifically. Anyone can have a muscle spasm--I thought it just meant someone out of control. I still say crazy too, because I feel like it doesn't necessarily mean a specific impairment, but more like a passing mood.
I grew up back when it was totally normal to say all these things. When I was a kid there was no better put-down than calling something gay. I'm glad we've finally retired that one. Also in my elementary school, the teachers regularly called kids who misbehaved retarded and threatened to have them sent to the local mental hospital. Imagine a teacher braying in the worst New England accent: "Ah you retaaaahhhhded?" multiple times every day. It took me a long time to retire that one from my vocabulary too but it's time to let it go.
Ironically mentally retarded was at first intended as a kinder term than the previous clinical terms idiot and moron, which in turn had replaced other terms like simple or touched in the head. I don't think it means we should just throw up our hands and give up. Language changes, when something becomes a slur it's time to stop using it.
I also think these things never happen in a vacuum. Changing one word isn't the same as passing legislation but creating a culture of respect makes the legislation more likely. The idea behind inclusive language should be respect and calling people what they want to be called, rather than euphemisms ("differently special" etc).
|
|
|
Post by infinatedreams on Feb 18, 2023 10:10:44 GMT -5
Im more concerned about lack of physical accessibility and unequitable treatment than what words are used. Lets sort that first and the language can follow.
Whether someone refers to me as a 'wheelchair user' 'wheelchair bound' or 'confined to a wheelchair' I dont particulaly care, If I did then I would tell them.
Am I a wheelchair user ... yes 10/10 for observation ... confined to a wheelchair .... no I get out of it .... wheelchair bound .... I have been by a rather foxy dev
|
|
|
Post by Dr. BiPAP Sachin on Feb 18, 2023 13:43:38 GMT -5
Inclusive language is a great idea, but first and foremost, let's begin with inclusivity in terms of physical accessibility and working to curb inequities and ableist attitudes.
|
|
|
Post by newjess on Feb 18, 2023 14:29:25 GMT -5
It is interesting that there is sort of a chicken and egg theme coming up, where some think of a push for inclusive language/more representation in media/etc as an important piece of the puzzle in the bigger picture of increasing disability rights, and from what I'm gathering, others see it more as a bonus but not really something that contributes strongly to big changes in policy and social support.
I can definitely see both sides. I've typically leaned more toward the side of, conversations around disability raise awareness and therefore contribute to greater change, but I do see also how focusing on some things can eclipse other (more critical) things and then potentially hurt the cause.
One thing I'm curious about is what things were like around the time that the ADA was enacted (I was like 2 years old then). What were the things that led up to it that were most effective in making that change actually happen? Did it start with a shift in general thinking/awareness around disability (and similar conversations around language, representation, etc), or was that something that followed the ADA?
Not that what happened then is what should happen now necessarily, but I think it is interesting to think about.
|
|
|
Post by mnquad07 on Feb 18, 2023 16:40:36 GMT -5
I think it really depends on the situation. If you know the person, you should know what bothers him/her. Otherwise, like everything in life, ask away.
|
|
|
Post by ayla on Feb 18, 2023 16:45:53 GMT -5
I don’t think anyone feels that the language we use is totally unimportant. It matters. I believe inclusive language should enable dialogue rather than derail dialogue. When *all* we talk about is “how to use the right words” we are missing (or possibly even sabotaging) opportunities to focus on inclusive spaces, policies, attitudes, systems. I say sabotaging because I worry that mainstream AB people would avoid conversations if they fear putting their foot in their mouth and getting excoriated for it. Not that dialogue needs to be centered around AB’s comfort, it doesn’t, but since a lot of pwd don’t even care all that much about the terminology why make that such a wedge?
|
|
|
Post by loveonaroll2 on Feb 18, 2023 16:58:58 GMT -5
I do think we’ve gone a little overboard with inclusive language you don’t really know what is the right thing to say anymore I don’t mind if somebody calls me disabled physically challenged it’s all the same to me but Political correctness depending on the subject it’s just a little too much for me personally
|
|
|
Post by newjess on Feb 18, 2023 19:27:16 GMT -5
I don’t think anyone feels that the language we use is totally unimportant. It matters. I believe inclusive language should enable dialogue rather than derail dialogue. When *all* we talk about is “how to use the right words” we are missing (or possibly even sabotaging) opportunities to focus on inclusive spaces, policies, attitudes, systems. I say sabotaging because I worry that mainstream AB people would avoid conversations if they fear putting their foot in their mouth and getting excoriated for it. Not that dialogue needs to be centered around AB’s comfort, it doesn’t, but since a lot of pwd don’t even care all that much about the terminology why make that such a wedge? I do agree and I think the general consensus in this thread has been that when it gets to being more about being on the attack/virtue signaling/etc it is entirely unhelpful, if not damaging. I do think about the flip side though, and this is my hot take: maybe we as a society could stand to accept discomfort a bit more (and this coming from someone who struggles with this). Dismantling systemic ableism is going to come with some discomfort. Sometimes people are largely more concerned with never feeling uncomfortable. Like not wanting to engage with disabled folks for fear of saying the wrong thing, because there are not these clear cut "good ally" guidelines (I've been guilty of this). If people are more willing to accept that being a part of this dismantling and learning from people who have had different experiences might come with some discomfort, that would go a long way in reducing people's fear of engaging as well. If someone who is frustrated with living in an ableist world comes at you when you're learning/attempting to engage, I think it's possible to disagree but still see where they're coming from and why they're frustrated (even if you don't feel like you're the one it should be directed at).
|
|
mellowcanuck
New Member
Posts: 41
Gender: Male
Dev Status: Disabled
Relationship Status: Single
|
Post by mellowcanuck on Feb 18, 2023 20:38:33 GMT -5
I speak as I do. I keep it civil unless I'm being disparaging. When in the company of others, ya know? Modify your words they can hurt. If I'm rude. Check me. I can take it, or see the miscommunication and go "doh."
|
|
|
Post by zacc on Feb 18, 2023 23:01:51 GMT -5
I don’t think anyone feels that the language we use is totally unimportant. It matters. I believe inclusive language should enable dialogue rather than derail dialogue. When *all* we talk about is “how to use the right words” we are missing (or possibly even sabotaging) opportunities to focus on inclusive spaces, policies, attitudes, systems. I say sabotaging because I worry that mainstream AB people would avoid conversations if they fear putting their foot in their mouth and getting excoriated for it. Not that dialogue needs to be centered around AB’s comfort, it doesn’t, but since a lot of pwd don’t even care all that much about the terminology why make that such a wedge? I do agree and I think the general consensus in this thread has been that when it gets to being more about being on the attack/virtue signaling/etc it is entirely unhelpful, if not damaging. I do think about the flip side though, and this is my hot take: maybe we as a society could stand to accept discomfort a bit more (and this coming from someone who struggles with this). Dismantling systemic ableism is going to come with some discomfort. Sometimes people are largely more concerned with never feeling uncomfortable. Like not wanting to engage with disabled folks for fear of saying the wrong thing, because there are not these clear cut "good ally" guidelines (I've been guilty of this). If people are more willing to accept that being a part of this dismantling and learning from people who have had different experiences might come with some discomfort, that would go a long way in reducing people's fear of engaging as well. If someone who is frustrated with living in an ableist world comes at you when you're learning/attempting to engage, I think it's possible to disagree but still see where they're coming from and why they're frustrated (even if you don't feel like you're the one it should be directed at). I feel like you hit the nail on the head. I feel like both sides are going to have to deal with discomfort. Able Bodied people are going to have to accept disabled people being part of their community, like casting more disabled people in movies as disabled people, not casting Able Bodied people as fake disabled people. And they need to be willing to hire more disabled people among many other things. And disabled people, and there twitter allies, need to be willing to listen to people who might be a little ignorant or just want to learn. Enough with this call out culture already. It really bugs me when I see disabled people on twitter saying how it's not there job to educate people, that they should "Go Read a Book". I feel like human connections are the best way to learn, not "Some book". We are not going to change minds by being annoyed at people who ask questions. I just wish people were just willing to be more communicative and treat other people like complicated human beings, like one of my favorite Youtubers ContraPoints (although she usually tries to understand much worse people for science and not much for empathizing with them). Also, on the words thing I really feel like there are certain words that are just the worst of the worst (depending on the country you live in). Like The n word for black people, f*#$%t for gay guys, and the R word for people with mental disability. I agree with Devogirl that language changes, and when something becomes a slur don't say it it. However, I feel like the reclaiming of these words by people in those communities is totally ok.
|
|
|
Post by darthoso on Feb 19, 2023 0:40:27 GMT -5
It is interesting that there is sort of a chicken and egg theme coming up, where some think of a push for inclusive language/more representation in media/etc as an important piece of the puzzle in the bigger picture of increasing disability rights, and from what I'm gathering, others see it more as a bonus but not really something that contributes strongly to big changes in policy and social support. I can definitely see both sides. I've typically leaned more toward the side of, conversations around disability raise awareness and therefore contribute to greater change, but I do see also how focusing on some things can eclipse other (more critical) things and then potentially hurt the cause. One thing I'm curious about is what things were like around the time that the ADA was enacted (I was like 2 years old then). What were the things that led up to it that were most effective in making that change actually happen? Did it start with a shift in general thinking/awareness around disability (and similar conversations around language, representation, etc), or was that something that followed the ADA? Not that what happened then is what should happen now necessarily, but I think it is interesting to think about. I lean towards policy changing culture. My reasoning is we're arguably never had it better in terms of the cultural social aspect, but things are getting worse. Not only in terms of the policy I mentioned earlier, but the really scary ideologies creeping back into the mainstream: A Yale Professor Suggested Mass Suicide for Old People in Japan. I'm just not seeing the translation from representation in culture to things that need fixing a decade ago. I think the gay rights movement is pretty instructive, it didn't start with the f word, it started with the HIV crisis.
|
|