Jane Lynch and Lauren Potter from Glee
Do you say ‘disabled person’ or ‘person with a disability’? Do you say ‘uses a wheelchair’ or ‘in a wheelchair’.
Disability etiquette. It’s one of those things that nobody wants to get wrong and yet on the most part we’re too anxious about causing offence that we don’t ever ask for help.
Even writing this post has been a delicate process. You write each sentence with a finger poised and ready, hovering over the ‘delete’ button.
Sadly, sometimes we let our anxiety over saying the wrong thing stand in the way of talking about disability at all. And in the end – although the wrong term can cause momentary pain or hurt – the real risk is that disability can become increasingly hidden, a forgotten issue.
It’s because of this that the Victorian Government has released a new set of guidelines, which detailing to correct way to refer to people with disabilities.
It’s disability etiquette 101, if you will.
The overarching rule is: use language to focus on the person and not the person and not the disability. So rather than ‘blind person’ go with ‘person who is blind.’ And instead of ‘vegetable,’ say ‘person who is in a coma’. Don’t say ‘disabled toilet,’ say ‘accessible toilet.’
But moving on from the finer points of language there are the bigger issues. Words that have historically been used to describe people with a disability but that have somehow managed to become school yard slang…
We’ve all been there: standing at the park, pushing the kids on the swings and you hear a seven year old boy call his mate a ‘retard’ when he misses a kick. A little girl is on her way home from ballet class and awkwardly practicing third position when her sister tells her to stop because she looks ‘spastic’.
That’s the big stuff the stuff that really matters. Using ugly words that send a message that disability makes someone a lesser person.
This campaign out of the US is absolutely bloody brilliant. It takes the word ‘retard’ and turns it on its head.
Take a look:
So next time you stub your toe or pour too much milk into your cereal bowl, don’t, don’t, don’t call yourself a retard. Can we suggest you try ning nong instead?
This is audio of Em and Dave from Mamamia’s radio show Mamamia Today chatting to disability advocate, Stella Young. They asked her what is OK to say – and what’s not OK to say to a person with a disability.
Comments
159 Comments so far
I agree with everyone that is saying that the whole ‘person first’ thing is kind of irrelevant, it is how you think of the person and how you interact with them…I’m saying this from my job experience and also as someone who has been ‘person first’ed through my experience with anorexia. They told my family never to call me an “anorexic”, always to say I was “a person with anorexia”. Didn’t make a bit of difference to me, but the way people treated me did.
loading...
As someone with multiple disabilities, I hate “person first” language. We call people “athletic”, not a “person with athleticism”. “Blonde”, not a “person with blondeness”. That obviously doesn’t mean that we think that single attribute defines them. We only use “person first” language for things we consider negative.
loading...
what about in the context such as “this dipilatory cream retards the hair growth?” I don’t think its offensive in that sense?
loading...
I found something else to add perspective and I hope that lots of you get a chance to read it – With something so complex and personal an issue I think that multiple perspectives are fantastic perspectives.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-11-15/young-reporting-it-right/4371912
loading...
I have to say i’m guilty of using words like retard and spastic i.e “Come here you spastic dog!” (to my dog). Sometimes while in conversation though, saying ‘disabled person’ is just easier and less of a mouthful than saying ‘person with a disability’. If I say it in the wrong order, well pardon me, I wasn’t trying to offend. I’m epileptic, and I refer to myself as epileptic, not as a ‘person with epilepsy’, because well… I AM epileptic. I’ve had it my whole life and it’s part of who I am. And having epilepsy, does that make me a ‘person with a disability’ or ‘a person with a medical condition’? I have no idea, I think Australia is becoming a bit too politically correct in my opinion. Everyone should just lighten up and not take things so seriously!
loading...
as a mother of a child with multiple disabilities we have experienced all sorts of ‘names’. I find it very offensive when people use the word spastic especially at the football coming from the people standing at the MCG and yelling it out at a football player when people in wheelchairs are sitting right in front of these ignorant people. I have called them out on it and will continue to do so.
What I find a bit weird is that now people in wheelchairs refer to themselves as crips. Is it ok for the rest of the population to refer to them as crips?
loading...
I’ve replied to many comments on this post, (I find this subject quite interesting and worth great discussion), but something has eaten away at me all day and I couldn’t put my finger on it.
Then I remembered comedian Claire Hopper, (who I love), doing a skit on Good News Week about Julia Gillard a few years back. She spent a great deal of time referring to the PM as a ‘ranger’ and pointing out that she would be used to bullying because of it. While it ws light hearted, an I took ir in the way it was intended, it kind of got to me.
I am a redhead. I have never been teased or bullied because of it, but in the past few years I have noticed a growing teasing, sometimes becoming quite nasty, of redheads. Kyle Sandlilands has laid in, as has every other comedian whenever talking about Julia Gillard, and there are plenty of nasty general comments about people with red hair too. If I took this personally I would probably just dye my hair, but I’m pretty comfortable in my own skin.
So here’s why I was feeling off about the topic – if you are someone that thinks that words like ‘Disabled’ or ‘handicapped’ are offensive, then please don’t use words like ‘Ranga’ either. It seems to me that we are expecting people to use correct terminology more and more, but for some reason it is perfectly acceptable to openly and blatantly criticise, or even bully people because of the colour of their hair. If it is not okay to taunt someone for their skin colour, it shouldn’t be okay to belittle someone because of their hair colour either.
Obviously the colour of my hair is not the same as a severe disability, and I am in no way drawing a parallel to that. But the point of this post is for people to be treated equally, and for the terminology we use to be matched by the intent of the words we use. In my experience, a word like Like the word retard when used colloquially, ‘Ranga’ is never intended to be used in a nice way, it is always nasty. At least people saying ‘disabled’ instead of ‘person with a disability’ is not intending to be nasty.
Also – if we don’t use the word ‘disabled’ anymore, what do we call the parking spaces? Parking for people with a disability or is there a shorter phrase?
loading...
I think it’s great to use language that places the person before the disability, but with the ‘right’ way to say things changing so often, people shouldn’t take offence where none is intended, but perhaps rather point out a more polite and respectful way to refer to a condition.
I recently read a book about late talking children, where the word retarded is used repeatedly (as a point of difference to speech delay). ‘Mental retardation’ used to be a proper medical term (and perhaps still is), so I wasn’t offended. The book was written in 1996.
It is interesting how some words cut so much more deeply than others. After all words like idiot and moron also used to be used to describe specific conditions of low IQ, but are now just general insults, which don’t offend in the same way that retard does. Likewise, cu** seems to offend so much more than co**, which I don’t get.
Is it wrong to say someone or something is crazy?
loading...
After spending four years working with people who have disabilities, it was nice to hear a discussion on mainstream radio about using respectful language. But it would have been a lot better coming from Em Rusciano and Dave Thornton had they not just spent a few minutes making fun of a Chinese couple’s name. Something like “They’re both called Wu? That must be confusing! The Wu man and the Wo-man? Ho, ho, ho.” It would have been rude regardless but since in China, the surname often comes first, they also managed to pull off looking ignorant, too. Pull your heads in.
loading...
It seems like as soon as you walk out your front door these days you’re going to offend someone. I don’t use words like retarded, spastic etc, or intentionally try to offend anyone. But things are getting so politically correct now, sure as shit, doesn’t matter what you do you’re going upset someone. So we can longer say “disabled person”, but person with a disability? So I’m no longer referred to as an “able bodied person” I’m now called a person who has an able body? Seriously!!
loading...
Mum of two Cheeky Monkeys here. Just doing an experiment – none of my comments are coming up and I’m wondering if I’ve been blocked for some reason. It’s been happening for a few days now. I always try to be very polite, so I’m not sure why, but if so MM can you let me know what I did?
loading...
A lot of people are experiencing the same problem. It can be quite annoying.
loading...
My best friend has a child with both intellectual and physical disabilities and was recently corrected by a able bodied disability worker about not “putting the person first” in her language. No, she may not have put him first in her language, but she puts him first every single second of every day of her life. How outrageous of these political correct ning nongs to focus on the language when she is actually living the reality.
How about politicians commit to funding the NDIS on a long term basis -start funding early intervention therapies that could actually make a difference to their quality of life, bring forward the start date – THEN we can worry about nicities such as the most correct form of language to use.
loading...
So, so true. I think that’s sort of what this article is saying — yes, try to get it right and avoid obviously insulting words, but it’s better for disability to be discussed than for it to become such a minefield that people just pretend it doesn’t exist.
loading...
Policing the way people use these words only makes an impact if you also address the attitudes that go with them.
While on canteen duty at my kids’ school I noticed that the new go to insult in the playground is ‘sped’, when I asked what it meant I was told that it’s short for ‘special education’. So while they’re not using the ‘r’ word they are still using having an intelectual disability as put down.
loading...
Yeah, I think that will always be a problem.
I had a brother when I was younger that was intellectually disabled. Very much so – he died at two and never learned to sit up, let alone walk, talk, etc. All he could really do was smile a bit, (but he did have a beautiful smile).
So I am not completely in the dark about this. But in our family when people asked us what was wrong, we said he was retarded because of an error at birth. It was true, and those were just the words we used back then. It didn’t mean good or bad, it just described a condition he had. We loved him dearly and grieved enormously when he died.
This is my problem with the constant renaming of these sorts of conditions. I believe medically speaking many of them fall under the blanket of Cerebral Paulsy, which means a slowing down of the developmental part of the brain through a variety of different causes. Now the word ‘retarded’ has negative connotations because we made it that way. Any word we change it to will probably become polluted by colloquialism, and constantly changing what is deemed as politically correct today will be out of date by tomorrow. Well meaning people trying to freely converse will be caught out and unfairly labelled as disrespectful.
Many years ago the N word, (which I don’t use because it offends many people), was the Proper noun for a person from Nigeria. It wasn’t negative or nasty, it was a word. Bigoted and uneducated, ruthlessly racist individuals corrupted the word and it now has so many feelings of oppression, anger and mistreatment associated with it. But it was just a word. I don’t use it because other people have these negative feelings and I would never intentionally want to hurt someone. And I don’t understand the connection the word has to the gross acts of depravity that some people have been subjected to. But it is just a word. If I did use it, it would be to describe a person that comes from Nigeria. Now there are feelings of hatred associated with the word black as well – so we say African American, African Australian, or similar. Sometime soon, there will be a gross shortening of these words too and they will take on new meaning.
Unfortunately there is a lot of hate in the world. And sometimes people are ignorant or don’t understand the power of their words. But my focus would be to create harmony, reduce hatred and improve relationships between sub cultures across society, and not on the words themselves.
loading...
WTF??? Since when has nigger been a proper noun for Nigerians??? I am Nigerian and have alwasys referred to myself as Nigerian and have always been referred to as a Nigerian? I have also been referred to as a nigger and trust me, it was always negative and nasty!!! Seeing as the African slave trade predates the naming by the English of that part of Africa as Nigeria and that this is predominantly where the term nigger came from, I think it is safe to say that the negative connontations of that word preceeded the its usage as a so called “proper noun for a person from Nigeria”!!!
loading...
“The proper noun for a person from Nigeria”?? I’m 42 and I’ve never heard of Nigerians being called that.
loading...
Since the 1800′s when the English participated in the slave trade in Africa. A few years back I saw an brilliant movie called Amazing Grace, (with Iaon Gruffud), which goes into the history of it in detail. The word was used in the same way as Australian, or Chinese. It wasn’t negative. So I’m not surprised you haven’t heard of it, I’m 36 and it has never been used in my lifetime that I know of either. But it did become associated with the slave trade which as wee know became a vehicle for the shocking racism that was experienced in the last century. The word itself predates all that – that was kind of my point.
loading...
Thanks MOTCM, I had no idea.
loading...
I would refer to you as Nigerian as well. You’ll notice I didn’t use the N word itself as I understand many people find it offensive, and I truly didn’t want to offend anyone. I don’t like the word, but my point was that the word became negative because of the way it was used.
I got this piece of Trivia from a movie called Amazing Grace about anti slave activist William Wilberforce . I remember at the time thinking, Wow, that word can actually be used with no hatred behind it. My understanding is that it was a term used by Englishmen during a time when there was discussion in parliament about outlawing slave trading in Africa. It was a movie, so it could be wrong, and I did see it many years ago, but the point is the same.
loading...
People from Nigeria are Nigerians. They are not niggers! The word Nigger is an abbreviation of negro, meaning black in Spanish (derived from the Latin for black, niger). Nigger had never been anything but an insult!
loading...
Well, as I explained above, I could certainly be wrong about the origin of the word. But even if I am and the origin of the word is from the Spanish word for black, in and of itself that isn’t negative either is it? It doesn’t become an insult until it is used in an insulting way. My argument is the same – the intent behind the comment dictates whether or not something is insulting in many circumstances.
loading...
Don’t always believe what you see in the movies, read a history book!
loading...
Just so you know Mum of two, I love the entire sentiment of this comment. It is such a slippery slope! If people never used these words in a derogatory way, the world would be a lot simpler.
loading...
Most people at least try to be respectful some just don’t get it. I was getting out of my car with my son who is blind at his new school, he had his cane in his hand and a man came over and said “what is the extent of your impairment?” No hello, no what is your name nothing. I turned around and responded with “Obviously not as bad as yours if you could come over and say that.” My son was not upset by this thankfully he has a very thick skin. What made things worse is I was walking back through the school and noticed the same man that had said this to him was a teacher at the school.
loading...
Right on, maddiek! X
loading...
Thank you for this article. I first heard of ‘people first’ language 8 years ago at uni during my teaching degree. Since then I have cringed at the language used, particularly in the media labelling people as being autistic or epileptic. It’s sad that it’s taken this long for the world to catch on, but I’m very glad that the message is getting out there.
loading...
Excuse my ignorance – I understand that many people prefer the phrase on the Austism Spectrum but what is wrong with saying someone is epileptic? That’s a medical condition. I know some epileptics, and that’s how they describe themselves. How should we refer to them? Genuinely, because I haven’t heard this before.
But just on that point, I do have trouble understanding why referring to someone as autistic is an issue. Years ago that is what it was called. We now know there are differing degrees of autism and Aspbergers, hence the spectrum, but isn’t this all getting a bit complicated? Saying someone is autistic isn’t a put down, it is describing a medical condition. If we have to use very long phrases for every syndrome, condition and illness, conversation will become very difficult! If someone has a condescending or negative attitude towards an individual with one of these conditions then that’s a problem. But most people that use words like epileptic and autistic are just being descriptive. Isn’t the intent behind the label far more important than the word itself?
loading...
I think the idea is that you should say ‘a person with autism’ rather than an ‘autistic person’, for the same reason you might say ‘she has cancer’ rather than ‘she is cancerous’ or ‘she is a cancerous person’.
Having said that, I agree that it can seem a little bit nit-picky, but perhaps if you believe that the way we speak can shape the way we think, then it makes more sense to be sensitive about that particular use of language.
loading...
Thank you, thank you! I’ve been cringing for the last 8 years at the lack of ‘people first’ language, particularly in the media. I first heard of these recommendations at uni during my teaching degree. It’s sad that it’s taken so long for the world to catch on, but I’m very glad that finally there may be change.
loading...
Hello, M Team,
Really great post about a really important issue, but it really needs to be re-read and subbed.
loading...
My mother is a teacher and said they no longer say children have “special needs” but “additional needs.” I think that’s brilliant, it reminds us not all children’s additional needs are the same, and they are just that. They’re still a child, still worthy, however we all have needs and some of us a few more of them to get through the day.
loading...
1. See the person and not the disability. By saying “a person with a disability” we are seeing them as a person and not defining them by their disability.
2. Same goes with behaviour. There are no naughty kids in the world, just kids with naughty behaviour.
3. Terms like retard, mental, spastic etc are offensive if not used in their intended medical context because they are being used in a negative manner.
4. Same goes with gay. When it’s used in a negative manner then it can be offensive.
Sure, some people won’t be offended or some people may not intend to offend but that’s no excuse. Once you’ve been told you must make every effort possible to change your phrasing.
loading...
What did the old bloke on the bench call himself?
loading...
I find it offensive to use the word retard & it really upsets me when the people around me use it, often out of ignorance!
My sister is intellectually & physically impaired & I see this word as an extremely derogatory term. How are people with a disability ever going to be recognised & treated equally within society (as they rightfully deserve!) if people continue to use that poisonous word? People who are disabled just want to be treated normally like the rest of us & want to feel like they belong. We haven’t gone too far with political correctness, perhaps those who are critical should walk a mile in the shoes of a person or family with a member who has a disability to appreciate why this is so upsetting to so many people. You may not realise you are intentionally upsetting people by using that distasteful word but please reconsider your need to use that word within your vocabulary. There’s a plethora, (actually a dictionary!) of other nouns out there!
loading...
What is the point of such ridiculous guidelines when most of the population don’t know the difference between your and you’re?
loading...
‘your’ and ‘you’re’ doesnt (usually) hurt people.
loading...
Totally agree with you. I never use the words in a way to be nasty to someone. We no longer call people with a mental disability ‘retard’ these days so it shouldn’t be a problem if I say “I’m such a retard today”.
loading...
Agree completely, I never even knew ‘retard’ was supposed to mean someone with a mental disability until a teacher said so at school, most people these days (even people with mental disabilities) use it in the same context as jokingly calling a mate an idiot or a d***head, it’s very rarely used in a nasty way. To be fair though, once I learnt what it’s supposed to mean I tried not to use it in front of someone with a mental disability unless I knew them well & knew for sure they wouldn’t take offence to it
loading...
Thanks Mamamia for highlighting this issue. I have commented before on the use of your language on this site regarding people with disabilities- so glad you are up to speed and helping everyone else do the same. The Queensland Government also has a great booklet “A Way with Words” to help out with this topic, and I suggest all media outlets read it too, as I am sick of hearing the 6pm news talking about people ‘suffering’ from cerebral palsy etc.
http://www.communities.qld.gov.au/resources/disability/community-involvement/communication/documents/way-with-words.pdf
loading...
In my case, I prefer the term vertically challenged! Terrific article BTW …. always interesting to hear Stella’s views.
loading...
Oh Charmaine, I too am quite vertically challenged. Unfortunately right now I am also feeling a little horizontally challenged too!
loading...
I admit I’ve done this and haven’t even thought twice about it.
I’d never use any of the other words and I didn’t even think about it.
I won’t be using the r word again.
loading...
One of my daughter’s has a disability, and it never ceases to amaze me how many thoughtless friends still use the words “retard” and “spastic” in front of me. It really upsets me….
loading...
Same here, my son has autism and friends refer to other people some times as being the “forest Gump” of their family, they may think its ok to refer to a member of their family that way, but I still take offence.
loading...
I don’t understand – didn’t Forrest Gump just have slightly below average intelligence? Isn’t that just like calling them a bit of a dummy, (not really that nice, but if said jokingly between siblings I guess it could be affectionate?) I don’t mean to be rude, its just that its hard to know what is offensive sometimes. Also Forrest Gump was incredibly successful at everything he did and was a nice guy and great Dad. So not entirely insulting?
loading...
So I can’t donate money to the Spastic Centre anymore?
loading...
It’s SCOPE now. Well in Vic anyway.
loading...
In South Australia it’s stil the Spastic Centres of South Australia (SCOSA)
It’s just a work, and while it should niot be used in an insulting manner, it’s still only a word.
Sticks and stones, if people spent a little more time on solving real problems instead of getting offended we’d get a hell of a lot more done.
loading...
The medical term “spastic” became used to describe cerebral palsy. The Spastics Society, a UK charity for people with cerebral palsy, was founded in 1951.
When used in the correct context and not as a way of insulting someone, yes!
loading...
…which came from the term ‘spasticity’ used to describe the stiffness associated with lack of control over the nerves that control muscle tone. However, people with Cerebral Palsy can also have low/no muscle tone (hypotonia) when the muscles are too loose so the term spastic is not really a correct definition of CP anyway. It was time for a name change.
loading...
They are called the Cerebral Palsy Alliance in NSW now.
loading...
If only the rest of America would catch up given that one of the main texts on Intellectual Disability is called “Mental Retardation” and this text is still used in university studies as it is the text book I’ve had to read this semester for a subject in my masters on special education for a subject called Intellectual Disability.
loading...
Well technically ‘retardation’ means slowness or delayed. From a medical perspective it’s descriptive rather than derogatory. Many of the terms we use as put-downs derive from real medical terms. For example, the word cretin was traditionally used to describe children with congenital hypothyroidism. Many older textbooks refer to ‘syphilitic idiots’ and imbeciles.
The language has changed, but I think a term like ‘retarded’ still has it’s place in medicine without implying anything other than a description of slowness. Spasticity is used commonly, and refers to increased muscle tone from a lesion in the brain or spinal cord, and isn’t easily replaced.
loading...
The word ‘retard’ in french means ‘late’, and in italian ‘late’ translates to ‘ritardo’ so this word obviously derives from latin
loading...
Hi have you tried Inclusion Press or the rolling around in my head blog which has links to great resources.
loading...
I get frustrated when people try and excuse their use of words like retard and gay by saying it is just what we call something we don’t like, it’s not personal. When gay or retarded started being used as a descriptor for people or things that are disliked it wasn’t because they were just random words someone started applying that meaning to. It was because society has historically viewed being retarded or gay as something to dislike. This is why it is considered derogatory by many, even when not being used in reference to a person.
Same goes for spastic, lame, etc.
No amount of “I didn’t mean it that way” will change this connotation for people who are offended by it. In my opinion, if people want continue to use loaded terms like these, they can. But to then turn around and try to dictate that others shouldn’t be offended by their use galls me. If you are going to use the terms, at least by honest about the fact that you don’t care if you offend people.
What it comes down to, is that if you want to express your dislike or, hey even insult someone, use terms that aren’t about denigrating a group of people. There are plenty of words in our vast vocabulary available to express dissatisfaction, or even hatred.
loading...
Such a great point. Language is extremely powerful. Even if the intention isn’t to hurt or offend, it still does, and that’s what matters.
loading...
I understand what you’re saying Maj and I have to say I agree in part, BUT I think what people tend to forget is the evolving process of language, itself. Yes, words like “spastic” and “retard” may be derogatory to a group of people at a certain time and place in history, even in a transitory period like the one we inhabit currently. However, they’re also evolving.
I think @jessimae94 pointed out that she’d never really known what the word “retard” actually meant until a teacher had addressed the subject. It was just another word she probably used to deride herself or her friends. A bit like d*ckhead, really. It seems like she never actually associated it with other people as a specific group, if that makes sense.
The same applies to the word “gay”. The best way to think about this would be in the way it was addressed on Can of Worms (Channel 10) on Monday Night. Gay, originally meant happy or joyful, and then it was of course used to describe a male who is homosexual, while today more often than not you’ll find youth, particularly gen Y using it instead of “lame”. Latter still applies though, that’s what I’m getting at when I say a transitory period I guess.
The best way I heard this described was by a UK comedian (don’t quote me on this, I think he’s from somewhere in the UK) Daniel Sloss. He’s a pretty young guy, early 20′s. In one of his sets he was addressing the way my generation use words like gay. He addressed himself specifically and said something along the lines of: “if I ask my roommate at the end of the day if he wants to go down the pub, and he says he’s too tired then I say don’t be so gay.”He goes on-in a humorous manner- to say that really he’s not calling his mate gay because he’s tired. Logically homosexuals aren’t gay because they’re tired, he’s just calling him a party pooper.
It’s all about context, and context is evolving. I mean, Gen Y is evolving and they’re going to be the forerunners soon. So, maybe…sometimes, they might be alright? I dunno. I still think we need to be careful and STOP and think, but maybe not be so rigid? Just food for thought.
loading...
Yes, language evolves – many innocuous words have evolved to having slightly different innocuous meanings as time goes on.
However, the only way the meaning of these kind of terms has ‘evolved’, as you put it, has been by people historically applying a negative insulting connotation to a previously unloaded word.
What you are basically saying is that, after a while the insult changes a bit, society becomes desensitised to its use, or is used in a differently insulting, possibly less harsh meaning. The newer generation never knew what the original meaning was so they have no responsibility over the hurt they cause when it is used. Well ignorance is bliss I guess.
Nothing you’ve said addresses the point that in order for the evolution to take place these terms have been used as very real insults to hurt and harm people. Many people remember that.
But now that you know (and come on, most people know) what these words mean to many (not all, but many) are you still going to use them? You can… that’s your choice, but stop trying to justify that you aren’t hurting some people by using them. You make the choice every time you use these words with the full knowledge that it could hurt some people. Some people won’t care, some people will care but are too tired, have other priorities than to pull you up on your bullshit.
Can you always predict if something you say will hurt someone? No, not always. But a good place to start is by not using terms that correlate a group of people with and insult or way to describe something you dislike or hate. And if you realise that you’ve unknowingly hurt someone, listen to why they are hurt and re-consider your language in the future and if you still want to use that term. You might make the choice that you think the chances of anyone being offended by gay or retard are low, so decide to keep using them, again your choice. But it seems to me like everyone wants permission to say what they want without fear of consequence, or instant justification that they didn’t mean offence when it is taken… well you aren’t going to get that.
loading...
I think Chlobee had some salient points actually. I bet many of the words you use mean something completely different when you use them than they were originally intended, and she gave plenty of good examples.
“Nothing you’ve said addresses the point that in order for the evolution to take place these terms have been used as very real insults to hurt and harm people. Many people remember that.”
I think she addressed this quite clearly – as words evolve their meanings change. They may have been an insult many years ago, but if they are used decades later in their evolved form they are not if they are not intended to be insulting.
For example, a few hundred years ago Rubanesque women were considered the most beautiful and sexy. Being called skinny was an insult to a woman’s physique because it reflected the fact that she was probably poor and couldn’t afford to eat well, (I know, not very evolved at all). If I said to you, “Wow, you look so skinny today!” would you be insulted because many years ago it would have been considered a rude comment? The meaning of the word is different now, and it isn’t meant to be insulting.
An insult is only insulting because of it’s intent. While it is possible to offend someone by being ignorant, the context and intention of what people say are more important than the actual words used in many instances.
loading...
The problem I’ve got here is that intention is being valued more than the hurtful outcome. Sure, intent often mitigates the amount of hurt. But we aren’t talking about terms from 100s of years ago. There are still people who have negative experiences with retard and gay being used as insults.
Even though I know those using the term retarded or gay often aren’t using it towards, or even really about, someone who identifies as gay or someone with a disability, but, their use still equates people to something dislikable. That still pangs for many people.
Again, people are free to use these terms, they can justify that their intent outweighs the unintended real pain caused to people by their use. Just don’t expect people who are hurt by their use to give a free pass – because that’s asking them to put aside their pain to make others feel okay about using a word that didn’t need to be used.
loading...
Thanks Maj, your first paragraph gave me something to think about, (although I don’t generally use those words). I still think we give words a power by using them as insults, but I suppose that has to be weighed against the potential for hurt for an innocent individual on the sidelines.
loading...
You’re a legend Maj.
loading...
Most gen Y, including my sons and their friends say gay instead of lame now. They’re not being spiteful in any way shape or form. I didn’t know lame was anything special either, I still say it.
loading...
Actually retarded is, (was), a medical term, meaning slowing down of development, I assume coming from the French word, (or maybe another language) for slow. It is medical. We don’t use it as much now, but I assume when people started using it as an insult it came from that. Just like now people might say someone is ‘a bit special’ or a ‘sped’ referencing special needs. It’s not because they don’t like special needs or retarded people, it’s because they are using hyperbole to compare themselves or someone else to a group that has different capabilities than they do. It is still insulting, and obviously hurtful, but I don’t think it’s because they dislike people with afflictions such as Cerebral Paulsy.
loading...
No one is saying that these people dislike people with special needs. The point is, these words offend them and their families. How can you defend that? Are there no other words to use???!!!
loading...
Hi Melly,
Actually Maj did say that in the paragraph from above;
I get frustrated when people try and excuse their use of words like retard and gay by saying it is just what we call something we don’t like, it’s not personal. When gay or retarded started being used as a descriptor for people or things that are disliked it wasn’t because they were just random words someone started applying that meaning to. It was because society has historically viewed being retarded or gay as something to dislike. ”
And yes, there are plenty of other words to use. My point is that one day they, too, may be considered too politically incorrect to use and sometimes people are labelled as ignorant because they weren’t aware that someone somewhere decided that those words have become offensive. I don’t defend their use at all. I have said a few times in this thread I don’t use those words because they are offensive to others. I’m just not sure where it will all stop.
loading...
Hallelujah Maj. My sentiments exactly. The words offend me, and I refuse to listen to people trying to tell me they shouldn’t. Use other words people!!
loading...
For people looking- I think this is the disability etiquette link that the article refers to : http://www.dhs.vic.gov.au/reportingitright
loading...
I have a family member who is vision impaired. In years past it was referred to as visually impaired, until it was decided that ‘visually impaired’ actually meant the person being described as ‘visually impaired’ was ugly to look at.
The family member was at a business meeting (again, some years ago) and referred to himself as visually impaired before being soundly told off by someone he didn’t even know! The lingo had changed and he hadn’t caught up with it, and he was the one with the disability in question! He found it most amusing.
loading...
Visually impaired = aesthetically challenged? You gotta love that.
loading...
Using this as an opportunity to understand the new politically correct terminology so excuse my impudence, but what is wrong with saying someone is blind? Should I not refer to blind Freddy anymore?
loading...
What an absolute load of bollocks! I am an amputee in a wheelchair. I use a disabled toilet. Sometimes I act like a retard. At times my limbs behave in a spastic manner. Come on people, lighten the f..k up! Life is far too short to be caught up in this type of tripe. I’m sick of the worry of trying to say the right thing so I cock up and say the wrong thing so badly that I’m frightened I’ll get thrown in jail. NOTHING should be said to any other person in an attempt to be cruel, but if you are speaking generally, what the???? It just isn’t worth the angst. Do you have any idea how many things I grew up with as normal language, are now illegal to say?? We can’t have golley wogs anymore – I never thought they resembled any person of colour – they were dolls for christs sake! Spastic is a medical term when your limbs don’t coordinate properly due to some nerve function or other. It doesn’t refer to a person. Oh gee, the list is endless, I just think we need to grow a funny bone. I’m a ‘disabled person’ not a person with a disability! Get over it!!
loading...
I agree. An old friend of mine was severely physically disabled and even she thought that people were being too politically correct.
loading...
agree completely, I’ve known quite a few disabled people who often use these words themselves, & don’t mind if someone else uses them as long as it isn’t meant to be rude.
loading...
Oh thank God you said it. I’m happy to joke about my own disabilities. As long as its not mean spirited, it’s ok.
A friend told someone at a party he’d kick their a*^e. When it was met with disbelief, he threw his leg across the room at him. Let’s not let everything be so serious.
loading...
LOL!
So often it’s people who aren’t affected getting their knickers in a knot about someone saying something that someone might maybe find offensive if they are in the wrong mood. I think it’s probably more realistic and easier if people who are actually affected and offended do the correcting and everyone just cop it on the chin should any offence be taken than trying to pre-empt the offence and getting everyone freaked out about what they think they can and can’t say!
loading...
Agree! I’m a proud spaz and am sick to death of people walking on egg shells in a conversation with me for fear of getting their words wrong. Kile the above said “LIGHTEN THE F*** UP!”
loading...
The Spazzies will be very glad to hear that, since they are a band named for their own surnames. I bet they get some funny looks!
Its a bit like Baa Baa Rainbow sheep – the people making these rules do realise that there is no such thing as a rainbow sheep, but there is in fact such a thing as a black sheep, unique and rare as it may be? Or should we call them alabaster challenged sheep?
loading...
Great piece. I often feel I put my foot in my mouth. Any chance you can link to the guidelines? x
loading...
I’m surprised at the comments on here (and the number of likes they have) along the lines of “why bother/ it’s over the top PCness” regarding the difference between saying ‘person with a disability’ and ‘disabled person’. Words and labels have long been used to put down all sorts of people in society, how can you honestly not care that you might be contributing to a culture of exclusivity? Because you can’t be bothered? Words matter. Be bothered.
For the record, is is my understanding of what the difference is: firstly to say ‘disabled person’ feels very hard line labelly to me. You could argue the equivalent is ‘person with cancer’ as opposed to ‘cancerous person’. Their disability does not define them as a person, and personally I feel like the new phrase acknowledges that more.
Secondly, if you acknowledge that they are a “person with a disability” you are also acknowledging its not always the physical / mental / intellectual impairment that is disabling but the social or physical environment around that person which is disabling. The label “disabled person” puts much more onus on the individual instead of society.
This is an issue I feel is really important and I’m really impressed that mamamia published this article! Thank you.
loading...
In fairness, I don’t think its because people can’t be bothered, I think its because they don’t see differently abled people that differently to themselves, so they don’t recognise these words as insulting until someone points it out. And they don’t want to step on eggshells, because that in effect draws a distinction between these groups within society where they themselves haven’t seen one.
loading...
I think this is such a tricky subject – the currently acceptable terminology to use. While I totally agree that insulting language should not be used at all for any minority group – for any person for that matter, I often wonder about the semantics of it all. Some names and labels are clearly derogatory but it seems to me that some have just become derogatory through their use and abuse. For example “retard” – as the definition provided by maggie below – technically speaking it might actually be a correct description of a person’s intellectual abilities (ie slowed) but it has become offensive because of the way its used. I wonder if we will forever continue this “bandaid” approach of finding new sensitive and acceptable words when the old ones become bastardised by bigoted (or unaware) people out there.
I believe that pc language is absolutely necessary but I do think we should put as much effort into educating people about actually treating minority groups as equals and not just using the right words.
I should also say that I do agree with the philosophy of not using such words as labels and defining a person – just like I don’t want to be labeled “the fat lady”, I’m sure people with a disability don’t want to be labeled “the deaf lady”. We are all so much more than just one thing.
loading...
I understand that people find it hard or scary talking about this topic….but why are we making such a big deal about making sure we get the label right, if we just see the person for who they are…then we wouldn’t need labels at all!!
Look past the disability and look at the human being…..a disability label shouldnt be what you remember most about a person. It should be their talents, personality, humor or whatever makes that person unique.
loading...
That’s the whole point of saying person with a disability. Sure, you wouldn’t say something like “this is my friend with a disability” but when the context requires it you should say person with a disability. By saying ‘person’ and not ‘disabled person’ then you are focussing on the person and not the disability.
loading...
I just showed this to my children…I must say that I was pretty happy that my 9 year old recoiled in horror at some of the racial slurs, and most of them she had never even heard which is great. It is really excellent for putting it in perspective for them.
loading...
A dog with spots is…. a spotted dog. A person with disabilities is… a disabled person. Unless the word disabled has now become a pejorative? Is that why we’re tiptoeing around?
Moron and cretin were once medical terms. So was mongoloid. Once these terms became ‘tainted’ as pejorative words, the world moved on to the next term. Retarded was in common use, correctly, before ‘retard’ became offensive. Handicapped was then the word du jour – until it suffered the same fate. Now it is person with disability. Give it time, that will soon become a phrase to be avoided and the next new term will be promulgated (stand by for the new one): ‘differently-abled’. Same with ‘special needs’ which is now falling out of favour because we are starting not to like the word special – eg. the ‘special bus’. As long as we treat people with respect, I think the exact terminology is perhaps less important than we think.
Really, I do get what is trying to be done, and it is politically correct in the best sense. But this is just another stage in the ever-changing semantics of disability. I don’t think we will ever arrive at the final, correct terms to use for disabled people because every time we do, these terms then fall out of fashion or become distaseful, and we then have to find new ones. I’m not writing with any particular opinion of these terms, more an interest in the English language and how it changes and evolves with social mores.
loading...
it’s person first, not their disability first.
loading...
A person with a disability is the same as a disabled person. I don’t think semantics about word order like this is any reflection of the user’s attitude towards disability. I am a short person, not a ‘person who is short’. It’s only when you see the adjective ‘disabled’ as pejorative that it becomes a problem.
loading...
It’s also using too many words to change from “disabled person”
I’d much rather reduce the amount of words that I have to type.
loading...
But I think that’s the point, it is often seen as the defining thing about that person by many people when it is put before the noun. I think it is also about saying ‘a disability’, the person has ‘a disability, the whole person isn’t necessarily disabled.
loading...
I see this as more of a problem – isn’t changing the terminology actually becoming insulting in itself? There is nothing wrong with being disabled, it isn’t an insult. If we keep changing the terms what we are really doing is pointing out the differences between disabled and non disabled people, which no one was doing before. In trying to make everyone equal, are we making a distinction which makes them appear less so?
loading...
This can be a delicate topic, and I agree with the sentiments of the new guidelines. Language is important and plays a large part in the formation of overall culture.
I’m compelled, for these reasons, to single out one line in this article that rang ironic to me: ‘Using ugly words that send a message that disability makes someone a lesser person’.
The words themselves are not ugly. The word ‘blind’ is a real word with real meaning, ‘spastic’ is a real word with real meaning. What we don’t want is for these and other words to be used in a derogatory way.
I know this could be viewed as nitpicking, but isn’t that the point of this article; to be aware of the language we use?
loading...
re·tard 1 (r-tärd)
v. re·tard·ed, re·tard·ing, re·tards
To cause to move or proceed slowly; delay or impede.
To be delayed.
1. A slowing down or hindering of progress; a delay.
2. Music A slackening of tempo.
——————-
re·tard 2 (rtärd)
n. Offensive Slang
1. Used as a disparaging term for a mentally retarded person.
2. A person considered to be foolish or socially inept.
———————–
I remember an episode of CSI where this came up and how the term Retard was technically appropriate. It’s a shame that it was turned into a negative connotation.
It’s the same with gay. It’s an explanation but also back when I was in high school we used gay to describe thing and people we didn’t like. I am pretty sure inanimate objects don’t feel happiness or have sexual preferences, but we still used it.
But now that retard is usually considered rude, I no longer use it to describe a disabled person.
loading...
So by that definition if I do something that is a little slow on the uptake I can use the word retard? Because I do refer to myself as a little slow when I do something infinitely stupid. I’m very exhausted by the word police. I can use the word beautiful to insult if I phrase it correctly. Why don’t we look at how it is used not the actual words used?
loading...
“Why don’t we look at how it is used not the actual words used?”
I agree. That is why I don’t think people shouldn’t not be able to use the word retard. If you used it correctly it wouldn’t be offensive.
It’s a shame that people have turned it to an insult.
That is what I was trying to mean above, if it’s the correct term and you aren’t using it as an insult, it should be fine. That goes for any word.
I had a disabled friend, and even she believed people are becoming too “precious or politically correct” these days.
loading...
It’s amusing you mention this. Slightly off topic, once I asked someone to grabs the faggots by a tree for a campfire. They were looking around for homosexual people, as they later explained, and not the bundle of kindling I had laid by the tree.
At least The Spastic Centre was renamed to the Cerebral Palsy Alliance.
loading...
While we’re on the subject (and we rarely are I’m afraid) can I pleeeease ask you not to use disabled toilets unless you NEED to – NB strollers are not a ‘need to’ situation.
loading...
Wasn’t it established on another post that accessible toilets aren’t there purely for those in wheelchairs, and that in fact anyone can use them as long there isn’t someone who requires the accessible toilet waiting?
Strollers are a “need to” situation if there is no parents room available, as they don’t generally fit in a regular toilet cubicle.
loading...
Agreed. But little point to make is that some places have the change table in the accessible toilet and I do have to use it for this reason. And yes, there are times I have peed after I have changed may bub, but I promise it wasn’t just so I could pee.
loading...
I’m not sure about this one. I absolutely agree that able bodied people shouldn’t be using disabled toilets just because there’s a queue. BUT, when I have a baby in a pram, I use the disabled toilet. I can’t really see any other alternative (I’m open to suggestions!). Baby change tables are also often located in the disabled toilet. The lines here are blurred I think.
loading...
No excuse. Join the line like we (disabled) people have to when inconsiderate people use them.
loading...
But we can’t fit in to the regular toilets. Can you? And I’m not talking about the insanely huge prams that people have. I’m talking about the $25 from Big W job that I more often than not use. The vast majority of people have no problem waiting for the toilet, and if there is someone with a disability who needs it, they get priority. I honestly cannot think of a time when I have been in the accessible toilet and come out to find someone waiting. Why is waiting a couple of minutes OK for everyone else but not you?
loading...
I can’t believe people with prams think they’ve got it just as bad as a person in a wheelchair. YOU DON’T
and the little bite at the end wasn’t needed, ok. Sometimes a colostomy bag can’t wait to be emptied, so while you and your kids take your time in the disabled toilets making a mess, think about that.
loading...
I don’t think that was what Kris was saying – I think the point is that people with strollers can’t fit into normal toilets. It isn’t about not wanting to wait in line.
loading...
I don’t make a mess in any toilet, thanks very much. That is what there is no need for.
I pointed out that we can’t fit in regular toilets with a pram – even the small umbrella stroller styles. And that not once have I used the disabled toilet when there has been anyone waiting for it.
I don’t think I’ve got it as bad as someone in a wheelchair, I said that strollers don’t fit in regular toilets. And I’ll reiterate – it’s not like our shopping centres are over-run with people in wheelchairs waiting for the disabled toilets. Would you be as up in arms if someone ELSE in a wheelchair made you wait a couple of minutes?
loading...
They’re accessible toilets, not disabled toilets and people with prams CAN’T fit the prams into ordinary toilets. If there’s parenting rooms available people generally use them (particularly if they have a toilet, but they don’t always. Sometimes the accessible toilets have change tables, so it’s not a matter of being inconsiderate.
loading...
“it’s not like our shopping centres are over-run with people in wheelchairs waiting for the disabled toilets.”
Choose your words wisely ‘over-run with people in wheelchairs’? I think you’re just ignorant. Say what you will about wheelchairs, but there are too many parents that treat their pram like they are disabled. There are more parents with prams parking spaces than disabled parking spots!
loading...
If strollers are not a ‘need to’ situation, can you suggest where I should leave my baby in the stroller while I’m using the loo?
I’ll stop using disabled toilets when there are public toilets that allow a stroller in them. As if anyone would leave their babe outside the toilet while they go, or should I have a wee with one kid on each knee? Actually, I am quite good at that…
loading...
When my son (now 3) was in a pram I always used the disabled toilets in situations where there were no family toilets available. Its simply not possible to bring a pram into most public toilets.
Funny enough I also get really annoyed when able-bodied, childless people use the family toilets because the queues are long elsewhere!
loading...
A few points to keep in mind are that most accessible/disable toilets are the ones with a change table in it or if a dad needs to take their child to the toilet the accessible toilet is normally the only option – parents rooms are not always available and there are not too many unisex toilets around.
Also most toilets are not easy to get a double stroller/pram into & I’m not leaving my kids outside while I use the toilet.
loading...
Yes strollers are a “need to” situation, if there are no toilet cubicles big enough to fit a stroller. Our local shoping centre has a parents room, but the tolet cubicle still doesn’t fiit a stroller, when I needed to go I used the disabled access toilets. Never had anyone waiting on the other side when I got out, ever, not that I would sit in there for 10 minutes reading a book
I also use the ramps at school, that were put in for wheelchair access
loading...
No need to be sarcastic. I’ve seen plenty of strollers exit disabled toilets when there is a PARENTS ROOM beside it. No excuse for not using it first.
loading...
It’s a fair point though – if there’s no one who can only use the accessible toilet waiting or in the vicinity, why is it not OK to use the accessible toilet? It’s not as if our shopping centres are swarming with people who are busting to use the accessible toilets. And most of us when using them, as Mickie and everyone else has alluded to, are acutely aware that we’re in the accessible toilet and don’t sit there reading a magazine.
I’d wager most people too, like me, only use the accessible toilet when the parents room is full/non-existent and we’ve got the pram. If I don’t have the pram I use the regular toilets, and I’m sure the vast majority of people commenting here do the same.
loading...
I wasn’t being sarcastic, i was pinting out that that there are ramps to make the classrooms accessible for the 2 children we have at school who require them. Anyone can use these ramps, but you wouldn’t go barging in front of someone who was in a wheel chair.
You need to remember that toilets, ramps, lifts, checkouts etc that are wheelchair “accessible” are totally different to a disability access parking spot .
loading...
Looks like you’ve been told!
loading...
No sorry. I will continue to use accessible toilets with my son so we can both be in the same cubicle when nature calls.
I’m interested in why you feel so strongly about it.
loading...
If your son is not in a pram , use the regular toilets. Why can’t you take him in with you like most other people do? It’s common courtesy. Having a child with you is NOT a disability.
loading...
I need to go to the loo and I need to supervise my children if the ‘accessible toilet’ is the only one ‘accessible’ then I need to use it!
loading...
100% in favour of the ‘Not acceptable r-word’ campaign.
But when it comes to talking about people with disabilities I think for me personally it will be hard to change. The reason I, and expect most people, say things like ‘they are deaf’ etc. is because it’s easy. Those adjectives makeit quick and easy to get a point across. I say, “they’re deaf/deaf person” in the same way I would say, “it’s wet/wet towel”. It’s just easier than saying, “the towel that is wet”.
I understand that some people may not appreciate it,and I will try to change the way I speak, but I think this way of speaking came about to make communication more efficient, not to cause anyone offence. So it’s going to be hard to shake the habit when you naturally gravitate to the easy way of communicating.
loading...
Have to say that it was hard for me to change too, and I didn’t really see the point – but was forced to because I started working with people with intellectual disability.
However after some time of using the ‘person first’ approach, it does cause a subtle shift in your thinking. It brings us all together and puts us on the same page. I think it was worthwhile making the effort!
loading...
Great ad. So true.
I’m a disabled person and staring, pointing kids don’t bother me. It’s adults who wrap me (and my wheelchair) in cotton wool. Disabled people don’t want special treatment so talk with us normally – joke, swear, laugh or whatever you would do with someone who wasn’t disabled.
loading...
Disabled – I am really happy to hear you say that. My son points, stares and yells. He loves wheelchairs and thinks they are ‘the coolest toy ever!’
loading...
Thank you for this article
I have a daughter who has Autism and I get frustated with the use of the word retard. I am also a Voice teacher who does not allow it to be used in class but I explain to the kids why and they all accept it which is wonderful. Sometimes if a person uses a word you have to explain why it offends you and generally they will stop using it. I also hate people assuming just because my daughter has Autism that she is intellectually impaired, Autism means your brain is wired differently. You can have both ( ASD and an II) or just one they don’t always go together.
loading...
Are you able to point me in the direction of the Vic Government guidelines?
Thanks in advance.
loading...
I find the rules very confusing sometimes. My FIL is a teacher of hearing impaired/deaf people, and has been for over 30 years.
He told me a story not so long ago about a visitor to his TAFE who kept referring to all the students as “hearing impaired”. A few of the students got really frustrated and one student who is completely without sound told my FIL (excuse the language, this is pretty much verbatim), “I wish all this politcally correct sh*t would stop – my hearing isn’t “impaired” – I’m f*cking deaf and I can’t hear a f*cking thing!” Most of the students in the classes also refer to themselves as “deafies” and have no issue in using the term deaf.
Is this is a case “if this affects you, you can use that term” but no one else should? Almost like African Americans using the N word? My FIL has been in the deaf community for so long and everyone he knows, works with and teaches used this terminology, but I thought it was supposed to be considered insensitive now?
This is a genuine question and I mean no offence to anyone!
loading...
I learnt sign a few years back, and part of that was learning about Deaf culture. People can be deaf, but not part of the Deaf community, like they don’t go to Deaf events and stuff. It’s hard to explain – what does your Dad say?
loading...
Hey Kris,
I just had a really fascinating conversation with FIL, and he said that (in his experience) if a person is profoundly deaf from birth, then yes, there is definitely a Deaf Community. Auslan, the language of people who are profoundly deaf, is very different from Signed English. It is a profoundly deaf person’s first language as they have grown up never knowing English (or having it to fall back on like a hearing person who has lost their hearing through an accident or similar). FIL said they do have a culture of their own because they have a language of their own.
This is different to hearing impairment, as a person with hearing impairment generally CAN learn English, and speak/hear it to some extent, and (according to FIL) don’t really use Auslan. I found this really interesting as I didn’t realise there was such a difference between the languages.
I don’t know if things have changed with time, but FIL has spent half his life working with children, adults and families who are profoundly deaf, and this is what he experienced.
loading...
Yeah, that’s what we were taught, just explained a lot better!
Also, you can be hearing but part of the Deaf community – hearing kids of deaf parents, hearing parents of deaf kids.
I loved learning Auslan, I wish I could have continued with it and had the opportunity to keep it up. One of my teachers was Sofya from Play School!
loading...
Sofya is my daughter’s favourite! Genuine question, why are the words blind and deaf offensive?
loading...
One of my friends teaches at a high school for the deaf (her words). She’s learned auel an and signed English for it. She also has mentioned the two very distinct cultures amongst those with varying degrees of hearing impairment and said that those with congenital often look down on those that go for the bionic ear implants and don’t like to lip read either.
I worked with a profoundly deaf lady (and her hearing baby) some years ago. She refused a translator, so we communicated via handwriting, texts, emails and my very limited sign language. Two of her kids (baby included) could hear, but the rest of her family was deaf. It was a very interesting year with her.
loading...
I worked with kids who were deaf and hearing impaired and they pretty much told me the same thing. I was told by one student that his hearing was so ‘impaired’ he was deaf!!
loading...
I teach in a Special Unit and we use the term ‘Special needs’ at our school because, at the crux of it, this is what they all have.
Deep down they are still everyday people who may need certain aspects modified to make their life easier and more enjoyable. Everything from a wheelchair ramp to a modified curriculum to a nationwide inclusivity policy at schools is enacted to ensure that absolutely no one is disadvantaged.
Education begins at home though.
Teaching your own children to be accepting, understanding and compassionate regarding people with special needs reduces the name-calling and bullying. Some children have empathy from a young age, some need to have it nurtured by their parents. Everyone has feelings, why would it be acceptable to hurt someone else’s, for no reason other than their appearance.
It also means that if someone uses disabled terms in a derogatory way, that your children will not accept it and correct the rude and ignorant people about what is appropriate and what isn’t. I know I do, especially with a ‘special needs’ brother who has an intellectual disability and my own Asperger’s child.
loading...
Well that can be turned on its head too. I knw someone who jokes “I’m a little bit special today” when she does something dumb.
loading...
Calling anyone autistic makes me cringe. They are people who happen to have autism. We need to stop living by labels.
loading...
As troubling as “disabled person” is; “normal person” is just as troubling to the families of a person with a disability. We say “typical” around here or “mainstream” when referring to other children at my granddaughter’s school. Most confronting; “when did you realise she wasn’t normal?”
loading...
I think the pc term is “neurotypical”
loading...