I ran across the term "Differently Abled" the other day. Apparently, it's the new politically correct term for "Disabled". Sigh. I'm sure in a year or so, there will be a new, improved, more sensitive way to say it.
I read a really interesting piece written by Kenneth Jernigan, who is President of the National Federation of the Blind. In it, he includes a memo sent out by the U.S. Dept. of Education to employees about what terms are politically correct when dealing with people who are disabled. It's absurd. For example, instead of saying "blind people", it tells you to say, "people who are blind" or "persons with a visual impairment". Or, instead of "disabled person", you should say, "persons with a disability" or "individuals with disabilities".
Jernigan (and the NFA) published a Resolution in response to it, denouncing the use of all the euphamisms. You can read it yourself here. (I'd suggest reading it- it's good.) I think it's a great example of how political correctness can become a runaway train. The very people it's aimed at pleasing... aren't pleased! I'm all for treating each other with tact and courtesy, don't get me wrong. If there's a nice way to say something, by all means, use that way. But, don't bury yourself under vague terminology and useless jargon!
It's not just the tiresome cycle of it that bothers me. It's also the idea that it's not acceptable to notice or admit that we are all different. Some of us can't walk. Or talk. Or see. Why is it so taboo to recognize that as a society? It doesn't mean they can't accomplish the same things other people can, it's just a physical difference that is undeniable, no matter how you phrase it! It doesn't make them inferior or irrelevent in our world. Nobody who uses the word "disabled" or "handicapped" or "blind" or "deaf" is determining someone else's worth. It's just a physical description for a fact of life. Now, if a group of people prefer to be identified a certain way, I'll comply. People I've always called midgets now prefer to be called Little People. That's fine! I'm happy to do that. They want it- it didn't come about because of some politically correct agenda that's been forced on the public through memos.
Anyway, that's just my opinion, it's open for discussion if you disagree.
Posted by Shannon at January 6, 2004 09:56 PM | TrackBackI completely agree with you. I remember in college I took a course called "Psyco-social aspects of Deafness". In this class we read an article about how people who are functioning on a normal level should be called "non-disabled" (as opposed to normal). I was outraged. Deafness and disability are facts of life, we are not trying to downplay the affects of these conditions or do any harm to people who are disabled. But the bottom line is, when people are blind, deaf, and/or disabled, they are not the norm and they shouldn't be considered the "norm" just because it is politically correct.
I will stop my rant now.
Posted by: peninah at January 7, 2004 09:43 PMI'm with you, Shannon... it's out of control.
love,
someone who is a woman who is an aunt due to the fact that she is a female who is related to asomeone who was born of the same mother who has a relationship under the laws of the state and of God with a woman born of another mother, and wno (the first who, that is) happens to be named vickie...