Fun for all the family
There is always a lot of discussion about PC language and whether it is important and, as someone with a background in linguistics, I think that it is. It is not that the preference for one term over another is always particularly logical or even grammatical. It is simply that, by using the vocabulary of a group and avoiding its taboo words, however arbitrary, you show solidarity for their cause and, most of all, respect for their culture. Would you shove a bacon sandwich into the mouth of an Orthodox Jewish person? No? Then you shouldn't say the h-word to me either.
One reason that people use the "wrong" language is simply that they don't listen, a fact which when repeated endlessly, can make relatively innocuous terms seem offensive. For instance, I have been diagnosed with autism, so I never describe myself as having Asperger Syndrome, but many people talk about me having AS as though it is the same thing. The actual error itself is not offensive to me but I am mildly hurt by the appearance that someone is not paying attention.
Nevertheless, you can turn the tables on such people and have fun at their expense, which has led me to invent what I call the "people with disabilities" game. This is based on the fact that many disabled people, including myself, prefer the term "disabled people", which is more consistent with the social model of disability. However, many non-disabled people prefer the term "people with disabilities", because it seems more euphemistic. From a style guide perspective, no-one is highly offended by either term, at least compared with the h-word, but it is always worth bearing the difference in mind.
The game goes like this. You try to have a conversation with a non-disabled person but always saying "disabled people" and the aim is to get your "opponent" to say "people with disabilities" as many times as possible. It is very easy to get through a half-hour discussion with them without them realising that you are even using different terms. A much harder trick is to get them to parrot back one of your sentences virtually word-for-word, except with their phrase substituted for the one that you have used. Nevertheless, it is certainly possible to do so. I am sure some valuable research about language processing could be done using this game because it seems that people only get the "gist" of what has been said and are perfectly capable of changing several words in a sentence without noticing.
posted by James Medhurst @ 11:15 pm
4 comments
4 Comments:
Well, I'm pretty sure you've done well in that game against me, as I'm pretty sure that I use the term 'people with disabilities'. Is this because I feel the need for something which is 'more euphemistic'? No, it's because that is the term that I use, though I certainly see the distinction between that and 'disabled people'. The question is, do you eventually tell your 'victim' what you're doing, and try to clarify the difference, to aid in the other person understanding where you're coming from?
Similarly, when someone refers to you having AS, do you clarify the difference? It is a truth that AS and high-functioning autism are seen as the same by many. If someone persists in hearing the term they think you're using, instead of the term that you are actually using, why not let them know?
Hiya Kim,
The situation is complicated by the fact that 'people with disabilities' is regarded as the PC-term in the United States, even among campaigners, and so that may be why you use it.
I do correct people some of the time but, unfortunately, it is too exasperating and antagonising to always do so. I regard the repeated use of my 'version' as a subtle way of hinting at my preference but it rarely works. Hence the game - childish, I know, but it keeps me amused.
A few months ago, my uncle died. To you or I, he had profound learning difficulties. His death was sudden and I happened to be staying with my folks when it happened. My Mum had to get some information to a certain person within social services, but didn't really know who or how to contact them, so she sat down and made about six or seven phone-calls, being passed from pillar to post trying to get this information across.
Now, during this period, I sat and listened and heard her use pretty much every term, PC, non-PC and downright offensive, to describe my uncle's impairment. In fact, I think "impairment" was the only word she didn't use.
"He was mentally hancicapped."
"He had intellectual problems."
"He was disabled... in the head."
"He was, you know, not very bright."
"His brain didn't work very well."
My poor Mum, bless her, just hasn't got a handle on this language thing. But I felt that she was trying. She was trying very hard to express something that really there isn't a linguistic consensus about.
The only real way we win this battle is gentle, repetitive correction. I do think that if you continue to play your game, it will eventually sink in.
If in doubt, pick on a phrase, such as "Gordon Bennett!". Keep using it in your office and by next week I guarantee you that other people will be cursing in the same way.
are you insane?
Post a Comment
<< Home