Paralympics ad on TV

[wahwahwah]

...err 'I am a freak of nature'.

Um, the word 'freak' - I thought I midheard until it was on again last night. Am I being a bit 'PC' on this or is it really offensive?

.. DS is fascinated my amputees running on their blades. 'Mummy, can I do that when I am bigger?'

is that meant to be funny

I don't think that freak is the same as nigger though. It is a word that in some circumstances has no negative connotations, and that's not because of any reclaiming attempts either. Nigger is used exclusively for black people. It has no other meaning. Freak is used for different/unusual/exceptional as well as a term of abuse. dh's friends who said that their biceps were freaky were meaning freakishly good. Journalists saying that Jonny Wilkinson or Usain Bolt were freaks of nature meant they were unbelievably good.

However I absolutely get it that if your child has been abused with the term then you woudl have a totally different view point on the ads and see them as either very unwise or deliberately hurtful. But there are disabled people who have used the term freak in their work in the same way as Channel Four, to be deliberately provocative and challenging. I've no idea if they themselves had or had not been the target of abuse using the word "freak".

Nooka, i get where you are coming from, but the term is commonly used for mental disabilities too, perhaps even more so.

Perhaps some of us are coming across as annoying. For some of us, who have children with disabilities this is a debate which is close to our hearts.

Nooka, I was replying to maryz's post, where she drew the comparison. Maryz, I know what you mean about words that people use wittily about themselves, but aren't as funny when used to them by others. It's just one of those social subtleties that children tend to find out the hard way, as in the story you told ...

... but I still don't think "freak of nature" is such an expression. It would be if they'd called themselves cripples, spazzas or something - however, they wouldn't have done that because they are promoting their sporting excellence NOT their disability.

Ifgrace, I would say you are coming across more ignorant than retarded.

It's interesting that nigger is still beyond the pale in a way that gay isn't. I do think that it's very tricky to reclaim negative terms, and I'm not at all sure it's the right way to go.

If Channel Four had won the rights to broadcast the Olympics they would have had no need for any build up at all, as the Olympics are of interest to a very wide audience and do not need promoting. But the Paralympics have been seen as a very minority event, with little coverage and low viewership. Part of the reason why Channel Four got the rights was because they said they would dedicate significant hours to the event. The reason they gave for their campaign was to address the invisibility of the events, sports and the athletes. The wording of the campaign may be misplaced but the campaign itself is needed. I wonder how many members of the public could name a single Paralympian, even though British athletes collected 102 medals in Beijing.

Your DD is fantastic and instinctively knows that it is wrong unlike the executives at Channel 4.

Nobody objects to a campaign to publicise the Paralympics, it is the wording and the emphasis on 'freak' that is controversial and problematic.

Maryz, i have a 16 and 14 year old they view 'freak' in exactly the same way. As does my 6 year old disabled ds.

claw of course you are not being annoying. As I said I'm not sure that these sort of reclaiming type approaches work at all, and have never really subscribed to the I can tell off jokes about the group that I belong to, but no one else can, because some of the "jokes" really shouldn't be told (frequently because they aren't funny at all, or because they may cause significant upset). I think it is an area to be very very careful.

In my close family there are two children with severe LDs and one with a severe and lifelimiting disease causing significant physical disability. My mother is also very involved with disability sports so I know a fair few people with different sorts of disabilities. I've not personally heard of anyone calling them freaks so it's not an association I'd make. In fact I've never really come across very much disabalism until I came to MN. I'm not saying in any way that it doesn't exist, sadly, just that to me "freak" isn't something I associate with disability.

gigantaur...stand by.

Nooka, Im sure you are not the only one who doesnt associate the word freak with disability.

The campaign organisers are obviously aware of the usage "Freaks of Nature is designed to make people sit up and think. It is quite challenging in some ways but has been carefully researched and tested and the athletes who take part agreed to it."

yes mind would love to get one of them to respond on here and explain their feeling and listern to us who have more vunerable people that potentially will sufer

Riven, I would imagine that able-bodied athletes don't have to face the misconception about their abilities that disabled athletes will encounter.

It seems to me that the point of this (whether it will work or is wise or not I am undecided about) is that the use, by the athlete, is meant to jolt the person listening; we don't expect to hear a disabled person use a term that has derogatory associations in describing themselves. Then, the listener is, I think, supposed to realise that the athlete is really saying not "I am a freak because I can't walk/am blind/am an amputee" but "I am capable of great sporting achievements".

I abhor anyone who would bully, victimise, insult or assault anyone for any reason. However, I really really really do not think that anyone is going to decide, from having watched this ad, to go out and abuse a disabled person. It just might give them a new word to use but that's all.

On the other hand, it might, just maybe, make someone else, maybe someone with similar views to claig, stop and think about their attitude to disabled people. It also might encourage someone who would never have watched disability sport before tune in to the Paralympics. You never know.

Most of us instinctively find this advert offensive because it uses the word 'freak' in relation to disabled people. We find it offensive because we do not think that a person is a freak because they cannot walk, or because they are blind, or because they are an amputee. We don't need Channel 4 to make us realise this. Why don't the Channel 4 executives find it offensive? Why have they introduced it? How could they think it? Do they have such a low opinion of the public? Do they think we are all thinking it? Why are they casting such aspersions on the public? The more I think about it, the more I think that it is Channel 4 and not the public that is insulting disabled people. Most of the public instinctively feel that this advert is wrong, but the Channel 4 executives clearly don't. But I wouldn't expect you to understand that MsHighWater, as you seem to occupy a parallel universe where the word 'athlete' is an insult and the word 'freak' is just "a new word to use", "that's all".

Mshighwater - A handful of athletes have used a derogatory word which represents many other disabled people, but chosen to showcase their abilities and raise their public profile, not to raise awareness of how the word has been used, but their abilities.

So dont use the word 'freak' in the campaign as they are misrepresenting the majority of disabled people.

Someone who would not usually insult a disabled person, is not going to do so, just because of this ad. But they are reinforcing the people who already do, not challenging them. Thats the problem.

claig, it is not for you or me to be offended by this - neither of us is a disabled person (at least I know I am not and I cannot imagine, from your patronising comments about disabled people, that you are). Riven has identified herself as a disabled person and I know that she does not like it as she has said so. I presume (since I acknowledge them as self-determining adults) that the athletes do not see it as offensive (shocking and provocative, maybe, but not offensive). So that demonstrates that disabled people can hold either view.

claig, you haven't the slightest idea what "most of the public" think about anything, let alone this. I entered this discussion, and have stayed with it, mostly to challenge your patronising attitude to disabled people. I'm sorry that this debate has not let you see that.

I rather suspect the "disabled" athletes in the advert would be more offended being labelled as "vulnerable" than as a "freak".

I honestly can't understand why some people look to get so offended on others behalf.

I know why you have "stayed with" this thread, MsHighwater. It is not because of the ad, but because you think that I am patronising to disabled people.

I think disabled soldiers are vulnerable to abuse from certain members of the public.

"http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-495910/Wounded-Iraq-veterans-driven-public-pool-told-scare-children.html"

If soldiers are vulnerable to abuse, then athletes are too, and even more so disabled children who cannot protect themselves from bullies in the playground. I don't think that is patronising, I think it is a fact, and one that I am surprised that you cannot see or feel.

LookToWindward, you said
"I honestly can't understand why some people look to get so offended on others behalf."

They do so because they care for others and not only for themselves. I personally cannot understand why you can't get offended for the sake of others.

claig, I know why you have "stayed with" this thread, MsHighwater. It is not because of the ad, but because you think that I am patronising to disabled people.". That's right, claig. That is, in fact, what I said so well done for working it out.

I can see only too well why you have done so, and I saw it long before you told me. I think I also understand the reason why you are determined to misconstrue my feelings towards disabled people.

At least we both agree on one thing, the true reason why you have "stayed with" this thread.