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?'

I think the people who have the interests of the disabled most at heart are the parents of disabled children, not you and the 'creative officers'. Haven't you listened to Riven, Claw3, roundthebend4 and 2shoes? Why do you think that all of these parents are against the advert? I bet the 'creative officers' were like you and also didn't ask or listen to parents of disabled people. But then you don't need to listen to others, do you MsHellorHighwater? You know better. Try stepping down off your high horse MsHighwater and maybe you will make better judgements.

Just to clarify, guys...bullying children (or anyone else) at school (or anywhere else) is wrong and should be stamped on whenever it happens.

100%.

But this ad does not do that.

To blame this ad for anything that bullies say would be wrong and misguided, for it would (even if only in part) reduce their own responsibility for their insulting behaviour.

By all means, attack bullies when they bully but this ad does not bully anyone.

Please, let's treat everyone as adults and not try to 'prevent' them from being unpleasant.

MsHighwater, it matters what words are used to insult someone. I am sure that a disabled child would prefer to be called an athlete than a freak. Athlete applies to world record holders and Olympic champions and is not a derogatory term like freak. I think the difference is obvious. Scoper is also a terrible insult because it is used only against disabled people, it singles them out and excludes them from the group. It isolates them and hurts them in the way that a term like athlete could never do.

but BarmyArmy, put yourself in the position of a parent with a disabled child. Can't you understand their fear that this language will be used by others against their children? Have you googled about Joey Deacon and seen what happened and how his name was used as an insult? Don't you think that creators of adverts also bear some responsibility for the words and images that they use (just like the bullies who may pock up on their words), given that their 'bold' campaigns will be seen in every household and will influence millions of people?

pick up on

Claig, perhaps they took the desperate course and talked to disabled people themselves. I expect there is a range of opinion among disabled people about this kind of issue but, nevertheless, that's the group who have more credibility to comment than any other, without exception.

I had never heard the term "scoper" until this thread. It's not "a terrible insult" - it's just a word but, evidently, one that has acquired an insulting meaning because of how it has been used by some people who were intent on being unpleasant. Words can be made to acquire new meanings by how, and by whom, they are used. I suspect this campaign is seeking to do this with a positive, rather than a negative, effect.

Clearly, they have a long way to go.

"I suspect this campaign is seeking to do this with a positive, rather than a negative, effect."

I suspect the same, but I think they are wrong and it will backfire. It will be like the Joey Deacon case. But time will tell and we will see what happens.

Riven quoted a very moving quite from a yoing man with Down syndrome on another thread. Reading this you understand the feeling of isolation and separation from the group that language such as retard of freak or scoper etc. creates in disabled people. I think responsible people should think very carefully before helping to increase the use of these terms amongst the general public.

'What's the big deal about using the word "retard"?

A lot of people are talking about the movie "Tropic Thunder." One of the reasons that it is being talked about is that the characters use the term "retard" over and over. They use it the same way that kids do all the time, to jokingly insult one another.

The people who made the movie, DreamWorks and Paramount, and many of the critics who have reviewed it, say that the term is being used by characters who are dumb and shallow themselves.

You see, we are supposed to get the joke that it is only the dumb and shallow people who use a term that means dumb and shallow. My dad tells me that this is called "irony."

So, what's the big deal?

Let me try to explain.

I am a 26-year-old man with Down Syndrome. I am very lucky. Even though I was born with this intellectual disability, I do pretty well and have a good life. I live and work in the community. I count as friends the people I went to school with and the people I meet in my job.

Every day I get closer to living a life like yours.

I am a Global Messenger for Special Olympics and make speeches to people all over the country. I once spoke to over 10,000 people at the Richmond Coliseum. I realize that I am a voice for other people with intellectual disabilities who cannot easily speak for themselves. I thank God that he gave me this chance to be someone's voice.

The hardest thing about having an intellectual disability is the loneliness. We process information slower than everyone else. So even normal conversation is a constant battle for us not to lose touch with what the rest of you are saying. Most of the time the words and thoughts just go too fast for us to keep up, and when we finally say something it seems out of place.

We are aware when all the rest of you stop and just look at us. We are aware when you look at us and just say, "unh huh," and then move on, talking to each other. You mean no harm, but you have no idea how alone we feel even when we are with you.

That is why I love being a Global Messenger. I work for days telling my dad what I want to talk about and he tries to write it down for me. Then we do it over and over until we have something that says what I mean. We wrote this letter the same way.

So, what's wrong with "retard"? I can only tell you what it means to me and people like me when we hear it. It means that the rest of you are excluding us from your group. We are something that is not like you and something that none of you would ever want to be. We are something outside the "in" group. We are someone that is not your kind.

I want you to know that it hurts to be left out here, alone. Nothing scares me as much as feeling all alone in a world that moves so much faster than I do.

You don't mean to make me feel that way. In fact, like I say in some of my speeches, "I have always depended on the kindness of strangers," and it works out OK most of the time. Still, it hurts and scares me when I am the only person with intellectual disabilities on the bus and young people start making "retard" jokes or references.

Please put yourself on that bus and fill the bus with people who are different from you. Imagine that they start making jokes using a term that describes you. It hurts and it is scary.

Last, I get the joke ? the irony ? that only dumb and shallow people are using a term that means dumb and shallow. The problem is, it is only funny if you think a "retard" is someone dumb and shallow. I am not those things, but every time the term is used it tells young people that it is OK to think of me that way and to keep me on the outside.

That is why using "retard" is a big deal to people like me.

John Franklin Stephens is a Special Olympics Virginia athlete and Global Messenger who lives in Fairfax, Va.

See I have a fundamental issue with this statement "I think the people who have the interests of the disabled most at heart are the parents of disabled children" because it implies that people who are disabled need to be looked after. They are permanently like children. Women used to be regarded like this, as lesser beings who needed protecting by their men folk. Of course parents of disabled children should have a powerful voice. But actually the people who have the interests of the disabled closest to their hearts are the disabled. And like any other large and diverse group they have many opinions and views. And one response to be marginalised and hidden might well be to say "so I am a freak, what of it" in a similar way to 'I'm black and I'm proud' or gay pride (and gay was used as a derogatory term of homosexuals before it became neutral and then derogatory again sadly) movements.

I'm not saying that this is necessarily an approach that works, or that doesn't have a backlash or might create some victims too. Just that it is a perfectly legitimate and is not necessarily a marketing gimmick, and that it is pretty insulting to suggest that the athletes who decided to participate in the series are passive and stupid.

Anyway, I can't find the advert to view, only posters and channel four execs speechifying, so I will quit out of this conversation now. I hope that the impact of the program and Chanel Four's coverage of the Paralympics is positive.

Is it nothing more than a marketing stunt aimed at gaining attention and making money. It does not genuinely challenge anyone to reassess the way they view disabled people.

Im sure they have asked the athletes involved and they do not object to prime time TV, fame, more money etc. Perhaps their reasons for agreeing to be called 'freaks of nature' are a bit shallow or had alternative motives?

I think disabled children are vulnerable and do need protecting. I think young children have less experience of life than their parents and their parents have a greater understanding of their real interests. Some young children may have severe learning disabilities and may not be capable of understanding what is in their best interest.

"one response to be marginalised and hidden might well be to say "so I am a freak, what of it"

I think this is wrong, because they are not freaks, so why should they start thinking that just because other abusive people call them freaks?

I don't think that the athletes who decided to participate are passive and stupid. I understand why they did it. If Channel 4 came knocking on someone's door and said we want to do an advert on this, most people would agree to take part. That is life. But I do think that they made the wrong decision. Gordon Brown listened to his spin doctors. I don't think he was passive and stupid, but I think he made the wrong decision and he should have known better. We are all persuaded by other people and we all sometimes make the wrong decisions.

well said maryz, you said much better what I was trying to say.

Oh I agree. The experiences of the learning disabled and the physically disabled are different. And the experiences of top athletes different again. And there are of course different types of disability, and different levels of severity, as well as differences between those with congenital disabilities, those with degenerative disabilities and those who had accidents that impaired their bodies (which is where the Paralympic movement came from). The traditional freak show was of those with physical differences, so the reclaim view might be stronger from those with physical differences - thinking of the Last American Freak Show for example.

Still I guess I just feel differently about the term "freak" because I know that it can be seen as powerfully positive in sports, where part of the point is to be very different from the normal populace.

Yes MaryZ a very good point, which i tried to raise earlier, but didnt get across quite as well as you did!

As long as you have amazing abilities and can do the same things as able mind/body people, it is ok to call yourself a 'freak' is the message being sent.

Claw3 is exactly right. They are pretending to reclaim the word 'freak', but as Claw3 says it will only apply to the exceptional disabled people who can do amazing things like win Paralympic medals, or as nooka said bodybuilders who can be champions. They are reclaiming the word 'freak' in a positive sense for a small minority of exceptional people. But what if you are not exceptional? what if you can't do amazing things? Then you will be a 'freak' in the bad, more common, unreclaimed sense.

Riven, I am sorry that you feel that I am ignoring your opinion. I don't think that I am. I have been at pains to acknowledge that not all disabled people will be OK with the use of the term "freak of nature" in this context. But, I'm sure you would not claim to be the voice of all disabled people and, undoubtedly, some will be in favour of this kind of tactic.

As I have repeatedly pointed out, I began by picking up on claig's patronising attitude to the athletes in the ad rather than commenting on the ad itself. Nothing claig has added has altered that impression.

I doubt that the use of "freak of nature" will make anyone into a bigot who is not already - it might make some adopt this particular term but if it was not this term, it would be some other word. That is why I say that the specific words don't really matter; at least nowhere near as much as the intent of the speaker (or shouter).

But I'm tired of repeating myself.

Nooka "The traditional freak show was of those with physical differences, so the reclaim view might be stronger from those with physical differences"

Would that be the same of the reclaim right to nigger for example, a black person would have more right, than a mixed race person?

The word ?freak? is more commonly associated with a longstanding belief that the usual processes of nature have set standards of normalcy for human form and ability and these havent been met.

The usual processes of nature DO have set standards of normalcy for human form and ability. Were that not so, there would be no special considerations for anyone, would there? Because everyone would be 'normal'.

MsHighwater, "I doubt that the use of "freak of nature" will make anyone into a bigot who is not already"

Surely the idea of this 'campaign' should be to challenge everyone to reassess the way they view disabled people? If not, its just a marketing ploy to gain attention and there is nothing positive about it.