Fucking stupid people

[knittedbreast]

They have only gone and burnt down 50k worth of play equiptment at the local play park.

Thanks

Why?

Oh the irony. I shouldnt be on bloody Mumsnet. I should be reading 'Equality,Participation and Inclusion' Diverse Perspectives. part of the 'Equality participation and inclusion, learning from each other' course.

Stead I am faffing about here.

Mind you, I am allowed to use internet forum conversations as part of the course. Technically I AM studying then. Yay.

joni I did not for one minute think you were trying to offend anyone. My comment was part of the thread, one that was discussing the use of language and disability.

TFMD That course sounds interesting. I should be reading Ways of Knowing: Language, Maths and Science in the Early Years. Not sure I can blag that I'm studying.

OK

I'm a health journalist. Style books these days tend to advise against using terms such as 'the disabled' because it can be patronising/distancing/defining people by their disability. 'People with disabilities' or 'disabled people' is preferable. 'The deaf community' would be fine just as 'The South East Asian community' is fine. (Although I always wonder who exactly is in this community and whether whoever the spokesperson or 'community leader' is has really canvassed all their views...)

Sometimes despite the stylebooks negative language such as 'sufferers' or 'epileptics' instead of 'people with epilepsy' does creep through. Always good when readers point it out as it helps to educate the person who wrote it, who probably wasn't deliberately intending to be patronising.

'handicapped' regularly appears on online message boards. I hear it a lot in Lincolnshire and Norfolk where my family live.

I don't hear it as often in London but I read it regularly online.

ahhh but SG - I wasn't around much at the weekend, I've got plenty of time free except I'm going away on Saturday until Thursday so will improve on that score by the end of the week

(Joni, my guess is in the medium term Dogs for the Disabled might well tweak its name, just as the RNIB went from 'Royal Institute for the Blind' to 'Royal Institute of Blind People', IIRC. In the context of providing dogs for disabled people the title makes sense but it would be better as 'Dogs for Disabled People'.

im actually quite glad im reading/posting this thread. Im learning a lot.

i dont normally think too much about the language im using, but perhaps i should actually to to be more sensitive. I would never have thought twice before saying 'the disabled' (but would never have used the more classically offensive ones).

I will know now. :)

Quite possibly you are right edam.

Again, it all depends on context. However a lot of this is, as you say, a 'style issue.'

My DP is a very robust individual who refuses to my defined by his disability. We both have a healthy, postive attitude towards life, a good sense of humour and being northerners, perhaps are more interested in the sentiment rather than the style

iwantadog - that's a brilliant post. It would be so nice if people were like you and prepared to learn and change rather than getting all huffy! I've learned stuff from the SN threads on here that was never covered in any journalism training. It's interesting, and it's helpful, just as it's useful when MN tells me there are slots in my box of clingfilm to hold the roll in place. (Didn't see anyone on that thread getting offended because their lack of expertise in cling film usage had been exposed, even though there was dozens of us going 'doh, I've been wrestling with cling film for years, never realised I was doing it all wrong...')

I don't think it's a style issue as in 'not important' - the style books recommend this precisely because it is important not to objectify or patronise people because they have a disability or illness just as much as it's important not to do the same wrt race or gender or sexual orientation. Years ago progress was moving from 'spastic' to 'someone with cerebal palsy', now the debate has moved on.

say what i want to say so much better than i can

edam Tue 05-Apr-11 21:07:38
I'm a health journalist.

Your profile states that you are a trucker!!

It hasn't gone from 'spastic' to 'someone with cerebral palsy.'

It's gone from 'spastic to 'cerebral palsy'.

I think my DP would actually be quite upset at the word freak to be honest.

I wish you could meet him. He's a million things beside being disabled. That's why I'm finding the whole thing on here rather interesting.

Its interesting that you describe your OH as someone who is not defined by his disability joni. Can you see why being described as part of 'the disabled' could be interpreted as doing that?

Honestly - not digging at you. I genuinly find this topic very interesting and enjoy debating the issues around it.

yes,

I think I'm re-thinking a lot! It is probably best to go through life trying not to offend people.

I guess some things just hurt too muchno matter what your intentions are, and if they hurt that much you should avoid saying them even in jest/anger/rage. That vid made me think that AfternoonsandCoffeespoons.

If I pointed to a group of people and said 'look over there at the disabled' I would say you had a point. That is objectifying them by their disability and I don't approve of that. To that extent I agree with you.

However, if you look at the sentence I wrote, I would argue that I was merely using shorthand. I don't agree for one moment that my language was 'offensive' and I say that to argue it was is to be overly semantic. You probably disagree with that, which is unfortunate, but there we have it.

I agree with you BTP

iwant that is great. Your post genuinely brought tears my eyes. I know so many people use that word without realising its connetations (sp?) but its lovely to see someone re-learning and re-thinking like that.

just re-read that and it sounds a bit patronising. Really don't mean it that way.