Political correctness

This issue drives me nuts. The proper terminology changes on whim. If I were up to date:

Is my son black, African American or something else?
Is he mentally ******** or developmentally delayed?
Is he handicapped or disabled or otherly abled?
Is my daughter partially deaf or hearing impaired?
Am I short or vertically challanged?
Am I fat, obese or fluffy?

I personally find none of these terms offensive but know that some will. I just don't get the whole thing. While there are some terms that are universally considered in poor taste what makes one description okay and one not?

:confused3
Ok this is how I see it.
I'm short.
I'm fat (less than I was)
I'm Deaf but hard of hearing
I have a mobility disability and several chronic diseases
I find the term impaired to be very negative and do not use it. Better to focus on the positive.
 
agree this stuff is a crock. My son's girl friend is black and she's from Columbia. She certainly isn't African American - she prefers black or chocolate! :lmao:
How about this. My firend was born in Africa (Nigeria) to American Missionaries. That makes him an African American but he is Caucasian.

Political correctness is a crock.
 
I read it as Corryn saying they laughed at the situations that the disabilities created not that the person has a disability.

Well, I didn't read it like that. See below.

My husband's step brother is mentally retarted. That's the way the family has referred to him, mentally retarted or just retarted. BTW, my husband laughed his butt off in that scene from "Something about Mary" where Matt Dillion is going on and on and on about Mongo.

To me, that's not about political correctness. It's about making fun of others for their disability. Very different. We laugh at our situation all the time. That's different than poking fun at someone for their disability.

Like I said...my son is MR. I choose not to use that term in my home when I refer to him. However, for eligibility for services, in academics and such, he is, in fact MR. Such a negative tone has been attached to the word that we don't use it in our home. Children have pointed at him and called him a "retard." Meaning has everything to do with the conotation of a word.

And as I also said before, these things are all "labels". Labels don't tell you what my son IS or ISN'T. They don't tell you the person he is.

I think you're right. Political correctedness can absolutely too far.

But, I wasn't talking about a "term" or a "label."

I was talking about making fun of people for their disability.
 
How about this. My firend was born in Africa (Nigeria) to American Missionaries. That makes him an African American but he is Caucasian.

Political correctness is a crock.

A local deejay here was born in South Africa - he calls himself African American all the time. He's Caucasian. :rotfl: :rotfl:
 

This issue drives me nuts. The proper terminology changes on whim. If I were up to date:


Am I short or vertically challanged?
Am I fat, obese or fluffy?

I personally find none of these terms offensive but know that some will. I just don't get the whole thing. While there are some terms that are universally considered in poor taste what makes one description okay and one not?

:confused3

I always say I'm not tall enough for my weight;)

:hug:
I never know what to say anymore without insulting anyone so I usually don't say anything:scared:
 
Oh, and my brother and my neighbor are deaf as well as many others I know. My sisters' mother is an interpreter for the deaf. I have been known to use both deaf and hearing impaired interchangeably. I have yet to find one deaf person that has a problem with either term. Maybe I just know some laid back people or something?
Most deaf people I know would prefer to just be called deaf. They will not jump down your throat if you use hearing impaired but they will sign "ME DEAF". I'm Deaf but I am hard of hearing not medically deaf. There is a difference
 
You really think the term "mentally ********" is ok....really.

so i guess deaf and dumb is ok with you

Negro must be perfectly fine, as it was completely accepted for years.

why dont we just shorten it to "retard"

How about midget, does that work for you.

We are evolving as a society, and becoming more aware of our diversity. It is the reason why the terms ******, wop, mick, ****, kraut, jap etc. are no longer acceptable after being universally acceptable in this country at one time.....Why does that growth bother you so much

I know it's no longer PC, but when I was going for my Masters in special education 12 years ago, that was the term - notes, lectures, textbook. I did my student teaching in a self contained EMR classroom (educatable mentally ********, I believe?). Yes, terms change, but not everyone is in on the change. I myself had to inform my mom that those of asian decent are not called "oriental."
 
You really think the term "mentally ********" is ok....really.

so i guess deaf and dumb is ok with you

Negro must be perfectly fine, as it was completely accepted for years.

why dont we just shorten it to "retard"

How about midget, does that work for you.

We are evolving as a society, and becoming more aware of our diversity. It is the reason why the terms ******, wop, mick, ****, kraut, jap etc. are no longer acceptable after being universally acceptable in this country at one time.....Why does that growth bother you so much

Mentally ******** is only NOT ok when used in the derogatory term. Unfortunately, it IS used by doctors and others to describe the brain process. When I was talking to my doctor about my babies possible birth defects, the term 'mental retardation' was said. I didn't take it as rude, I took it as fact.

I think your sarcasm is rude, as you took a perfectly ligitimate question and turned it into something it wasn't....
 
My Grandpa who was about 5' 6" said he wasn't short they just built the ground too close to his butt.

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

My great aunt who was a dwarf (and yes this is what she called herself)

would have loved that line:)
 
I always say I'm not tall enough for my weight;)

:hug:
I never know what to say anymore without insulting anyone so I usually don't say anything:scared:

LOL..my dad is bald and has a shirt that says he's too tall for his hair.

And...as I read thru all these pages... I understand both Corryn and Goofyluvr. I don't think Corryn MAKES FUN of others...I think humor is her way of handling the situation. Sarcasm and humor are a way alot of people handle or describe things.. I'd be lying if I said I hadn't done that in my own household recently.. Sometimes making light of a situation is the only way some of us make it through the day. Now, pointing fun at someone else? Never.
 
I feel that many of the politically correct crowd uses ‘political correctness’ as an empowerment tool.

It is part of human nature to want to feel ‘superior’ to others, or, lacking that, to have power over others. It is why, in part, you have those who feel compelled to purchase very expensive cars: it is a status symbol. It says “I have more wealth than you and so I have a higher social standing than you because I am driving a Mercedes Benz and you are driving a Honda”.

Others seek power over others. Some seek that power through politics. Others seek power through wealth or social status. Others seek power through controlling the thoughts of others.

By ‘controlling thoughts’ I mean simply this: if I can persuade you, through shame, social pressure, even legislation, to not utter certain words, then I have succeeded, at least to a small degree, in controlling your thoughts and perhaps even behavior. That is power over you. You no longer have the powered to use those words I have prohibited you from using. You may wish to use those words in communicating with others, but I have succeeded in forcing you to use alternative words of my choosing. If that is not seeking power over another, I would like to know what it is.

Certain organizations are famous for seeking to control thoughts and behaviors of others. For instance, there are ‘animal rights’ organizations that have sought, through legislation, to prevent people from calling the cats and dogs they own ‘pets’. Rather, these groups wish the term ‘animal companion’ to be used, or some like phrase.

Words do have power. If you can succeed in preventing a person from using a word or phrase you do not approve of then you have succeeded, in a small measure, in establishing power over that person. The converse is true also, of course: people use words to empower themselves over others.

A good example is the “n’ word. As you know, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain has often been banned in school libraries due to the use of this word within the text. Yet, as Twain himself has pointed out, during the days of slavery this word was commonly used by all: whites and blacks (for purposes of this posting I am simply going to use the terms ‘whites’ and ‘blacks’ rather than spell out African-American, etc). It was not considered a particularly derogatory word during the times of slavery. Why? Well, I guess because whites had utter and complete power over black slaves. Slaves had absolutely no power whatsoever, and so, in a way, it would have been superfluous for the ‘n’ word to be derogatory to slaves.

However, during the Civil War some slaves gained their freedom, while the remainder achieved freedom at the end of the war. Blacks were now gaining power. True, it was not much power, but it was a start. As the decades rolled on blacks gained more and more power, such as the right to own property, demand wages for employment, to vote, etc. As they gained power the whites saw their power over blacks ever decreasing. Hence in time the ‘n’ word became a ‘power word’, used by whites towards blacks as a in an attempt to keep some form of social dominance over them; for the whites to continue to feel superior. As blacks achieved power, so the offensiveness of the ‘n’ word increased, both in meaning by the whites and acceptance by the blacks.

Indeed, when blacks gained total legal and social equality to whites, then the ‘n’ word probably achieved it highest point of offensiveness as whites used the term in the most derogatory sense in an attempt to maintain some type of feeling of superiority.

We have seen over the past decade or so the ‘n’ word used more and more by blacks, possibly as an attempt to wrest the power of that word away from the whites, or possibly (in individual circumstances) used by a black to another black to indicate the users superiority over the other. After all, whites have always used words, symbols, etc., to try to show their superiority over other whites.

It is always interesting to see what words will be declared politically incorrect by some individual or group. The attempt to outlaw the word ‘pets’, when applied to animals, has thus far been unsuccessful. Yet I have no doubt that the attempt will continue to be made. Of course, many of the words that people seek to send to the scrapheap of linguistic history deserve such a fate, such as the ‘n’ word. Others feel that some words, such as ‘mentally ********’, have themselves become ‘power words’ used by people in an attempt to ‘keep down’ the subject of the words. After all, the term ‘mentally ********’ not only has a medical meaning, it also has a legal meaning. Historically, if one were declared ‘mentally ********’ then that person suddenly found himself deprived of certain legal rights enjoyed by others, such as entering into contracts or even marriage. To be called mentally ******** continues to have legal as well as social significance.

In conclusion: I certainly feel that there are many valid reasons for some words to no longer be used, particularly in certain situations (such as, to a person’s face). Of course, one must recognize that many seek to have words prohibited simply as a basis for exercising some form of thought control over people. It is a fine line to distinguish the good from bad.
 
Wow...legalsea... I felt like I just left history class :)
 
I feel that many of the politically correct crowd uses ‘political correctness’ as an empowerment tool.

It is part of human nature to want to feel ‘superior’ to others, or, lacking that, to have power over others. It is why, in part, you have those who feel compelled to purchase very expensive cars: it is a status symbol. It says “I have more wealth than you and so I have a higher social standing than you because I am driving a Mercedes Benz and you are driving a Honda”.

Others seek power over others. Some seek that power through politics. Others seek power through wealth or social status. Others seek power through controlling the thoughts of others.

By ‘controlling thoughts’ I mean simply this: if I can persuade you, through shame, social pressure, even legislation, to not utter certain words, then I have succeeded, at least to a small degree, in controlling your thoughts and perhaps even behavior. That is power over you. You no longer have the powered to use those words I have prohibited you from using. You may wish to use those words in communicating with others, but I have succeeded in forcing you to use alternative words of my choosing. If that is not seeking power over another, I would like to know what it is.

Certain organizations are famous for seeking to control thoughts and behaviors of others. For instance, there are ‘animal rights’ organizations that have sought, through legislation, to prevent people from calling the cats and dogs they own ‘pets’. Rather, these groups wish the term ‘animal companion’ to be used, or some like phrase.

Words do have power. If you can succeed in preventing a person from using a word or phrase you do not approve of then you have succeeded, in a small measure, in establishing power over that person. The converse is true also, of course: people use words to empower themselves over others.

A good example is the “n’ word. As you know, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain has often been banned in school libraries due to the use of this word within the text. Yet, as Twain himself has pointed out, during the days of slavery this word was commonly used by all: whites and blacks (for purposes of this posting I am simply going to use the terms ‘whites’ and ‘blacks’ rather than spell out African-American, etc). It was not considered a particularly derogatory word during the times of slavery. Why? Well, I guess because whites had utter and complete power over black slaves. Slaves had absolutely no power whatsoever, and so, in a way, it would have been superfluous for the ‘n’ word to be derogatory to slaves.

However, during the Civil War some slaves gained their freedom, while the remainder achieved freedom at the end of the war. Blacks were now gaining power. True, it was not much power, but it was a start. As the decades rolled on blacks gained more and more power, such as the right to own property, demand wages for employment, to vote, etc. As they gained power the whites saw their power over blacks ever decreasing. Hence in time the ‘n’ word became a ‘power word’, used by whites towards blacks as a in an attempt to keep some form of social dominance over them; for the whites to continue to feel superior. As blacks achieved power, so the offensiveness of the ‘n’ word increased, both in meaning by the whites and acceptance by the blacks.

Indeed, when blacks gained total legal and social equality to whites, then the ‘n’ word probably achieved it highest point of offensiveness as whites used the term in the most derogatory sense in an attempt to maintain some type of feeling of superiority.

We have seen over the past decade or so the ‘n’ word used more and more by blacks, possibly as an attempt to wrest the power of that word away from the whites, or possibly (in individual circumstances) used by a black to another black to indicate the users superiority over the other. After all, whites have always used words, symbols, etc., to try to show their superiority over other whites.

It is always interesting to see what words will be declared politically incorrect by some individual or group. The attempt to outlaw the word ‘pets’, when applied to animals, has thus far been unsuccessful. Yet I have no doubt that the attempt will continue to be made. Of course, many of the words that people seek to send to the scrapheap of linguistic history deserve such a fate, such as the ‘n’ word. Others feel that some words, such as ‘mentally ********’, have themselves become ‘power words’ used by people in an attempt to ‘keep down’ the subject of the words. After all, the term ‘mentally ********’ not only has a medical meaning, it also has a legal meaning. Historically, if one were declared ‘mentally ********’ then that person suddenly found himself deprived of certain legal rights enjoyed by others, such as entering into contracts or even marriage. To be called mentally ******** continues to have legal as well as social significance.

In conclusion: I certainly feel that there are many valid reasons for some words to no longer be used, particularly in certain situations (such as, to a person’s face). Of course, one must recognize that many seek to have words prohibited simply as a basis for exercising some form of thought control over people. It is a fine line to distinguish the good from bad.


I agree with that last line in particular. That is what's causing people trouble. What's ok today may be changed tomorrow.

As to thought control over people with words, how many of you have reread 1984 since high school?

I bet it's more relevant now than it was way back when.
 
Most deaf people I know would prefer to just be called deaf. They will not jump down your throat if you use hearing impaired but they will sign "ME DEAF". I'm Deaf but I am hard of hearing not medically deaf. There is a difference

Yes, thank you, but I am well aware of the difference as I have dealt with deaf people and the varying degrees of deafness most of my life (my brother just being one example...and we actually got my son's name from another deaf guy we know). I do tend to say deaf more than hearing impaired (just a personal preference thing) but I personally do not know a deaf person that has a problem with either term...in my area at least. And believe me, they would tell me if they prefer one term over the other since I've known them for a very long time. I think people are too hung up on labels in general though. It's hard to know whom you might offend as one person may prefer one term and another might prefer the other. :confused3
 
You really think the term "mentally ********" is ok....really.

Let's see...the definition of Mentally would be having to do with mental function and the definition of ******** is to hold back or to be behind. Sorry, I fail to see what is wrong with the phrase.

so i guess deaf and dumb is ok with you

Deafness is an actual medical affliction, so yes I think it is acceptable. Dumb in this case and scenario means unable to speak...it doesn't mean stupid. Like many words in the English language it is spelled the same and sounds the same but has more than one meaning. Nothing offensive at all, except in the mind of people that do not understand the nuances of our language.

Negro must be perfectly fine, as it was completely accepted for years.

Actually is a very acceptable term that was created as a "political correct" way of eliminating the derogatory other N word. Like I said earlier all things become offensive to someone at sometime.

why don't we just shorten it to "retard"
We can and do. It is only bad when used in a derogatory sense. Take any word and apply the same meanness and bigotry to it and it becomes offense.

How about midget, does that work for you.

If the definition of Midget is "little person" (the politically correct word(s)) then I would prefer midget. I don't know the origin of the word but to me it has always been just another medical condition. It never struck me that there was anything bad about it. It was just a physical condition no better or no worse than my baldness (I prefer folically challenged), in describing a condition.
 
And the Native American/Indian thing is true--Indian is the preferred term unless you're so PC you don't care what anyone thinks, even the person you're describing.

I have family who are Indians--from India. When I hear "Indian" I think of people from India, so I say Native American. It would be so much clearer if people were more specific and said, "I'm part Seminole" or "My father's Pomo" or whatever. After all, not all Native Americans are the same, they have different languages and cultures. :)
 
Deafness is an actual medical affliction, so yes I think it is acceptable. Dumb in this case and scenario means unable to speak...it doesn't mean stupid. Like many words in the English language it is spelled the same and sounds the same but has more than one meaning. Nothing offensive at all, except in the mind of people that do not understand the nuances of our language.
Most deaf people I know are not dumb in either sense of the word. I attend a Sunday School class that is in ASL and they can be a noisy as any other class in the church except my husband's class. Now they are the noisiest group in the church bar none. :scared: :scared: :scared:
And we constantly have to remind deaf kids in mainstream classes to control their vocalizations. They get in the habit and we have to train it out of them.
 


Disney Vacation Planning. Free. Done for You.
Our Authorized Disney Vacation Planners are here to provide personalized, expert advice, answer every question, and uncover the best discounts. Let Dreams Unlimited Travel take care of all the details, so you can sit back, relax, and enjoy a stress-free vacation.
Start Your Disney Vacation
Disney EarMarked Producer






DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest DIS Tiktok DIS Twitter

Add as a preferred source on Google

Back
Top Bottom