![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
brightlotusmoonEvery time I think, "But I don't WANT to be in this much pain and exhuastion!" that damaged part of my brain with all that dead white matter points and laughs. Neurology likes to make things that much more difficult. Oh, whatever. This has been happening since I was a baby, it will keep happening, and I already know everything I need to do to manage it.
And that right there brings me to this one thought that keeps circulating. The idea behind "person first" language in reference to disabilities. Me? I am against it for my own self, personally, and I finally found a comment that explains why:
"Careful with the semantics. A lot of disabled people object to 'person-first' language because it suggests their disability is a wholly negative thing that should be peripheral to who they are. I usually refer to myself as an autistic person because autism is not a disease or something to be ashamed of. It's just how my brain works, and it's an integral part of who I am. Yes, it's a label, but one that I accept and am proud of, much like labels of race, class, gender, and my family's national origin. To compare disability to, say, cancer has some very problematic implications."
I honestly do not know if it makes a difference if someone was born with disabilities or acquired their disabilities. But I do know that the majority of my acquaintances who acquired their disabilities prefer "person-first" - and often admonish anyone who doesn't, including me. I have very few friends who were born with their disabilities, but I do wonder if they would view "person-first" as a negative connotation. I wonder if it may be because people who were born with it consider it literally part of them, while people who acquired it see it as wholly unwanted since they were "just fine/normal/ordinary/etc" before they became disabled. It is a very interesting thing to think about! I can only speak for myself - aside from those who I know who agree with me. For example: a conversation I had a couple of weeks ago with a friend. He had acquired neurological damage from a car accident and one arm has been semi-paralyzed for several years while his doctors work on treatments that will help him use that arm again. Before the accident, he had been extremely active in the military, in martial arts, in sports. He said, "No, I am a person first, I am not my disability. And so are you. You are a person with disabilities" I said, "Actually, I don't know what it's like to not live with disabilities. My disabilities technically happened while I was becoming a person." He blinked, tilted his head, stared at me, and said, "Huh. Interesting." I said, "At some point, you may regain the full use of your damaged parts and will no longer be disabled. That won't happen to me. Ever. This is who I am. I am both a person with disablities and a disabled person." He said, "Okay. I can absolutely understand that, in your case." "Yes," I said, "In my case. Not everybody's, though. But it's something to think about."
And there is... well... this:
Disabled people are people, and that means that can be rude, dickish, prejudiced, judgmental assholes, as bad as anyone. In fact, yes, someone them do it deliberately, because people coo "Oh, they're disabled, it's okay, the poor things! They don't understand what they're saying!"
It is almost as awful as the "disabled inspiration porn" - example, "Look at that disabled person! She is so amazing, so strong, to do what she does while being disabled! We should all look up to her!"
No. Oh, gods, no. PLEASE don't look up to me. Look, if you want to call me inspirational, refer to the strength and power I have because of my disabilities, not despite them. I may be physically and neurologically weak, but I am incredibly strong in my soul, spirit, etc. It's just how I live. I live WITH my disorders, I don't live DESPITE them. I work WITH them, not AGAINST them. I am constantly and consistently COMPROMISING and COMPENSATING. And guess what? I HAVE LIMITS. Don't dare ever tell me all that bullshit about how "the only disability in life is a bad attitude" or "the only limits are in your mind" because fuck you. I have limitations, and the best I can to is to keep raising them, keep increasing those limits, instead of pushing or breaking them, because trying to break my limits is stupid and will leave me exhausted, drained, agonized, and unable to function. But raising my limits just means that I can go on a little longer without collapsing. That's all.
And this is not saying "I can say this stuff because I'm disabled so it's not discriminatory, ha ha!" This is saying "Many disabled people use their disabled status to be fucking assholes and they know it. Don't think I'm a sweet angel just because I'm a fucking cripple." I really do my very best to NOT be an asshole. Because it's a terrible thing to do. We're all people, we all screw up. But we also do the best we can. Most of us.
I still don't understand why so many people so desperately want to shift semantics like this, especially those who are not actually disabled. Then again, I don't get out much. I was late to the party.
And that right there brings me to this one thought that keeps circulating. The idea behind "person first" language in reference to disabilities. Me? I am against it for my own self, personally, and I finally found a comment that explains why:
"Careful with the semantics. A lot of disabled people object to 'person-first' language because it suggests their disability is a wholly negative thing that should be peripheral to who they are. I usually refer to myself as an autistic person because autism is not a disease or something to be ashamed of. It's just how my brain works, and it's an integral part of who I am. Yes, it's a label, but one that I accept and am proud of, much like labels of race, class, gender, and my family's national origin. To compare disability to, say, cancer has some very problematic implications."
I honestly do not know if it makes a difference if someone was born with disabilities or acquired their disabilities. But I do know that the majority of my acquaintances who acquired their disabilities prefer "person-first" - and often admonish anyone who doesn't, including me. I have very few friends who were born with their disabilities, but I do wonder if they would view "person-first" as a negative connotation. I wonder if it may be because people who were born with it consider it literally part of them, while people who acquired it see it as wholly unwanted since they were "just fine/normal/ordinary/etc" before they became disabled. It is a very interesting thing to think about! I can only speak for myself - aside from those who I know who agree with me. For example: a conversation I had a couple of weeks ago with a friend. He had acquired neurological damage from a car accident and one arm has been semi-paralyzed for several years while his doctors work on treatments that will help him use that arm again. Before the accident, he had been extremely active in the military, in martial arts, in sports. He said, "No, I am a person first, I am not my disability. And so are you. You are a person with disabilities" I said, "Actually, I don't know what it's like to not live with disabilities. My disabilities technically happened while I was becoming a person." He blinked, tilted his head, stared at me, and said, "Huh. Interesting." I said, "At some point, you may regain the full use of your damaged parts and will no longer be disabled. That won't happen to me. Ever. This is who I am. I am both a person with disablities and a disabled person." He said, "Okay. I can absolutely understand that, in your case." "Yes," I said, "In my case. Not everybody's, though. But it's something to think about."
And there is... well... this:
Disabled people are people, and that means that can be rude, dickish, prejudiced, judgmental assholes, as bad as anyone. In fact, yes, someone them do it deliberately, because people coo "Oh, they're disabled, it's okay, the poor things! They don't understand what they're saying!"
It is almost as awful as the "disabled inspiration porn" - example, "Look at that disabled person! She is so amazing, so strong, to do what she does while being disabled! We should all look up to her!"
No. Oh, gods, no. PLEASE don't look up to me. Look, if you want to call me inspirational, refer to the strength and power I have because of my disabilities, not despite them. I may be physically and neurologically weak, but I am incredibly strong in my soul, spirit, etc. It's just how I live. I live WITH my disorders, I don't live DESPITE them. I work WITH them, not AGAINST them. I am constantly and consistently COMPROMISING and COMPENSATING. And guess what? I HAVE LIMITS. Don't dare ever tell me all that bullshit about how "the only disability in life is a bad attitude" or "the only limits are in your mind" because fuck you. I have limitations, and the best I can to is to keep raising them, keep increasing those limits, instead of pushing or breaking them, because trying to break my limits is stupid and will leave me exhausted, drained, agonized, and unable to function. But raising my limits just means that I can go on a little longer without collapsing. That's all.
And this is not saying "I can say this stuff because I'm disabled so it's not discriminatory, ha ha!" This is saying "Many disabled people use their disabled status to be fucking assholes and they know it. Don't think I'm a sweet angel just because I'm a fucking cripple." I really do my very best to NOT be an asshole. Because it's a terrible thing to do. We're all people, we all screw up. But we also do the best we can. Most of us.
I still don't understand why so many people so desperately want to shift semantics like this, especially those who are not actually disabled. Then again, I don't get out much. I was late to the party.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2013-02-21 02:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-02-21 02:47 am (UTC)I always use person-first language around other people with disabilities. The other way is for me personally, unless someone expresses their similar opinion on it. I do believe it is polite to just use person-first language, unless I really know the people I'm talking to!