[Blindtlk] Use of the Term Visually Impaired

[kelby carlson]

THe people in this particular discussion were arguing even beyond what
that HR department apparently had in place--that "visually impaired"
was in and of itself a morally off-limits word.

My philosophy is akin to George Carlin's: changing the name of the
condition does not change the condition itself.



On 6/21/13, Sherry Gomes <sherriola at gmail.com> wrote:
> A number of years ago, I worked briefly for a large telecommunications
> company. The head of the training department had a meeting with me one day
> to get my ideas on how to make the training process better and how to
> attract more blind people to the company. In the middle of the meeting, he
> stopped me and admitted that he was shocked to hear me refer to myself as
> blind. He told me that he could get fired if he called me blind and someone
> from HR heard it. He had to say visually impaired. I thought that was one
> of
> the most ridiculous pieces of forced PC-ness I'd ever heard.
>
> Sherry
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindtlk [mailto:blindtlk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Desiree
> Oudinot
> Sent: Friday, June 21, 2013 3:02 PM
> To: Blind Talk Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Blindtlk] Use of the Term Visually Impaired
>
> Person first language has always seemed a bit nitpicky to me. Either
> way, the term is the same. Adjusting the order of words does not
> change the tone in which it's said, for example. If someone is
> stuttering and fumbling in desperation, trying to appear politically
> correct, I really don't care what term they use, or what order they
> say it in, as long as they can find some semblance of comfort so they
> can move past that and get to know me as a person. by the same token,
> anyone with enough spite or hatred in their heart can make any number
> of phrases or statements sound like a curse.
> In other words, far too much emphasis is placed on the ways in which
> words or terms are used. If we would all relax about it, and allow
> people to say what they're comfortable with, rather than trying to
> shove a certain ideal down their throats that blind, or visually
> impaired, or what have you, is the *only* acceptable, politically
> correct thing to say, a lot of awkwardness would be avoided, leading
> to more easily flowing conversations, educational experiences, and so
> on.
>
> On 6/21/13, Christine Szostak <szostak.1 at buckeyemail.osu.edu> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>   I suspect that actually the issue was not really with the term visually
>> impaired, but rather with the order. When you say a "visually impaired
>> person" the disability comes first as  opposed to saying a "person with a
>> visual impairment". Thus, having the disability first is objected to, at
>> least this is what I am assuming the blogger was getting at.
>> Happy Friday!
>> Chris
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Kelby Carlson" <kelbycarlson at gmail.com>
>> To: <blindtlk at nfbnet.org>
>> Sent: Friday, June 21, 2013 4:24 PM
>> Subject: [Blindtlk] Use of the Term Visually Impaired
>>
>>
>>> Hi everybody!
>>>
>>> So, since I'm not aware of any incendiary debates flaring up around here
>>> recently, I thought I'd bring up something I read recently that I found
>>> utterly baffling.  This was on a blog thread about proper etiquette
> around
>>>
>>> people with disabilities.  Towards the end, a discussion of language
>>> appropriateness came up, and someone said that "visually impaired" was
>>> an
>>>
>>> unacceptable term that should not be used.  Instead, one should say
>>> "with
>>>
>>> a visual impairment." I have heard similar things regaring the phrasing
> of
>>>
>>> a "blind person" versus "a person with blindness", but this was
> especially
>>>
>>> perplexing because I can't recall ever meeting someone in my entire life
>>> who was opposed to the term "visually impaired", at least when it was
> used
>>>
>>> to describe someone who had some functional vision.  I don't have strong
>>> feelings either way, but I would actually lean more to towards
>>> preferring
>>>
>>> visually impaired than "partially sighted", though I think neither one
>>> is
>>>
>>> more linguistically accurate than the other.
>>>
>>> I have encountered the issue of language surrounding disability many
>>> times, and it's always been a bit strange-don't we, as blind people
> (among
>>>
>>> other people with various kinds of disabilities) have higher priorities
> on
>>>
>>> our lists of "things to fix in the world"? These are just my thoughts on
>>> the matter.
>>>
>>> Kelby S.  Carlson
>>>
>>> Vanderbilt University
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> blindtlk mailing list
>>> blindtlk at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindtlk_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> blindtlk:
>>>
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindtlk_nfbnet.org/szostak.1%40buckeyemai
> l.osu.edu
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindtlk mailing list
>> blindtlk at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindtlk_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindtlk:
>>
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindtlk_nfbnet.org/turtlepower17%40gmail.
> com
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindtlk mailing list
> blindtlk at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindtlk_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindtlk:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindtlk_nfbnet.org/sherriola%40gmail.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindtlk mailing list
> blindtlk at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindtlk_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindtlk:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindtlk_nfbnet.org/kelbycarlson%40gmail.com
>