[Blindtlk] Use of the Term Visually Impaired

Sat Jun 22 02:02:04 UTC 2013

I prefer blind because I am total. but, I don't get into bashing folks
if they say visually impaired. I'd rather people not struggle with it
cause they are showing they are really uncomfortable with me. I am
very open about my disability  personally though and may be that
surprises some.

On 6/21/13, Mark Tardif <markspark at roadrunner.com> wrote:
> Yes, I seem to recall George's comments about those terms, and he used
> rather colorful language, too, but I thought "Right on, George."
>
> Mark Tardif
> Nuclear arms will not hold you.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: kelby carlson
> Sent: Friday, June 21, 2013 5:16 PM
> To: Blind Talk Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Blindtlk] Use of the Term Visually Impaired
>
> 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
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/markspark%40roadrunner.com
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2013.0.2904 / Virus Database: 3199/6427 - Release Date: 06/20/13
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/singingmywayin%40gmail.com
>