To whoever wrote the competition email

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.

Akida

A
Hi guys,

I just read the competition email and noticed that you used the term "disabled people".

The term "disabled people/person" is demeaning to people with disability as it puts their disability first rather than their humanity. I know it might seem a minor point but to some people it's actually pretty important to use the term "people/person with disability" because it helps to change the mindset of the general public toward seeing these people as just that; people.

Thanks :)
 

Jukelo

Jukelo
Disabled is an attributive adjective, its function is to associate the noun following it with, wait for it, an attribute. Handicap is an attribute of a disabled person, and if you have to mention it chances are the existence of that handicap is rather relevant to the context. But there's absolutely nothing behind the grammar of attributes causing them to magically gain more importance in the noun group they're modifying than they already have by being present at all.

Here both 'disabled people' and 'people with disability' are semantically very similar unless you inject more meaning into it on your own or disabled is used as a past participle implying some previous action leading to that state. Either way there's nothing particularly demeaning about 'disabled people' compared to 'with disability'.
 
Last edited:

Obnoxious_Gamer

Obnoxious_Gamer
Jukelo said:
Disabled is an attributive adjective, its function is to associate the noun following it with, wait for it, an attribute. Handicap is an attribute of a disabled person, and if you have to mention it chances are the existence of that handicap is rather relevant to the context. But there's absolutely nothing behind the grammar of attributes causing them to magically gain more importance in the noun group they're modifying than they already have by being present at all.

Here both 'disabled people' and 'people with disability' are semantically identical unless you inject more meaning into it on your own or disabled is used as a past participle implying some previous action leading to that state. Either way there's nothing particularly demeaning about 'disabled people' compared to 'with disability'.
Click to expand...

I want to thank everybody in the thread so far, that isn't the OP, for being logical, rational people who know how the English language works and refuse to let others abuse it for their own narratives. If I wasn't on my phone I'd rep all of you.
 

Thetele

T
Even WHO use disabled people term and association for disabled people have named themselves/called Disabled People’s Association.

Where is todays society going when people need to find something to be offended for nothing and not focus on real issues. This stuff is really going over.
 
Last edited:

xondk

X
Akida said:
Hi guys,

I just read the competition email and noticed that you used the term "disabled people".

The term "disabled people/person" is demeaning to people with disability as it puts their disability first rather than their humanity. I know it might seem a minor point but to some people it's actually pretty important to use the term "people/person with disability" because it helps to change the mindset of the general public toward seeing these people as just that; people.

Thanks :)
Click to expand...
*blinks*
Disabled person is demeaning? say what? puts their disability first?
This really feels like a bit of overreaction, I know several people that are such, but they call themselves this, but like most things if you overuse it and empathise on it, then yeah, it is demeaning, but again, it is how people use it, but as a general term there is nothing demeaning about it?
 

Obnoxious_Gamer

Obnoxious_Gamer
Thetele said:
Even WHO use disabled people term and association for disabled people have named themselves/called Disabled People’s Association.

Where is todays society going when people need to find something to be offended for nothing and not focus on real issues. This stuff is really going over.
Click to expand...

They just want attention. And sympathy. I'm reasonably sure this isn't the kind of attention OP wanted though. :D
 

sndle9

S
Nope, just using the language as it should be. No connotations implied.

At least we got rid of those abominations of 'differently-abled' and 'alternatively-abled' that became very PC briefly. My mate hated those as he considered his lack of legs as a disability which he was perfectly capable of dealing with, not as an alternative to having them.
 

Grumpy181155

Grumpy181155
To the OP, I have to agree with everyone else here in that I think you are playing with semantics. Whether you call them people with disabilities or disabled people will not change how I view them, which is as people. I actually wonder who is being offended here? Is it disabled people or the politically correct?
 

Obnoxious_Gamer

Obnoxious_Gamer
Grumpy181155 said:
To the OP, I have to agree with everyone else here in that I think you are playing with semantics. Whether you call them people with disabilities or disabled people will not change how I view them, which is as people. I actually wonder who is being offended here? Is it disabled people or the politically correct?
Click to expand...

Tough question, eh?
 

Alex Brentnall

Alex Brentnall
Disabled is the legally protected term in the UK where FDev are based. End of story.

If you wish to find offence you can find offence at anything. Less-able, handicapped etc all have their own connotations and detractors, there is no longer a "right" way to put it without offending anyone or being very unclear in what you mean. In the end it's the protected term in law so people shouldn't take offence really, or they should seek to change the law. Thats why parking spaces, access, guides, hearing-aid placards etc etc all use "disabled".
If this has personally affected you I suggest you get in touch with FDev directly rather than the public forums.

Edit: In this case yes it could be phrased differently. Maybe this is a bit of a over-reaction as I've been on the receiving end of people being "offended for me" when frankly I couldn't care and I actually was more offended by their offence (meta I know :p). Anyway, what I said above still stands true but I get your point OP.
 
Last edited:

CMDR Corlas

CMDR Corlas
I find it far more weird that so many apparently have such a negative on the OP's suggestion than I find the OP's suggestion in the first place.

OP's viewpoint would have never occurred to me, but I don't really have a disability worth mentioning, so what do I know? I doubt it's universal among those with disabilities either, but... so?

Did all you guys want a trigger warning and need a safe space, away from the OP's offensive ideas? ;)

To the OP: Interesting perspective, thanks for sharing. :)
 

xondk

X
Grumpy181155 said:
To the OP, I have to agree with everyone else here in that I think you are playing with semantics. Whether you call them people with disabilities or disabled people will not change how I view them, which is as people. I actually wonder who is being offended here? Is it disabled people or the politically correct?
Click to expand...

A question pops into my head whenever this happens, what IS 'politically correct' anyway? because it seems to vary a lot depending on where it is mentioned.
 

Zambrick

Zambrick
Jukelo said:
Disabled is an attributive adjective, its function is to associate the noun following it with, wait for it, an attribute. Handicap is an attribute of a disabled person, and if you have to mention it chances are the existence of that handicap is rather relevant to the context. But there's absolutely nothing behind the grammar of attributes causing them to magically gain more importance in the noun group they're modifying than they already have by being present at all.

Here both 'disabled people' and 'people with disability' are semantically very similar unless you inject more meaning into it on your own or disabled is used as a past participle implying some previous action leading to that state. Either way there's nothing particularly demeaning about 'disabled people' compared to 'with disability'.
Click to expand...

English is an ever evolving language filled with cultural and regional differences. So yes he or she can be offended especially if in the past being disabled somehow marginalized them in some way. There are a lot of verbs, nouns, adjectives, etc.. that can be offensive. In fact most sentinces are made up of those 3 things. Any word can be offensive based on how you use it.

I too have a disability and people already make enough rude off comments and dont realize what they are saying. It is hard to keep up on the Politically Correct thing to say all the time.

I make mistakes and probably say rude things about people that I do not realize. So when someone just calls me disabled I put it into the, this is how people speak and not write category in my brain. I realize that they are probably not trying to be rude. Some people are more sensitive than others and they have a right to their views as well.

But please dont spout off a grammar lesson and expect the lesson to absolve you of using a rude term.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom