Today at the grocery store, someone complimented me for training a
service dog. I was told that I was doing a great job training him, and
isn't it wonderful all the people a dog like Isaac can help, and it's
just such a wonderful thing I'm doing. I'm like, uh huh, I can't even
train him to stop eating Cayenne's food every time I go into the
bathroom.
You know, as nice as it is to know I look "normal," the
assumption that I am training Isaac really wears on me. It had actually
been a couple of weeks since I last heard that. Usually I hear it at
least once every time Isaac and I go somewhere.
But it's more than that. I want to look "normal" or be accepted as "normal" but I also don't like the assumption that I don't need a service dog, that I must be training a dog for someone else (someone that does look disabled, I assume), that I don't have special needs and can't have special needs and should be able to do all the things everyone else can do. It's hard to explain. I'm having trouble finding the words.
I guess I'll just say I wish diversity was respected and valued more. I wish people didn't feel the need to divide people into "normal" and "abnormal" groups and that I could go to the grocery store and just be me, a woman with a service dog that wants to buy her apples and almond butter and yogurt and dog treats and go home, not some poor disabled girl and not some saint that trains service dogs for other poor disabled people.
Showing posts with label language. Show all posts
Showing posts with label language. Show all posts
Thursday, March 13, 2014
Tuesday, January 21, 2014
She Doesn't Want to Look Like a Mental Patient
There is a forum I participate on for people that have had weight loss surgery. Tonight I read a post from someone that had weight loss surgery several years ago and now has to have surgery again to repair a hernia. She was advised to wear an abdominal binder afterward and posted to ask for advice about where to get one. If possible, she said, she would like one that she could wear under her clothes because she doesn't want to look like a mental patient.
Well. I have been a mental patient. Many times, in fact. In many different mental hospitals. Well, OK, most were not mental hospitals, they were general hospitals with psychiatric wards, but two of them were psychiatric hospitals. That's all they did.
Anyway. I have been a mental patient and I never wore an abdominal binder of any kind when I was in a mental hospital. None of the other patients wore abdominal binders, either, as far as I knew. Which is what I said in my reply to her.
Now, I know what she meant. She meant that she doesn't want to look odd or abnormal. She doesn't really think mental patients wear abdominal binders, nor does she think that people might think she is wearing an abdominal binder because she has schizophrenia or PTSD or bipolar disorder.
But... I think she probably thinks mental patients look odd or abnormal. Or maybe she doesn't just think they look odd or abnormal, maybe she thinks they are odd or abnormal. If she didn't think that, why would she suggest she would look like a mental patient if she wore an abdominal binder?
Her question had nothing to do with mental health. Nothing to do with mental illness. Why stick that little jab in there about how mental patients are weird? It was unnecessary. She probably didn't mean to be cruel, but it is cruel to suggest that mental patients look abnormal. It is cruel to say she wants to make sure she is never mistaken for one.
Words matter. They do.
She hasn't replied to my response to her. We'll see if she does.
Well. I have been a mental patient. Many times, in fact. In many different mental hospitals. Well, OK, most were not mental hospitals, they were general hospitals with psychiatric wards, but two of them were psychiatric hospitals. That's all they did.
Anyway. I have been a mental patient and I never wore an abdominal binder of any kind when I was in a mental hospital. None of the other patients wore abdominal binders, either, as far as I knew. Which is what I said in my reply to her.
Now, I know what she meant. She meant that she doesn't want to look odd or abnormal. She doesn't really think mental patients wear abdominal binders, nor does she think that people might think she is wearing an abdominal binder because she has schizophrenia or PTSD or bipolar disorder.
But... I think she probably thinks mental patients look odd or abnormal. Or maybe she doesn't just think they look odd or abnormal, maybe she thinks they are odd or abnormal. If she didn't think that, why would she suggest she would look like a mental patient if she wore an abdominal binder?
Her question had nothing to do with mental health. Nothing to do with mental illness. Why stick that little jab in there about how mental patients are weird? It was unnecessary. She probably didn't mean to be cruel, but it is cruel to suggest that mental patients look abnormal. It is cruel to say she wants to make sure she is never mistaken for one.
Words matter. They do.
She hasn't replied to my response to her. We'll see if she does.
Tuesday, June 4, 2013
Words Matter (Part II)
There is a wonderful book called The Future of White Men and Other Diversity Dilemmas by Joan Steinau Lester, in which she does a great job of explaining why words matter. It's an easy read and highly entertaining, and if you can find a copy, I definitely recommend it. In it, she explains that a word is not just a word, no matter how much some people insist it is. Words have histories. Words have complex and varied meanings. They affect the way we think about things.
And if words didn't matter, some people wouldn't get so upset when other people suggest changing them. Consider the people that insist the word "mankind" really means everyone. They don't want to change a title from Chairman to Chairperson, for instance, insisting it isn't necessary because the "man" in Chairman really refers to women, too. Suggest to one of these people that since a word is just a word, the title instead be changed to Chairwoman, which would include men, too. The amount of resistance you'd get to such a suggestion is a clue that the word really does matter.
Do you know where the word "handicap" comes from? In England in the 1700's, people with disabilities were not allowed into the poorhouses. They were not considered good enough for that. Instead, they were given caps with which they were supposed to beg.
Many people today prefer to be referred to as "a person with a disability" rather than as "a person with a handicap." I see their point. I have a disability, a condition that affects my abilities, but I don't beg on the street corner with a cap. I also object to the idea that a person with a disability is not even good enough to be admitted into a poorhouse.
When someone refers to me as handicapped, do they mean to say I am not even good enough for a poorhouse? Probably not. I bet most people that use the word "handicapped" don't even know the origin of the word. But now you do. And you know that some people find it offensive or objectionable. If it's just a word, and if you don't mean to use it to demean someone, why not just say "disability" instead?
And if words didn't matter, some people wouldn't get so upset when other people suggest changing them. Consider the people that insist the word "mankind" really means everyone. They don't want to change a title from Chairman to Chairperson, for instance, insisting it isn't necessary because the "man" in Chairman really refers to women, too. Suggest to one of these people that since a word is just a word, the title instead be changed to Chairwoman, which would include men, too. The amount of resistance you'd get to such a suggestion is a clue that the word really does matter.
Do you know where the word "handicap" comes from? In England in the 1700's, people with disabilities were not allowed into the poorhouses. They were not considered good enough for that. Instead, they were given caps with which they were supposed to beg.
Many people today prefer to be referred to as "a person with a disability" rather than as "a person with a handicap." I see their point. I have a disability, a condition that affects my abilities, but I don't beg on the street corner with a cap. I also object to the idea that a person with a disability is not even good enough to be admitted into a poorhouse.
When someone refers to me as handicapped, do they mean to say I am not even good enough for a poorhouse? Probably not. I bet most people that use the word "handicapped" don't even know the origin of the word. But now you do. And you know that some people find it offensive or objectionable. If it's just a word, and if you don't mean to use it to demean someone, why not just say "disability" instead?
Words Matter (Part I)
Read the following and be honest about the images each phrase brings up for you.
Now try these.
- the mentally ill
- a mentally ill person
- a person with a mental illness
Now try these.
- a wheelchair-bound person
- a person in a wheelchair
- a person confined to a wheelchair
- a person that uses a wheelchair
- a person
Monday, June 3, 2013
I Found This a Bit Insulting
A few days ago, I came home from running some errand and found a flyer on my door. It looked like there was one on every door in my apartment building. I took the flyer and went inside and read it over.
It was a handy list of "Tornado Safety Tips," which apparently my landlord thought would be of use to all the tenants in the building.
The flyer listed signs that a tornado might be coming, including a low-hanging cloud that looks to be rotating (well, yeah, I guess that would be a sign of a tornado, huh?), debris dropping from the sky, and a "greenish-black tint to the sky." I was immediately turned off because as a freelance writer, I have to do research and put accurate facts, based on reputable sources, in my articles. I recently read something that said that a greenish-colored sky did not indicate an approaching tornado.
To be certain of my facts, I looked it up. According to the Journal of Applied Meteorology, a green sky is a sign of severe weather. Well, yeah, you usually don't see a green sky on a calm, sunny day. But it doesn't necessarily mean a tornado.
If my landlord wants to help me prepare for a possible tornado, I would appreciate accurate information. But whatever. That's not the part that I found most insulting.
The flyer went on to advise me to inform "the blind or deaf" about the weather conditions. Because, what, they aren't bright enough to know what the weather is like?
I guess blind people wouldn't be able to see that green sky, but since that doesn't mean a tornado is imminent anyway, I'm not sure that really matters. I haven't known many people with visual impairments, but there was a woman that used to live near me that was blind. We took the same bus downtown to work, back when I was a social worker. She was a social worker, too. I'm guessing she was aware of the weather conditions. When it was raining, she got as wet as I did, standing on the corner waiting for that bus. She used her umbrella when it rained, zipped up her coat and put on her gloves when it was cold, etc. She seemed to be as aware as I was about the weather, even though she could not see the sky. I wonder if she would have appreciated me saying, "Hey, Mary Ann, it's raining" when it was raining. I'm thinking not.
I've known quite a few people that were deaf and they all seemed to be aware of the weather, too. Sometimes they would even tell me about the weather. For instance, when I did volunteer work at a summer camp for kids with disabilities, some of them would sign to me, "It's hot!" on a particularly hot day. I bet they would be aware of things like low-hanging rotating clouds and debris falling from the sky, too.
Besides the apparent assumption that people that are visually impaired or deaf must be too dumb to notice if the weather is bad, this flyer referred to them as "the blind and deaf." Not people with visual impairments, not people that are blind, not people that are hard of hearing, not deaf people. The blind. The deaf. Because of course they are all the same and the most important thing about them is their disability. I'll have to write about person first language another time, but if you didn't know, it is appropriate to say "a person with a disability," putting the person first. It is not appropriate to say "the disabled."
It was a handy list of "Tornado Safety Tips," which apparently my landlord thought would be of use to all the tenants in the building.
The flyer listed signs that a tornado might be coming, including a low-hanging cloud that looks to be rotating (well, yeah, I guess that would be a sign of a tornado, huh?), debris dropping from the sky, and a "greenish-black tint to the sky." I was immediately turned off because as a freelance writer, I have to do research and put accurate facts, based on reputable sources, in my articles. I recently read something that said that a greenish-colored sky did not indicate an approaching tornado.
To be certain of my facts, I looked it up. According to the Journal of Applied Meteorology, a green sky is a sign of severe weather. Well, yeah, you usually don't see a green sky on a calm, sunny day. But it doesn't necessarily mean a tornado.
If my landlord wants to help me prepare for a possible tornado, I would appreciate accurate information. But whatever. That's not the part that I found most insulting.
The flyer went on to advise me to inform "the blind or deaf" about the weather conditions. Because, what, they aren't bright enough to know what the weather is like?
I guess blind people wouldn't be able to see that green sky, but since that doesn't mean a tornado is imminent anyway, I'm not sure that really matters. I haven't known many people with visual impairments, but there was a woman that used to live near me that was blind. We took the same bus downtown to work, back when I was a social worker. She was a social worker, too. I'm guessing she was aware of the weather conditions. When it was raining, she got as wet as I did, standing on the corner waiting for that bus. She used her umbrella when it rained, zipped up her coat and put on her gloves when it was cold, etc. She seemed to be as aware as I was about the weather, even though she could not see the sky. I wonder if she would have appreciated me saying, "Hey, Mary Ann, it's raining" when it was raining. I'm thinking not.
I've known quite a few people that were deaf and they all seemed to be aware of the weather, too. Sometimes they would even tell me about the weather. For instance, when I did volunteer work at a summer camp for kids with disabilities, some of them would sign to me, "It's hot!" on a particularly hot day. I bet they would be aware of things like low-hanging rotating clouds and debris falling from the sky, too.
Besides the apparent assumption that people that are visually impaired or deaf must be too dumb to notice if the weather is bad, this flyer referred to them as "the blind and deaf." Not people with visual impairments, not people that are blind, not people that are hard of hearing, not deaf people. The blind. The deaf. Because of course they are all the same and the most important thing about them is their disability. I'll have to write about person first language another time, but if you didn't know, it is appropriate to say "a person with a disability," putting the person first. It is not appropriate to say "the disabled."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)