Terms in Disability

The vernacular treadmill is ever running and we often find we are behind on the currently accepted terms. While some struggle to accept change, many of us prefer to treat our fellow humans with respect by adopting the terms that are more compassionate. We briefly touch on the history of some terms as well as the current "best practices," including the controvery around person-first or identity-first language. What are some you didn't know? Did we miss any?

Recommendations

• Abraham: Hens (board game: https://www.littlerocketgames.com/product/hens/) 
• Shane: The Running Man (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt14107334/)

Holidays (11/26/26):

• Blackout Wednesday
• Coton de Tulear Day
• Good Grief Day
• National Cake Day
• National Jukebox Day
• Spitegiving
• Tie One On Day
• What Do You Love About America Day
• Better Conversation Week
• Church/State Separation Week
• GERD Awareness Week
• National Adoption Week
• National Family Week
• National Farm-City Week
• National Game & Puzzle Week

Links: 

1. https://adata.org/factsheet/ADANN-writing
2. https://www.ndrn.org/resource/communicating-about-people-with-disabilities/#:~:text=Avoid%20Using%20Euphemisms,part%20of%20the%20human%20experience.
3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GaGmxrPnYAM&t=7s
4. https://www.adcet.edu.au/resource/11292/file/19/3a-Guide-to-language-about-disability-FINAL_230209.pdf 
5. https://odr.dc.gov/page/people-first-language#:~:text=The%20People%20First%20Respectful%20Language,and%20publications%20and%20all%20internet 

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/why-we-do-what-we-do--3419521/support.

Support our podcast: www.patreon.com/wwdwwdpodcast

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:03):
You're listening to Why We Do what we Do. Welcome
to Why We Do what we Do. I am your
politically correct host, Abraham.

Speaker 2 (00:21):
And I'm your happy to adjust host Shane.

Speaker 1 (00:24):
We are a psychology podcast. We talk about the things
that humans and non human animals do, and we're currently
in a series of episodes discussing disability and ability and
accessibility and the various topics sort of in that category
of things. So welcome. I hope that you enjoy what

(00:45):
you hear in this one today, and if you're joining
us for the first time, then you're catching us in
the middle. But I do think that these episodes are
fully intended to stand on their own. They're not sequels,
but we wanted to just cover all of these topics
and do so altogether in sort of a release schedule,
if you will, almost like a season. If it's something
like that.

Speaker 2 (01:06):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, it's a nice little like standalone series,
like almost like one shots in comics, where we're just
trying to cover specific topics and just give you more
information that are all like generally linked but stand on
their own, kind of like how the MCU should have been.

Speaker 1 (01:20):
Yeah, yeah, exactly like that. Yeah, we'd like to see you. Yeah,
whether you are new here or you are a returning person.
Either way, we are so happy to have you here.
We hope you enjoy what you hear in this discussion today.
If you do, and you would like to support us,
that you can like and subscribe, leave a rating and
a review, join us on Patreon. I'll talk more about

(01:42):
the ways that you can support us at the end
of this discussion. But this episode publishes on November twenty sixth,
which means we'd like to wish you a happy Blackout Wednesday.

Speaker 2 (01:54):
Yes, yes, yes, yes, it's also Coton de Tulear Day.

Speaker 1 (01:59):
Okay, it is is Peanuts Day. No, sorry, good Grief.

Speaker 2 (02:03):
Day, oh man, so wholesome. It's a National Cake Day.

Speaker 1 (02:08):
It is National Jukebox Day.

Speaker 2 (02:11):
That's kind of fun. Sure, it's Spike Giving, which is just,
you know, kind of fun.

Speaker 1 (02:16):
Eh.

Speaker 2 (02:18):
Sure, It's Tai one on Day, Yes it is. It
is what do you Love About America Day? So it's
a really short.

Speaker 1 (02:25):
Day, really short celebration.

Speaker 3 (02:29):
Yeah, because we will be not releasing an episode on Thanksgiving,
but and you probably won't be listening to this before, during,
or immediately after Thanksgiving and some time thereafter but happy Thanksgiving.

Speaker 1 (02:46):
I hope that it either goes greater was great.

Speaker 2 (02:48):
I hope you enjoy the food that you like to
enjoy and that your family is calm and does not
cause you problems.

Speaker 1 (02:54):
And relatedly to that, it is also Better Conversation Week,
Yes it is.

Speaker 2 (02:59):
It's also Church State Separation Week. Big fan of that
that should be forever.

Speaker 1 (03:04):
Yeah, it's just the century of that or millennia.

Speaker 2 (03:07):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (03:07):
It is g E r D or GIRD awareness week.

Speaker 2 (03:12):
Perfect for Thanksgiving. I guess it is a National adoption
week for all you pro lifers out there.

Speaker 1 (03:21):
Yeah, making up a huge amount of the adoption pool
they are. Yeah, it is National Family Week. That makes
sense to me.

Speaker 2 (03:28):
Yep. It's National Farm City Week.

Speaker 1 (03:30):
Also makes sense to me. And it is importantly and
certain last and best National Game and Puzzle Week.

Speaker 2 (03:39):
I knew you were gonna love that day, that week
the whole time. So it was good.

Speaker 1 (03:43):
I really really do I do. Yeah, all right, But
we do talk about those holidays because it's fun, but
it's not the primary thing we do, and it's probably
not the primary reason that you are here. Instead, we're
talking about terms in disability and mostly the purpose of
this discussion is to specifically go over just kind of
the language we use as we're talking about disability. This

(04:06):
sort of embodies the fact that we are as a
show we embrace the values of the social model of
disability and those sort of person centered, humanistic values of
disability and that sort of thing. And we feel like
there are a lot of terms that it is just
worth discussing. Many of you will know these, like some
of those concepts will not be new to you, but

(04:28):
some of these were things that even I learned as
I was putting together the notes for this, And so
it's just like, how do we use our language in
a way that is supportive and does not cause undoe, distress,
or harm to those of us who have some kind
of impairment or condition.

Speaker 2 (04:45):
Right, So we're going to talk about how our language
shifts and changes and all that. And you know, the
language that we use to talk to and about people
does not carry inherent meaning because everything's made up. We
make up all of our language. So that means that
we can change everything as we go. Yeah, but it
does carry current cultural values and meanings. Less than a
year ago, maybe even just a few months ago. The
sounds six seven meant nothing. Arguably they still mean nothing,

(05:08):
and I think it's really important to remember that, and
they will continue to mean nothing well into the.

Speaker 1 (05:11):
Future when we've forgotten them.

Speaker 2 (05:13):
Yeah, when we've forgotten them. But all of a sudden,
this is the word of the year, and that just
kind of shows how rapidly language evolves. It's just kind
of like why bootylicious is in the dictionary.

Speaker 1 (05:22):
Yeah, yeah, a word that also does not get used anymore.

Speaker 2 (05:26):
Yeah, exactly.

Speaker 1 (05:27):
So the language we use to talk to and about people,
it does directly impact our thoughts and feelings about those
people and also how those people feel when they're spoken
to or addressed, And so we just want to be
mindful of how we are saying things that affects then
how we think about them and how we feel about them,
and how the people who are on the receiving end

(05:49):
of that have to experience that language. And just again
it's bringing some mindfulness and intentionality to that kind of language.

Speaker 2 (05:57):
Yeah, And we're going to discuss some terms of practices
and disability that are considered politically correct or incorrect, which
is to say, insulting, inoffensive, or compassionate and acceptable, with
some caveats. Of course, because this episode may eventually not
even be relevant as we kind of like unpack some
of these things.

Speaker 1 (06:13):
All right, So I think that is a sufficient preamble
to get started into this. Is there anything that I
missed before we are ready to dive into the sort
of main content?

Speaker 2 (06:23):
No, I think we're ready to go.

Speaker 1 (06:24):
I will say this is the kiss of death for
us always, but this is probably going to be a
shorter episode. There's just why would you do that? I know,
I know, I've condemned us to death. Every time we
say that, the episode ends up going like past our
normal median range. But I don't even know if that's
possible here, So I guess I'm challenging the universe to

(06:45):
prove me wrong. Yeah, but let's go ahead and dive
into it. So our language is an ever evolving thing.
I found this really cool YouTube video at one point
where it played some sentences from that were in English
from a few centuries years ago, and they were unintelligible,
like you could not make out cognate words in there

(07:08):
for what they were supposed to mean. And then they
just kept jumping through every like every fifty years or
maybe a century or whatever, and you start to see
the language, you start to hear it morph into a
language that's familiar. But our language is continuously evolving, you know,
five hundred years from now, assuming we haven't killed each
other off, we will if we were to listen to

(07:29):
this podcast, it might sound unintelligible to them because of
how much language could have changed. So as our language evolves,
so too will our relation to the words that are
part of that language. That will change also will espouse
some observations about the language we use to talk about
disability that are relevant at the time of this recording.
But who knows how quickly some of this information will

(07:51):
go out of the mainstream. Some of it will probably
last for a while, but some of it will become
incorrect or irrelevant almost immediately. And like, that's just a
thing to know that it happens, and we accept that
it happens, like it's just part of our language. But
we do our best with right now, you know what
I mean?

Speaker 2 (08:07):
Yeah, absolutely, And some people are disturbed, distressed, or angry
at the constantly shifting attitudes around terminology that is considered
correct or incorrect as they relate to being offensive or not.
People really struggle with this and you'll hear people kind
of argue against change like this. They'll say, we use
that word my whole life, or we use these words
my whole life, and they were never a problem. But

(08:27):
I think it's in people dislike change and it is
uncomfortable for some folks. But it does happen rapidly. It
does happen with changing generations. It can happen year to year,
let alone decade to decade or century to century. But
it is important to like people. It really at the
end of the day, people really struggle with some of
these changes, and then other people just they adapt really quickly.

Speaker 1 (08:48):
Yeah, And for those who do struggle, their dissatisfaction might
come from being corrected when they're trying to stay on
top of things and then they're still being told that
they're wrong, and they're like, I thought I was doing
the right thing, and now you're telling me that I'm
wrong again, and that's where they sort of get frustrated.
But some of the people their frustration will come from

(09:09):
they feel like things are changing around them and they're
expected to just change along with it, even though they're
kind of being left out of those conversations, and they're
just sort of like, man, why do why you have
to be the one who keeps on like everyone else
is just makes these arbitrary decisions, and now I have
to go along with it. And there are some I
think who just they are willing to change, of course,

(09:29):
But for those who experience frustration around this, I think
those are kind of the camps they fall into. Is
the like I'm saying things, That's how I've said them,
that's how I've heard other people say them, and now
all of a sudden, you're telling me I'm wrong. And
then there are others who are just like, why are
you changing this? Like this is the language we use,
and they There may be others, but those are some
of the ones I thought of when thinking about, like,

(09:51):
what's going on for people who experience frustration around the
shifting language.

Speaker 2 (09:55):
Yeah, and I think sometimes too, like I think people
will be frustrated with it because I think that the
correction may seem like somebody is telling them that they're
doing something wrong because they think that they're trying to
be intentionally harmful. Their intent is always good, like they're
trying to be mindful, they don't ever want to hurt people,

(10:16):
but now they're being told that they're hurting people, yeah,
or you're using the wrong language, And so that is
frustrating because it's like, that's you know, it's a conversation
between intent and impact. And I think that that is
an important conversation. Oh yeah, critically important conversation. But also
I could see being frustrated when you your intent is
never to harm, but you accidentally do. I could see

(10:36):
some people getting really upset about that.

Speaker 1 (10:39):
Yeah. Yeah, I think that's a really good point, and
the intent versus impact is a great distinction to bring
in here.

Speaker 2 (10:44):
Yeah, and some people might be frustrated with the fact
that they that they'll adopt new language knowing it's just
going to change again in some undetermined amount of time
that may be very brief, and so they're kind of
thinking like, well, what's the point of learning this new
term or new phrase or this new way of speaking
about this when it's just going to change in a
couple months anyway.

Speaker 1 (11:01):
Yeah, Yeah, I do think there are some people who
they dislike that it feels that like people are just
chasing things to be offended by, and that there's no
language that's safe from correction. So it's sort of like, oh, look,
You've picked some new word that makes you mad, and
now I have to change the things I say again,
and that'll make you mad. And so they see people
as sort of looking for attention by getting offended by things.

(11:24):
I don't think that they're right, but I do think
that they might feel that way about it.

Speaker 2 (11:29):
Yeah, and then some people enjoy the fact that some
of the terms are cruel and they want to retain
their ability to speak to others in a cruel and
offensive way. You know who they are, and it rhymes
with will say Republicans.

Speaker 1 (11:41):
Right, We're just trying to enumerate conditions under which we're
wrapping our heads around understanding why people struggle with the
fact that language constantly evolves, and like we are legitimately
trying to understand that because it's a thing that happens,
and we want to understand human behavior and we want
to be compassionate to it and also provide some suggestions
for how we move forward. And a major barrier to

(12:03):
that is ads always all right, we are back. So
we've been describing the various camps of people who are
attitudes that might be associated with being frustrated with the
shifting language of our times. And if you fall into

(12:25):
the camp of people who struggle with the seemingly endless
treadmill of terms that cycle through being considered politically correct
and then later politically incorrect, I would actually like to
express compassion and patients for that position. I appreciate that
those in that group, they want to do the right
thing and they just struggle, like they're feeling like they're
constantly being corrected. Because I feel like your heart is

(12:47):
in the right place. Like it sucks when people don't
give you space to learn new terms in a safe,
constructive way rather than just being berated for getting it wrong.
And like I think that it's not appropriate or compassion
in it to like make people feel wrong because they
use something in a way that they did not know
was a way they is not considered politically correct anymore. Yeah,

(13:10):
And so like I think I do have a listening
and a compassion for that. And like I've been I've
been the person where I was being corrected on those things,
and like that doesn't feel very good and it's like
I didn't know that, Like you don't have to make
me feel like a terrible person because of something I
didn't know. And so I really do have compassion for
that group of people. So I hear you, I see
you keep trying. We are we are compassionate and patient

(13:33):
with you.

Speaker 2 (13:34):
Yeah, And I think that it's also important to say
that that is not in lieu of using the correct
terms either, right, Like, we feel for the people who
are learning, and we also feel for the people who
are victimized by the terms.

Speaker 1 (13:47):
Like.

Speaker 2 (13:48):
I think it's like one of those things where, you know,
I think that we take the stance of the podcast
that that almost everybody, the majority of people are always
intending to try to do the right thing in all
those situations. I think genuine only people care about other people.
I think that they don't want to harm. I think
that their intent is almost always good for the most part.
And I think I can't imagine being on the other

(14:09):
side of that conversation where you know the term is
being used incorrectly or the incorrect humor is being used
and that's harmful to like, So I have compassion for
the folks that are the direct target and experience that,
like the misuse of the terms and the use of
the wrong terms, And I also feel for the people
who are trying to learn, who are like really in
it for the right reasons, And it's a really confusing

(14:29):
time because language is very complex and very unique, and
it does shift and change rapidly.

Speaker 1 (14:34):
Yes, that's great, that's very useful clarification. Now, I do
think that most of us can at the very least
wrap our heads around the fact that we don't like
being talked down to or offended by ignorant comments. So
being told that we're stupid, worthless, and inconvenience and shouldn't
exist is something that we don't appreciate. So we can

(14:56):
embrace the corresponding value that we don't want to do
that to other people. Yeah, And so that we when
we use our language in a way that does make
people feel othered in that way because of their impairment
or their disability, we can understand that we wouldn't want
to be treated that way ourselves, most of us, right, right.

Speaker 2 (15:15):
And so we should be paid. You with people who
are learning the terminology and without being accusatory, let them
know the terms that are more considerate and less offensive.
Your relationship to the person will likely impact how you
go about saying this. I do firmly believe in the
concept of radical candor. Like you do give people feedback
and correct them, like based on the fact that you
care about them and you want them to experience like

(15:35):
good things. So, like I do believe that like a
one on one personal feedback opportunity, I think is really good. Yeah,
and some people can say you're not supposed to say
it that way, dumbass, say it this way, or and
have that land favorably with their audience. Some of us
will need to approach it more gently something perhaps like
I learned that apparently the preferred term is blank because

(15:55):
of X, Y Z reasons, And you could do that
and just kind of like give that correction, move on.
There's lots of ways to do that. But I do
think that there's a softer approach and then there's a
more sarcastic approach. There are some studies that show that
sarcastic feedback, if you have a good relationship with somebody,
can be really effective, right, you know, So it really
depends on your relationship.

Speaker 1 (16:12):
Yeah, And that's exactly what we mean here, is is
the fact that like, if you have that relationship with
someone and they use a term in correct and be like, hey,
stop it, stop being a jerk, Yeah, cut it out. Yeah,
or it's being like all right, I don't know, it's
gonna come up with some sarcastic name for them and
like point out that they've done it wrong, and like
that will actually land really well with them because that's
the nature of the relationship. But I think generally speaking,

(16:34):
we want to approach people in the way that's going
to work best for them, and if we don't know
them very well, then like, let's just be compassionate and
patient and like, as you said, sort of radical candor,
but a way to say it diplomatically.

Speaker 2 (16:46):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (16:47):
Absolutely, Yeah. I actually like I feel like I have
the experience of when I watch people who they try
to interact and they just are sort of yes to
everything because they want to be liked in that conversation,
and they start agreeing to things that I know that
the don't agree to. I'm like, I feel like this
is not doing anyone any favors. Like this person needs
to hear that they're wrong about these things. Yeah, you

(17:07):
can't just keep telling them that they're right, because the
more we tell them that, the more they'll believe it.
I'm like, it's okay for us to disagree with each
other the whole point of us having like a society
is that we communicate and learn from each other like
and that means that there's gonna be disagreements sometimes and
when we talk it out, like we just need to
have a conversation. Absolutely, So I don't know, I agree

(17:27):
with I agree with that all a lot. Okay, So anyway,
this is a boatload of preamble basically half the episode
at this point to get to the main point here.
But we're also gonna have to say some things as
we go through this that are on the offensive side
while explaining the terminology and the incorrect terminology. We're going
to try and keep it to a minimum. We're gonna
avoid I mean, we added a list of like everything

(17:48):
we could possibly say, and we before recording sort of
discuss which ones made the most sense to like, partially
because they're less likely to be known. So we're gonna
try and keep it to a minimum. If there's something
you strung to listen to, you might want to skip
the rest of this discussion. Again, we're not going to
be using super derogatory terms, I don't think, but we
are going to try and list like here's how to

(18:09):
say it, how not to say it and how not
to say a part is going to contain some offensive language.

Speaker 2 (18:15):
Yeah, and I think also too, we want to make
sure that we open it up so that if you
do have feedback or comments or thoughts or an adapt please
send it our way.

Speaker 1 (18:22):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (18:23):
We take the stance that we are open to learning
new ways to say things, given our our learning histories,
our privileges and all those things. So we do want
to make sure that you know that this is an
open space for us to receive feedback to. So, so
with all that being said, as we described it, our
model's a disability episode. Disability is productively viewed as an impairment,
and the disability is a barrier created by poorly designed systems.

(18:46):
So mostly we describe impairments rather than disabilities when talking
about people, but disabilities is an appropriate is appropriate when
describing environmental barriers.

Speaker 1 (18:56):
Yes, all right, So let's go ahead and get into
some of the main issues that we're going to talk
about with respect to language and how we talk about
these things. And the first one is called person first
versus identity first language and what that means. First, this
is a complex and evolving issue as well. Looking back,
it's around the nineteen seventies with disability advocacy groups. They

(19:19):
started with this idea of person first language. And the
whole value here is that people are not defined by
their disability, but that they are people first and whatever
the disability they might have second. That started in the
seventies with some of those advocacy groups, and then it
spread and became more popular in the nineteen eighties. And
as I said, that's called person first language. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (19:42):
And in two thousand and six in Washington, DC, a
council enacted the People First, Respectful Language Moderganization Act of
two thousand and six, which just rolls.

Speaker 1 (19:50):
Off the tongue it does.

Speaker 2 (19:52):
It requires that laws be written such that language about
people with disabilities is respectful and puts the person first.
So that's where you might see person with blank yes, right,
And that's that's usually where you that's that's where that
comes from.

Speaker 1 (20:04):
And I didn't I guess I didn't clarify, Yeah, that
you're exactly right, that the identity first is putting the
impairment and then something about the person, so like they're
a deaf person, they're an autistic person, they're a I
don't know, I guess I'm trying to think of words,
not I'm thinking of words, not to say, yeah, they're
they're a blind person. And so the blind, the deaf,

(20:25):
the autistic, whatever is the thing coming first, and they're
arguing instead put the person first, the person who is blind,
a person who is deaf, they're a person who is autistic.
And that was sort of the language here, And the
value espoused in this is that people should be talked
about as people before being talked about as their disability.
And in this language, it was considered inappropriate to describe

(20:46):
someone as being an autistic person because it puts their
identity before their personhood. Person first language instead advocates that
we describe the person as a person with autism. It
could be a boy with autism, a girl with autism,
a kid with autism, a person with autism, as long
as their personhood came first. And so you can sort
of see the value there was trying to look at

(21:07):
a respectful tone to take when talking about these communities.

Speaker 2 (21:12):
Yeah, However, many people in those communities advocated for the
fact that their identity was inherently tied to their impairment
and that they preferred identity first. Language. So in this approach,
calling somebody an autistic person was more appropriate than calling
them a person with autism. So just as an example,
which is exactly the opposite as the previous recommendation provided.
And that's happened only, I mean, I don't want to

(21:35):
say only that's become more prevalent. I would say a
more common talking point in the last like several.

Speaker 1 (21:41):
Years, yeah, maybe ten years, maybe.

Speaker 2 (21:43):
Ten years that we've really seen this. And I've seen
some really good infographics that'll show like a person and
they'll be holding a bag and the bag just says autism,
and they're like, this is a person with autism. And
then it'll show a person where they like in the
bag is like maybe like colored like the autism spectrum,
you know, Like they'll do that. Yeah, they're like this
person with autism. And then they'll show a person who
is the full color of the spectrum, and they go,

(22:04):
this is an autistic person. And you could see the
difference between how the language might be used in that
really cool visual. I think that's always really helpful for me.
That was helpful for me to change the way that
I was using it. But it is something that is
only a more recent change that that's been part of
a larger discussion point in the last few years.

Speaker 1 (22:20):
Right, and ultimately where we've sort of landed, at least
at the time of this recording, is that it's just preference.
It's some people will prefer to be called a person
used person first language, say a person with autism. Some
people will prefer to be called an autistic person. And
the community seems to the autistic community seems to have
largely advocated for identity first, but they also just leave

(22:42):
it open to like whatever people are most comfortable with,
go with that, and so it's just a matter of asking, like,
how would you like me to refer to you? So, yeah,
like what did we learn from this big back and forth?
People are going to have their preferences for how they're
talked about and how they're described. If you're not sure,
ask what they prefer, because you know, I think the

(23:02):
issue is a lot of this is thing decisions were
being made without necessarily including those communities in those decisions,
and then initially they some of the advocacy groups did
start with some of those people, but it kind of
then left them behind, and then the conversations kind of
happened without them and it was sort of turned around
and were like, oh, wait, what do you guys want
to have happened? And then we got a different information. So,

(23:26):
you know, just thinking about like if I was talking
to Elon Musk, I might want a default to calling
him a vile piece of garbage and waste of life,
but he might actually prefer waste of life, vile piece
of garbage, or maybe he prefers useless pile of Either way,
I'm I can ascertain how best to refer to him
if I'm not sure which one he prefers, because any
one of them might be correct.

Speaker 2 (23:46):
Sure, yeah, absolutely, I mean one politician boldly claimed that
their gender pronouns are kick and ass, So yes, you
can call that person ass because specifically that's how they
prefer to be addressed. And I agree that's actually an
apt way to refer to that specific.

Speaker 1 (24:01):
Yeah, but at all serious, like if someone who has
a vision impairment might, for example, be preferred to be
called blind, someone might be preferred to be called visually impaired.
It's likely a rule that just can't be universally applied.
So again it's just we get figure out what you
can look and see what those advocacy groups are currently
saying you can also just talk to the person and
ask them how they prefer to be referred to if

(24:23):
you feel the need to refer to them, and include
their impairment as part of that referral.

Speaker 2 (24:28):
Yeah, and this could be used in other spaces too,
not just disability. Like I'm gonna I want to use
the example of my buddy as an English teacher, and
he was recently given some feedback. He had a black
student in his class. He had refrained from using the
term African American. They were doing some poetry and some
readings from African American or from black authors, and so
he had been explicitly told that African American was not preferred,

(24:50):
so they went with black. And he had a students
class eventually come to him and say she preferred person
of color. And so again you could see how like
some sometimes the communities may not agree on what they're called.
Like sometimes you have to go with the individual and
what the individual prefers in the space of those communities
as somebody who belongs to that community, rather than me,
as an outsider of that community, choosing what that person

(25:11):
should be called.

Speaker 1 (25:12):
Yeah, absolutely, that's exactly correct. I do feel like most
people universally don't prefer ads.

Speaker 2 (25:17):
That's true.

Speaker 1 (25:24):
All right, we are back. Let's get into some more
of the sort of dos and don'ts around here. This
is going to be more specific with some of the
terms that you might have heard or used and so
again at the time of this recording. Some of this
might change very quickly after we record this, but we'll
do our best. The general principle here is to use
language that communicates respect for the person and their preferences,

(25:46):
without judgment about their condition. A lot of the idea
here is to emphasize abilities rather than limitations. So if
you're going to talk, if you feel the need to,
if it's helpful in some way to be communicating about
an impairment, to focus on what that person does rather
than what they can't or struggle to do. Right.

Speaker 2 (26:08):
One example is the term you might have heard this
term wheelchair bound, and so, instead of saying wheelchair bound,
which emphasizes that the person can't do or implies the
wheelchairs a kind of prison that we should feel sorry
for that person who is stuck there, instead we might
use something like a person who uses a wheelchair or
a person who you know, maneuvers using a wheelchair or
something along those lines.

Speaker 1 (26:29):
There's also like people who have disabilities that affect their communication.
We have historically described them as nonverbal or can't talk,
and again the only focuses on the limitation, but it
doesn't necessarily tell you what they can do or what
to expect. Instead, you could say something like uses a
communication device or alternative communication methods, and that lets you

(26:52):
know that, like they might be using sign language, they
might be using pictures, they might be using text. But
just saying that their nonverbal doesn't really tell us very
much about them, and it focuses on there. Again, it
focuses on the limitations and not their their abilities.

Speaker 2 (27:05):
Right, instead of describing people with disabilities as suffering from
their condition or a victim of their condition, you can
simply say has disability if that's what they prefer, or
say what that disability is, such as a visual impairment
or being deaf or hard of hearing. You can use
those instead of saying they're a victim of that.

Speaker 1 (27:21):
Yeah, the whole language around just like saying suffering from
or victim of or things like that, like is just
like it's just really difficult. It really infantilizes, and also
it just is condescending to those people. And there's also
a tendency I think a lot of people have sometimes
to try and rank the severity of the disability, such

(27:41):
as like how impacted they are, And we can really
just say that someone is impacted or just what their
disability is, but qualifiers about how significant it is applies
judgment about it. Like everyone's just different. So it's like
like severely, like they're severely handicapped, as like, we don't
need that adjective. It doesn't really help us in any

(28:02):
particular way. I'm like, they're extremely blind, they're partially deaf.
I'm like, let's just say this is a person with
the hearing impairment. Let's do our best to accommodate them
in a way that works. And so like we don't
need to necessarily have some ranking system about how significant
we interpret their disability to be. And again, all of
us are going to be different along these lines anyway.

Speaker 2 (28:21):
Yeah, So one really good example of this that we
see currently is that right now, the preferred nomenclature for
people diagnosed with specific neurological or cognitive impairments, the current
accepted broad term is the term neurodivergent. And I want
to point this out real quick too, because I think
this is really important. Is that when you get into
these discussions and start kind of like having conversations with

(28:41):
members of the community, you'll find that even underneath that term,
there is still debate as to what is considered neurodivergent. Yeah,
and the idea is that we could see this going
away in the future. We could see as we find
that more people fall into neurodivergent, maybe they're not diverging
from the quote unquote neurotypical space, but you'll find that,
like there are still some debates, Like anxiety comes up

(29:03):
a lot because it's often tangentially related to some of
the other diagnoses underneath neurodivergent. So like generalized anxiety disorder
shows up, and people will say, yes, it does belong,
No it doesn't belong. Some people will say every mental
health diagnosis belongs in that. Some people will say it
really only has to do with the neuroscience part of it.
And so it's really an interesting space. And I just

(29:24):
kind of lean into if somebody says that they prefer
to be described as neurodivergent, I'm just going to go
with it. I'm not going to argue with them. Why
would I. That seems like a waste of time if
this person is telling me, Like that'd be like if
somebody told me that their preferred name is Bobby versus Robert. Yeah,
like I would call them Bobby versus Robert. I wouldn't
call them Robert to spike them, Like it's going to
improve their quality of life by calling them what they

(29:44):
prefer to be called. So it doesn't matter to me
if it's their preference. But I do think there's just
it's important to know that there are lots of discussions
inside of this particular label right now.

Speaker 1 (29:54):
Yeah, exactly, the idea is like divergent from what like
it's not like there's actually normal anything, Like every everybody
is totally unique, So it's I could see this being
a term that kind of just completely goes away. But yeah,
right now, like this is generally considered PC. A lot
of some people accept this, but the conversations are ongoing
and this is probably going to change. But that's sort

(30:17):
of a where we're at with that particular term. In general,
around disabilities, it's really recommended to just avoid euphemisms. These
are condescending that make it seem like there's something to
hide or something wrong with a person like that we're
something we're trying not to talk about for some reason.
Pretending their impairment doesn't exists almost as bad as being
judgmental about it. So it's sort of like the person

(30:38):
who's got the the issues. Yeah, like that's not that's
not helpful either, even though the word issues is not
one that's been flagged as offensive, Like, we don't need
to use euphemisms to talk condescendingly about impairments, right.

Speaker 2 (30:51):
Absolutely, So what we want to do is we want
to just share a couple of terms that are off it,
that are pretty common, that are used. And admittedly some
of these words are in my own language that I
have tried to tried to get out and fade out
same and it's really tough, Like I mean, some of
these words are going to be ablest, some of these
words are going to be sanest, and you'll find some
of those types of things going on. But they are

(31:13):
terms that are so common that you don't even realize
that they're actually a little bit problematic. And again this
may change, but right now these are some things that
we that we do know, like the term lame. The
term lame has come up quite often. It's really a
term that is historically used to describe somebody who has
some type of mobility impairment. They maybe have a hard

(31:35):
time walking, they may walk with a limp, they may
walk with a cane, And so that was originally what
it was used for, and it's kind of evolved in
something that is like something that we don't like, something
that's uncool. Ye, And that's kind of how it's often
used in like day to day language. But it comes
from that space of like, you know, kind of derogatory
or condescending.

Speaker 1 (31:54):
Yeah, So in case you weren't clear, this is a
list of things not to say.

Speaker 2 (31:57):
Yes. Yes.

Speaker 1 (31:57):
Another one that's really common is the word this actually
was for a while in the eighteen hundreds, like a
diagnosis that referred to some kind of I guess we'd
call it a diversion at this point, but some kind
of like cognitive impairments of some sort or neurological impairment.
But but yeah, idiot has this long history of that

(32:18):
and then being sort of judgmental term. So it's just
it's just considered like an an inappropriate non PC term.

Speaker 2 (32:25):
Yeah, just like the R word. I'm not even gonna
say it. Yeah, but it is a term that has
come up, and it's suddenly gotten this huge resurgence, like
all of a sudden, I'm seeing it all over the place,
which is like really astounding.

Speaker 1 (32:36):
Yeah, I mean it makes sense. We are a currently
administration that is marching backwards through time as quickly as possible.

Speaker 2 (32:41):
Yeah, yeh, yeah, that's true.

Speaker 1 (32:41):
They really want to get back to slavery is sort
of their ultimate goal.

Speaker 2 (32:44):
Yeah. Yeah, so that that is a term that I
think everybody, I think anybody who's listening this podcast is
probably familiar with. So like we probably don't need to
spend too much time on that. But the term crazy,
I know that that's in my language. Yeah, and I
really try hard to change what I say, And I
really am trying to find the right word that fits
more with that because you made me. You may hear
me say something like bonkers or bananas, but those are

(33:06):
also often euphemisms that are designed to replace that. Yeah,
So I'm trying to find, like, you know, I'm trying
to kind of think of like terms like maybe more
like ridiculous, or ludicrous or something along those lines, which
feels a little bit more like absurdist rather than sayest.

Speaker 1 (33:21):
Yeah, yeah, well and you you also have had recommended
to me a while back that you say that a
good replacement is wild like, something that seems just like,
as we use the term crazy, we're talking about something
that's like unexpected or maybe extreme in some particular way.
And so just saying wild like gets that idea cross

(33:42):
without it being a reference to someone's like mental capacity, yeah,
or their their sort of current status. I guess. Dumb
is another one that actually comes from the deaf community
that was like a very old timey way of talking
about it, or the people who are mute and so like,
it's just that is another one that just is it
has these these roots in this ablest sort of offensive language.

Speaker 2 (34:04):
Yeah. A couple other ones that I think are more
common that you know. I mean, I think there's some
that are like pretty like you know about but like
epileptic or spastic. Those are often used in spaces to
describe somebody with cerebral palsy who has like maybe some
I guess maybe like identified concerns related to mobility and

(34:24):
like gross motor movement, and so those terms are kind
of moved away, we've moved into different spaces for that,
but that those are terms that we don't we really
shouldn't use anymore.

Speaker 1 (34:34):
Yeah, And like people who have like seizures sometimes are
sometimes described that way. And yeah, another reason for this
too is like this is another example of like focusing
on the limitation and not the ability, like physically challenged
like that. That's again that that focuses on the limitation,
not the ability. It's also not very descriptive, it's not
very helpful, and it has really been I think appropriated

(34:56):
in some spaces to just be an offensive term. So yeah, again,
just let's not use it. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (35:00):
Another one that's come up more more recently that I think,
and I think part of it too is like there
are sometimes some of the words on this list, or
some of the phrases on this list are more recent
updates to how we can move away from these, But
I don't know that the communities have settled on a
preference around this, so it's kind of hard to get
consensus around what is the preference. So, like special needs

(35:23):
special needs is one that comes up quite a bit,
and that is kind of a unique one because the
term special needs is by some members of the community
is actually perfectly fine. They accept it. Some other folks
do not. They might decide to use terms like exceptionalities
because a lot of times people don't realize that special
education refers to all of the levels of support that

(35:45):
are beyond what is considered like general education that interudes
like gifted programs and honors programs and stuff like that,
to IB programs are all under special education as well.
So like, I don't think people realize that part of this,
and so I think oftentimes we have a connotation with that.
I think that's one that's kind of evolving and changing
and still kind of in flux right now.

Speaker 1 (36:03):
Actually, I do feel like handicap kind of falls in
that category. Like that's still on a lot of legal documents,
like and when you get like a parking the parking pass,
I think they still call it a handicap parking pass.
So like that language is still there. I think, like
its current status is not definitive, but it's one generally
we want to avoid. But it is also like some
it's still used in a lot of spaces.

Speaker 2 (36:25):
Well, and also too, there are some members of the
community that actually prefer that, like they'll pre sure to
say disabled their handicapped as like a like, which is
like again, this is and I think this is the
part where we were saying that language is evolving. Yeah,
and and as people, maybe if you're listening to the
show and you are a member of one of these
communities and you have more insight on this, we would
love to know. But like what we're learning is that,

(36:46):
like there are just some spaces that are starting to evolve.
There's some that have, Like you know, I think the
autistic community is a little bit far further advanced in
terms of like finding preferred language or finding community language.
There's like at least some level consensus, but even then
it really depends on the person you're talking to, which
is it's complex. It's a very complex thing.

Speaker 1 (37:06):
I'm just going to list a few more without describing
them very much, just because I think I think people
sort of get it at this point. But some other
words to generally avoid are calling people slow, more on invalid.
Most of these have been out of vogue for quite
some time, so hopefully that doesn't come as a surprise
to anybody. Maybe slow is one that some people still
use yeah. Again, just these are because they are non

(37:28):
PC terms. One that's actually surprised me was paraplegic. And
I reason for this is again focusing on limitations and audibilities.
So those are sort of a few more to know about.

Speaker 2 (37:39):
Yeah, and again we're not naming these to just kind
of like get away with saying them. I want to
be really clear about that, Like I don't want to
be actually skip the worst ones. But no, we skip
the worst ones that we could. Yeah, we even started
by saying like, oh I hate I hate this. I
had I didn't want to say the things on those lists,
so it sucks. Yeah, sorry, I guess I just apologize
for that. Yeah. Yeah, and yeah, it's more so to
highlight how, I think, more importantly, how these words in

(38:04):
these phrases were widely accepted as like part of the
common descriptors. Like mental retardation is an example of a
term that was a medical diagnosis, as psychiatric diagnosis that
is still I still see it on psychological reports for
people who have like historical reports where they are diagnosed
under those different guidelines and requirements. So, like the goal here,

(38:26):
the important thing to understand is that while these may
have been accepted at one point they are no longer accepted,
or it's evolving in some way that you have to
be aware of it so that you can identify and
be aware that it might show up in your language
and see if you can find a more appropriate or
more acceptable alternative as your language continues to evolve.

Speaker 1 (38:45):
Absolutely. Yeah, that defensive list brought to you by ADS. Okay,
we're back. We're sort of about ready to wrap this up.
I think one of the important things to end this
discussion with here is what happens when you get it wrong.

(39:06):
Should you self flagellate? Should you say a thousand hail
Marys Like? No, that's obviously not what we're going to
advocate here. You are probably gonna make mistakes. We probably
did in this discussion, or at least they will think
these are things that we said that will be viewed
as incorrect in the future. And I think the important
thing is to just again express some compassion toward the
people who are on the receiving end of those mistakes

(39:27):
and the people who are making them. It's okay to
make mistakes, just learn from them, like, just try and
learn from them. Like, I think we want to understand
that like it's not the end of the world if
you say something that's wrong, but like let's just try
and do better and like have patience for those people
who are figuring that out.

Speaker 2 (39:43):
Yeah, And I think another thing too that I have
learned from spending time working in the trans community is
that if you make a mistake, just move forward, Like, yeah,
don't spend time going I'm so sorry I said that.
Da da da da da da da. Just say oh,
okay and correct your language and then move forward. The
more you harp on it, the more I'm comfortable it

(40:04):
is for everybody involved. Like it's just one of those
things where you just go, okay, I'm just oh, I
called you the wrong I said the wrong term. Okay,
thank you for that. I'll and else just move on,
Like the more that you apologize, because you're gonna feel guilty,
Like if somebody corrects you, you may feel guilty that
you've done some harm. Just correct it and move on.
The more you spend time spent talking about it is
going to be it's gonna make it weirder. Yeah, Like,

(40:25):
so don't make it weirder. It's already it's already gonna be.
Like you've already made a mistake, don't make it worse, right.

Speaker 1 (40:31):
And then it sounds like you're like make an excuse
for you, Like, well, that's just the way that I
was talked about, Like here's my dad just said there's
one person we knew when I was growing up, and
they go, they wouldn't like this, and my dad always
called in this, and I'm like, we're so far past
this conversation needed to happen, Like please just stop, please
just stop, Like we don't need to be talking about this,
Like we made a mistake, we dressed it, we fixed.

Speaker 2 (40:50):
It, it's done. You're making it worse.

Speaker 1 (40:52):
Yeah, go on to something else. Please.

Speaker 2 (40:54):
It's that meme from the Simpsons where like it's Rod
or Todd going oh my god, stop and he's already dead.
Like it's that like, just leave it alone. It's done,
it's fine. You don't need to do you're making your
causing more damage, right, And I think another thing to
think about, too, is like you want to let the
people know around you know, when you're not sure what
to do, you can tell them something like I'm not
used to communicating about this disability or condition. Please let

(41:16):
me know if I make a mistake or say something
that is upsetting, or you could start with are you
comfortable talking about your disability or do you have preferences
for communicating about your disability? Any of those things are
are fine. I think part of that is also, like
the other recommendation that would make inside of that is
like also just doing your independent research around stuff.

Speaker 1 (41:32):
Yeah, it's a good recommendation.

Speaker 2 (41:33):
Like, and when I say independent research, I don't mean
like going on like YouTube and being like, wellhy like
go to like redit me. Yeah, like, go to members
of the community that belong to the community, organizations nonprofit
organizations that are our advocates for the members of the community,
and find out if you can even like just speak
to advocates inside of that space and see if they

(41:54):
have a preference for how to talk about it, and
just try to get as much information as you can
if you can't. I think that's incredibly valuable.

Speaker 1 (42:02):
Yeah, and I guess actually Reddit it does count in
the sense that there are those communities on Reddit, so
you could potentially engage with them that way. But yeah,
just going on to like the whatever offensive in cell
group that hates everybody and just wants to say racist
and misogynistic slurs. They will not have useful information there
about anything, right, let alone this. So yeah, exactly, Okay,

(42:24):
I think that's what we have to say about terms
of disability. If you are listening for the first time.
Something that we do at the end of each of
our discussions is we recommend some things. It's usually just
something that we found joy in and it's almost never
related to the topic that we're talking about, although sometimes
it is, but it's not today. So that's a fun
thing that we do, and you should stick around through
the credits to hear that because it's fun. Before I

(42:45):
do that, I would like to say thank you so
much for listening. Thank you for my team of people
without whom I could not make this happen, writing and
fact checking from Shane and myself. Thank you for recording
with me today.

Speaker 2 (42:53):
Shane Hey, thanks for having me.

Speaker 1 (42:55):
Our social media coordinator is Emma Wilson. And the person
who stitches together a the amount oh I said it.
I said the thing a wild amount of edits from
making mistakes and cuts out maybe three hundred and fifty
million ums, is justin and he does a really good
job and that it makes it listenable as a podcast incredible. Also,
if you would like support us, you can pick up

(43:16):
some merch leave us a rating and a review like
subscribe so that you always get new episodes as they
come out, and go tell a friend because the word
of mouth is very important. If you do, head over
to our Patreon community. That's something where you if you're
not familiar with it, this is like a members club.
You can sign up. You can sign up for a
recurring monthly sort of donation to our cause, and that

(43:36):
gets you access to some certain benefits, including ad free episodes,
early episodes, behind the scenes content, and at the end
of our discussions, I'll read the list of names who
are so generously helping us continue to be a podcast.
So big shout out and thank you too, Mike m Megan,
Mike T, Justin, Kim Brad, Stephanie, Brian, Ashley, Kiara and Charlie.

(43:57):
Thank you so much, y'all. The beautiful people, beautiful people,
the beautiful people. All right. I think that is what
I have to say about our credits and thank yous.
Is there anything that I missed or that you'd like
to add before we recommend some things?

Speaker 2 (44:10):
I have nothing else to add right now. I think
I think we're good to go.

Speaker 1 (44:13):
Okay, all right, let's recommend some things.

Speaker 2 (44:15):
Yeah, recommendations.

Speaker 1 (44:25):
All right, I'm gonna go first. I'm recommending a little
card game. It's called Hen's. I guess you could put
it into the category of tabletop games, maybe euphemistically board games,
but it's just a deck of cards. It's a really
quick game. It's for two to four players. There is
a solo mode though, so you can play by yourself,
although I haven't tried that yet, so I guess technically

(44:46):
one to four players. And it's you're playing cards. There
are suits of cards which are like breeds of hen
and you're essentially trying to assemble them into a grid
that's a three by four grid or a four by
three grid whatever. You're gonna have twelve cards at the end,
and there's just certain placement rules and so on your turn,
you draw to cards, play one of them to your grid,
discard the other. But when you play a card, it

(45:07):
either has to match the suit of the card next
to it, and then it doesn't matter what the value is,
or it has to be one more or less than
the card next to it. But that includes cards that
are above and below into the right of it. So
as you're placing these cards, it gets harder and harder
to get a card that's going to match those suits,
and you want to try and have your suits be

(45:28):
in groups because you're in a score for the largest
number of group, the largest group that you have of
the same color, but the colors are also limited. The
harder colors to get are worth the most points, but
there's not as many of those cards. So anyway, you
can play the whole thing in like twenty minutes. It
works really well with two players, and I was just
really I was really impressed with that. I was like,

(45:48):
this is just a smart design game. It's like really
easy to learn, but there's lots of opportunities for some
good strategy, and it's just really well put together. And
it's really small. If you had deep pockets, he could
fit into some Jinko jeans. But even still, it's like
it's you can hold it in one hand very comfortably.
It's really like a basically hand sized game. So it's

(46:11):
a really good travel game. Been really fun and really
quick and easy to learn. So Hen's is the game
and the publisher is Little Rocket Games, so cute. I
love that is an Italian company. Yeah, I love that
so much. Beautiful.

Speaker 2 (46:24):
I'm going to recommend something that feels like the opposite
of that, which is not tiny and cute. It is
a movie called The Running Man. Now here's the thing.
This is a remake of the movie from the eighties
that featured Arnold Swartzenegger.

Speaker 1 (46:37):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (46:38):
This is also an adaptation of a Stephen King story
which he wrote it under. Yeah, but he wrote it
under He wrote it as Richard Bachman, which has his
own his own that's its fun own like its own story.
For those of you who don't know. Stephen King decided
that because he was his works as Stephen King were
working so well, and people were criticizing him that he
was only selling books because he was Stephen King. He

(46:59):
decided to underneath another name to see how well it
would sell. Yeah, and those books also did really well
until somebody figured out that Richard Bachman was Stephen King.
Running Man is a Richard Backman story. And so I
think it's a Long Walk, which is another movie that
came out if you're not familiar, The Running Man is
just a mirror to America right now. It is people

(47:19):
who are living in poverty who are struggling to make
ends meet get on game shows to try to win
money to get them out of poverty, things like, you know,
to pay for general healthcare and stuff like that, while
the rich live extravagant lifestyles and just treat people who
don't have money as pawns and lesser than And it's
an action movie and the cast is incredible with this.

(47:40):
Glenn Powell is Ben Richards, He's the main character. He
is the running man. It was directed by Edgar Wright.
So if you like it's got that kind of like
snazzy yeah, great director, like super sarcastic, snazzy, like really
great shots, beautifully shot. Yeah, but there's a couple other
folks in this movie that are like pretty incredible. So
Lee pay is in it. Sean Hayes plays a guy

(48:02):
named who plays a game show host called Gary Greenback's
incredible good good dude, so good. Josh Brolin is in it.
He's and he's like one of the record the executives.
You've got Coleman Domingo who is like the main host
of the show. And it's just really it's just done.
So oh yeah, I mean, you've got you've got so

(48:24):
many folks in it that are really great, and you'll
see a lot of folks in it. You're like, I
know who that is. I know who that is. I
know who that is. It's just so much fun and
just done so well. Michael Sarah's in it. Michael Sarah's
like a revolutionary in it, which is really great, and
just there's a lot of really fun little bits of
humor in it that like I was cracking up the
entire time, but also like, oh, this is a little

(48:47):
bit too close to home. So if you gotta just
see it. It's really fun. It's a really great It's
like you can go in with little expectations and really
enjoy it. I think it's I think it's a good
it's a good watch.

Speaker 1 (48:56):
And this one's in theaters right now.

Speaker 2 (48:58):
This one's in theaters right now.

Speaker 1 (48:59):
Yeah, I just can't all right, cool, all right, So
that's hens the card Game and running May on the
recent movie Dystopian I guess sort of yes, satire type movie,
which is fantastic. Yeah, and the.

Speaker 2 (49:12):
Distant Future of twenty twenty six, it feels.

Speaker 1 (49:15):
Like Ken come soon enough? All right, Cool? I think
that's what we have to say about those things and
terms and disabilities. If you would like to tell us
your thoughts on these, you can email us directly info
at wwdwwdpodcast dot com. You can also reach us on
the social media platforms. And if you have really nice

(49:37):
things to say, you can leave in the comments. But
if you have some critical things to say, then like
email us talk to us about them. We're happy for
constructive criticism. Yeah, and if you're just aterd then I'll
ignore you. That's fine, that's true. Yeah, I think that's
all we have. So I'll go ahead and end this
one here. This is Abraham and is a Shane. We're out. So, Yeah,
you've been listening to Why we Do what we do.

Speaker 2 (49:57):
You can learn more about this and other episodes by
going to w w D w w D podcast dot com.
Thanks for listening and we hope you have an awesome
day