The influence of terminology

After reading a portion of Simi Linton's book Claiming Disability, I was struck with the notion of how much terminology matters and effects various people. She mentions the idea of an insider and an outsider - in respect to being inside the realm of what is normal or outside of it. This presents a new dimension to our discussion of being an insider or an outsider. The bottom line: whatever ways you define yourself are the groups you are a part of as an insider. I was very intrigued by the historical perspective on the study of disabilities offered my Linton. Similar to other movements across this nation, the function of the term disability has evolved, changed, and adapted to fit cultures as well as the individual using the term. As Linton explains, "Disability studies has arisen in the past twenty years to focus an organized critique on the constructed, inadequate, and inaccurate conceptualizations of disabilities of disability that have dominated academic inquiry" (Linton, 2). This explanation parallels many others who have decided to chart their own path, define their own terms, and set their own qualifications. For so long those who identify as part of the disabled world were shoved under the carpet, hidden, or ignored. However, with new laws and movements, the "screens" as Linton calls them, are being removed. As this change takes place, new problems are arising. As Linton describes, "The public has gotten used to these screens that we are now emerging, upping the ante on the demands for a truly inclusive society, we disrupt the social order" (Linton, 3). With this new emergence comes confusion - confusion concerning how to label and which terms are socially acceptable.

Choice of language is also very essential to this issue, words like “victim,” assume an awfully negative relationship between the person and the disability. As Linton clarifies, “Using this language attributes life, power, and intention to the condition and disempowers the person with the disability, rendering him or her helpless and passive” (Linton, 25). Again, the image created here is a very incapable individual who suffers greatly from their condition and seems to be overpowered by it. This damages the person in many extreme ways; it harms their appearance, performance, and self-efficacy. It is a much better option to avoid such language that may render the individual defenseless. Putting the person before the condition is the best way to avoid misunderstanding and hurtful words. As Linton gives the example, “if there is a particular need to note what the individual’s disability is, saying the woman has cerebral palsy describes solely the characteristic of importance to the situation, without imposing extraneous meaning” (Linton, 26). I find this corresponding with Gennifer Choldenko’s novel, Al Capone Does My Shirts, as Natalie is misrepresented on many accounts. In fact, I would venture to say that Moose is the only person to really see past her condition enough to recognize her strengths. Piper, Theresa, and Jimmy improve on this a lot, but not to the extent of her brother. This may be why Moose had such a problem with the way Natalie was being represented and reduced to a ten-year-old when she was really sixteen. Coming back to the point Linton is making, language is particularly essential to how individuals are represented, which ultimately influences how see themselves. The unavoidable truth is that people are greatly affected by society, so much that they will become the label given to them, and literally live up to whatever expectations they are given. Avoid words and phrases like innocent victim, suffering from, afflicted with, agonized by, tortured by, confined by, and is dying from. Instead, chose terms like has a disability, living with, uses, or maybe, just maybe, if it isn’t needed, don’t mention the condition at all. There are other ways to categorize people; other less harmful ways. Always consider the connotations, that is, what am I suggesting or implying about this person? You would be surprised how much someone would rather be known as “the influential children’s author” rather than “the disabled children’s author.” This would avoid the problem all together and allow the person to feel that their influence is greater than their disability. Like most sensitive areas, it is best to allow insiders to set the rules for terminology, labels, and what is socially acceptable for their group.

I feel this issue affecting my daily life as I have a sister with special needs. She has multiple serve disabilities and moves by use of a wheelchair. When I was younger I remember wondering why other people were staring at her, to me she was who she was, which was exactly how she was supposed to be. In my mind there is absolutely nothing wrong with Karin, but soon I learned she was not "normal." I would fight with people constantly about that as a child. My friends (or sometimes strangers) would ask "What's the matter with your sister, she looks funny" and I would get very angry and tell them "She is perfect in every way is prettier than you will ever be." I was in constant defense of her since she is not able to speak for herself. But I do not mind being the voice of my sister, I hope she agrees with the decisions her family and I make on her behalf.