this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2023
-4 points (46.0% liked)

Canada

10024 readers
858 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

As a disabled person, I face ableism and ableist language every day. Some people use ableist language without even knowing that it is ableist. I thought it would be good for folks to take a look at the attached BBC article and expand their perspectives a bit.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Didn't someone really waste time writing an article about statements like "falling on deaf ears" being hurtful? There saved everyone a click.

[–] Ransom@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Why is it hard for you to believe? If someone is telling you that the language you’re using is harmful, is your reaction really to say, basically, that you don’t care and you’re going to continue using it?

[–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago (6 children)

If you're offended by the phrase falling on deaf ears, which is very much just an expression, then you need to go outside more. Nobody is trying to offend deaf people with that phrase.

[–] Ransom@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

If nobody is trying to be offensive, and deaf people (one of whom wrote the linked article) are saying that using “deaf” in this way is offensive, and you continue to use it because you don’t care… you’re being offensive. Is it really so hard to change the language you use?

[–] Endorkend@kbin.social 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

Intent is everything and if someone is clearly not using a word with the intent to offend you, you being offended is a YOU problem, not a them problem.

And before you go say shit like able people can't know how bad it feels.

1, I'm not "abled".
2. I've had people call me these words meaning to offend and hurt me. THAT actually does hurt. These words being used without any intention to hurt or offend anyone, doesn't matter to me at all.

And sometimes, using those words to offend is perfectly appropriate to express what you want to convey.

Like how many Americans have absolutely retarded levels of overblown reactions with a word like cunt.

[–] Ransom@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Intent is actually not everything. Legally speaking, if I run over a person with a car and they die, I can’t get away with it by saying, “well, I didn’t intend to kill them, so there shouldn’t be a consequence”. The impact of that person’s death is greater. It’s not murder, but it’s still manslaughter.

Ableist language is the same: it still causes harm, but obviously not harm to the body.

[–] Remmock@kbin.social 3 points 2 years ago

Legally speaking, if you didn’t intend to kill them it actually does change the consequences.

[–] Sir_Osis_of_Liver@kbin.social 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

There are a lot of two vehicle, or pedestrian, traffic fatalities that don't result in manslaughter charges.

https://globalnews.ca/news/8973010/man-lying-in-road-hit-car-killed-comox-valley-rcmp/

To date, no charges have been laid.

Intent is huge.

[–] Ransom@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago

Even if no charges are laid, someone is dead. The intent to kill wasn’t there, but the impact is that someone is dead. It doesn’t matter if a person didn’t mean to kill someone, but again, someone is dead.

This is why impact matters far more than intent. This is an extreme example, but it still applies in all situations. Someone might want to argue their way out of offending someone else, but the damage has already been done.

[–] Endorkend@kbin.social 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

In the valid to the discussion case you said something with no intent to harm or insult anyone and you didn't harm them, they decided you harmed them.

In the case of a car accident, you literally fucking killed someone.

It's Apples and Oranges, a false equivalence argument that goes straight into the trash.

[–] Ransom@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago

Both are about impact vs intent. Both are about harm. I’m sorry you can’t see that.

If I accidentally spill hot coffee on you and say that it was an accident, you’re still going to be upset. You’d be more upset if I said I did it on purpose, but let’s not pretend that being offensive accidentally is okay.

[–] Guns4Gnus@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 years ago

So, "You aren't abled"

You are just a smug prick.

Gotcha.

[–] DessertStorms@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

You're being deliberately obtuse and wilfully ignorant if that's what you took from the article.
And not that you care, but it isn't about offence

[–] Guns4Gnus@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

So, deaf people say "Please don't say that," and you are the smug asshole that says "How the fuck will they know what I say, they're fucking deaf. Open season on insults boys!"

[–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago

No, I'm saying there is nuance to phrases like this. There are multiple meanings to the word deaf. Jesus, it's like talking to a brick wall sometimes.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 years ago

That's fine but answer the question.

[–] MapleEngineer@lemmynsfw.com -1 points 2 years ago

They're trolls from Hexbear. They like to label us as ableist and bigots because it makes them feel superior.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Guns4Gnus@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

That's exactly the mentality they have.

Any thought that goes contrary to them being perfect turns them into petulant brats that allow them to justify having a hissy fit against the left.

[–] Ransom@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 years ago (15 children)

I just don’t get it. If someone tells me that a word or phrase I’m using is offensive, I’m going to apologize and stop using it. Why is this so hard? Why would people double down on wanting to offend others?

load more comments (15 replies)
[–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago (6 children)

Dude, I'm about as left leaning as it gets. The mental illness comments mentioned in the article, sure, that's kind of problematic. But statements that are literally just expressions that have been used for probably half a century or more like "falling on deaf ears". Gimme a break. Find something actually a problem to focus on, like the climate crisis, or the Assault on trans rights in the U.S.

[–] DessertStorms@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

I’m about as left leaning as it gets.

not proudly flaunting ableism and refusing to listen to people with the actual lived experience, the way you are, you're not.

Find something actually a problem to focus on

in other words: fuck disabled people

[–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Yeah, definitely didn't say 'fuck disabled people'. This is literally a made up problem.

[–] Ransom@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Is using racist language a “made-up problem”? If not, how is racist language different from ableist language?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

People who are affected are trying to tell you it's not a made up problem. It is your ego and aversion to criticism and personal development that is telling you otherwise.

[–] Ransom@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Language changes. We’ve stopped using some expressions because we’ve realized how hurtful they are — the n word, all sorts of slurs related to being LGBTQ2S+, etc. Here’s one more. Doubling down on this is exactly like arguing that you should still be allowed to use the n word because it’s been used as an “expression” for more than half a century.

[–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Not even sort of the same thing. The n word is a racist term people use to intimidate people. Falling on deaf ears is an expression used with a specific meaning. Now if it was intended as an intimidation tactic or something to make people fearful for their life or insult them that'd be different. This is neither of those things.

[–] Ransom@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago (3 children)

There’s a difference between intent and impact (which is in and of itself a pretty important concept in antiracism). Basically, impact always trumps intent. If I use a phrase that insults someone else, and I said “I didn’t mean it that way, so you shouldn’t feel insulted”… well, that doesn’t work. It’s a pretty privileged position to say that an ableist expression is value neutral. If somebody is saying that a phrase is not okay with them, why argue? What’s the harm in just going, “Okay, I’ll stop using that phrase”? People don’t generally make up words to get offended at, and certainly don’t write articles (multiple articles, multiple books, multiple YouTube videos…) to try to invent outrage unless they’re trying to discredit this topic. If someone says that your language is harmful or discriminatory, what does it cost you to listen to them and to change the words you use?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] samothtiger@artemis.camp 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

“If you're comparing the badness of two words, and you won’t even say one of them? That's the worse word.”

I admit I didn’t read the article, but I can say that with the phrase in question of “fall on deaf ears”, it’s a complicated situation. The phrase is poetic in nature and I’m hesitant to try and erase this particular phrase from modern day. I have fear that there will be an over correction towards being non offensive and that creativity as a result will suffer. As someone who has a fondness for poetic expression, this feels like a “throwing the baby out with the bath water” type of situation.

[–] Ransom@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago

But what’s great about this is finding new and creative ways to express yourself! “My points fell on rocky ground” — Biblical allusion. “They believed me as if I were Cassandra” - Greek. “My words fell on them like the sun under an umbrella.” If you want to keep the synecdoche, “Their ears weren’t ready to hear me”. There’s opportunities to be really creative and poetic if you’re interested in language as rhetoric!

Colloquially, nobody will blink at “They refused to listen” or “It was like I was talking to a tree”.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] secret_ninja@feddit.nl 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I think it all depends on context and wether the person is trying to be mean or condescending. If a person is deaf and I say he’s deaf, I’m not being condescending, I’m simply stating a fact. With all due respect to your opinion, if we follow your logic we will quickly run out of words.

[–] Ransom@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 years ago

Have you heard the expression “white lies and black truths”? The intent behind “simply stating a fact” can indeed be hurtful.

But I really don’t think we’re going to run out of words. There’s at least a half million in English, and even counting obscure ableist terms, we’re talking about maybe thirty. Pretty small percentage.

load more comments (1 replies)