Language Used to Refer to Disabled People: My Preferences and Aversions

Welcome back to Musings of an Arthritic Artist!

Today I'm going to be talking about what terms I use to refer to myself and which ones I refuse to even have in my vernacular. 

Normally, I like to keep politics and language out of my posts, but after getting so annoyed and frustrated with some terminology used for disabled people, I've decided (as a disabled person) to speak up. 

The realm and exploration of disability language and etiquette can be difficult to navigate. Some disabled people choose to identify themselves using certain terminology. That is perfectly okay. 

I'm not here to police the terminology of the disabled community, even though I am disabled myself. These are just my preferences, and why I think these terms (particularly the last two) are problematic. 

Anyone who is disabled has a right to choose how they want to identify themselves. These are just the terms I refuse to adopt myself and why I choose not to.

Without further ado, let's get into the post!

King, Alexandria. Musings of an Arthritic Artist. 2021.

I never thought I'd have to do a post like this. If you've read my About Me page, you probably know where this is going. Let's discuss the easiest one and the one I don't get as annoyed with.

________________________________________

Person-First

Here's the reason why I don't like person-first language and why I refuse to predominantly identify myself as such. If a disabled person/person with a disability wants to identify themselves using person-first, by all means I have no problem with that. I'm not going to tell people what they can and can't call themselves. They have a right to identify however they choose.

It wouldn't be so bad if someone asked if someone preferred identify or person-first language, but in most instances, this isn't the case. All disabled people are referred to as "people with disabilities," which seems fine at first glance, but the sad thing is why this language was introduced in the first place.

Person-first language was "invented" to prevent marginalization and discrimination against people with disabilities. But if you need the English language to make you see me (and other disabled people) as a person, that's a flaw in your own mind and thinking. This language was introduced solely so people could see the disabled as people instead of inanimate objects that were pitiful and always needed help. Their identity as a person comes before their disability.

Once again, if you need language to view me (and other disabled individuals) as a person and not a "burden to society," "a fate worse than death," or even "life unworthy of life" (as the Nazis put it), then you need to change your view of what a "real person" looks like. Language can't work on its own. Yes, it helps, but it can't do everything. If you are relying on a word or phrase to convince you a disabled person is a person then your view needs to change. 

My main problem with this is when someone uses this phrase it separates the person from their identity, especially when referring to certain people. Again, if a disabled person/person with a disability wants to identify themselves using person-first they can. My problem is when this is greater society's automatic. 

My problem is when someone calls themselves a "disabled person" and people flock like birds to correct them because they're using the "wrong term" because "disability/disabled" is a bad word. I can't stress this enough: let people identify how they wished to be identified. 

In a world where greater society is trying to be "more inclusive" and encourages and celebrates novels written by someone who is a minority, the fact that language is constantly being policed by (most frequently) people who aren't part of that community, is saddening and not inclusive.

Let the disabled community choose what they want to be called. The non-disabled shouldn't be making those language choices for us. We aren't silent. We have a voice, and it's saddening that certain terms are being policed and called something they're not.

Disabled isn't a dirty word. It's okay to say disabled. It isn't an insult (in most cases; there's always outliers). It's the truth. I'm disabled. It's okay to be disabled. A lot of us were basically born this way. I refuse to predominantly use person-first language, because it separates me from my identity.

I have been certified disabled for a decade now. I was a child when I got my certification. My disability impacts my everyday life, even if I don't want it to. Disability isn't just something I can wear and then take off. It isn't something I can always control. 

Being disabled isn't something to be ashamed of. If you separate my disability from my identity, then part of my identity--along with parts of my personality and ideals--is stripped away. My disability doesn't define everything about me, but it is a part of me. I can't separate myself from it.

Because I was basically disabled from birth, taking that part away from me takes away part of who I am. That's one reason why my blog is named what it is. My sister had thought of the name, but hadn't said it aloud, not knowing if I wanted to identify myself like that. My mother thought of it as well and said it. I loved the name immediately.

I can't get rid of my arthritis and disability, so I may as well own it and make the best out of it, not walk around thinking "disabled" is a bad word, because it's not.

That's the main reason why I could never identify myself as a person with a disability. I think that on some level, my disability and my medical condition has shaped quite a bit of my personality, and especially my experiences with life as a whole. If that is taken away and separated from me, that's a part of me that is being stripped away. 

I don't know a life without pain. I don't know a life without disability. I don't know a life without arthritis, and to separate me from my disability just does me a disservice. 

There are disabled people who become disabled due to an accident. There are people who know a life before disability. I can't speak for them. I'm not going to tell other people how they should identify themselves. I just choose not to identify myself this way. I am a disabled girl, not a girl with a disability.

________________________________________

Differently-abled

Can we please stop with this?

I imagine that this term was also created by people who believe that disabled is a dirty word. While the prefix "dis" in disabled means "not," so technically while the meaning of disabled when broken down into the separate meanings would be "not able," it's not inherently a dirty word. To say "not able" is a vague relative term that, until you elaborate more on it, doesn't give a clue as to what it actually means. 

Not able to do what exactly? It doesn't elaborate on this fact. Someone could be not able to hear, or not able to walk, so in my mind, I don't understand how disabled would be considered a dirty word unless it is spoken in a certain tone or used in a sentence that is overall offensive, especially considering that the average person likely doesn't even know what the prefix "dis" means in this context.

This was a term supposedly first coined by the US Democratic National Committee in the early 1980s, as a more "politically correct" term than handicapped. 

________________________________________

Handicapable

No. Let's stop using these words. I can pretty much guarantee that no disabled person came up with this term. Why do I say that? Because the majority of the disabled community despises this term. We hate it. It sounds cheesy, cringy, and patronizing. It's not good. 

When I read this word in my head, I envision a girl who is the definition of toxic positivity. I don't want to be in one of my sad moods where I think about my disability and some girl pops into my head telling me in an annoyingly optimistic voice, "You aren't disabled, you're handicapable."

Honestly, I facepalm whenever I see this term, even moreso than differently abled. I hate this one so much. I first came across this term about two months ago, and I despise it. Who thought this was a good idea? I genuinely want to know.

________________________________________

At the end of the day, I don't prefer any of the terms I named above. My default is, and always has been, disabled. I find the terms above (particularly the last two) incredibly patronizing. Why do terms like these still exist? I don't understand them, and I don't know that I ever will.

That's it for this post! I hope you enjoyed it! 

Until next time, 

Lexi K🖌