If it were her intent to point out the potential derision that one may infer from the use of a word like "blind" it would be the end of it. However, she must have forgotten psych 101 and "Labeling theory." Referring to Dr. Cornwell as Mr. Cornwell and then referring to Dr. Godard correctly points to another motive. Secondly, to say a thought is "abelist" is different than saying a person is an "abelist." If she or you don't see the difference, pity! To me her intent was far clearer than Drs. Godard or Cornwell. -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Michele White Sent: Friday, September 08, 2006 1:24 PM To: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: [Air-l] ableist language I want to support Kathy Mancuso's consideration of the ways the language that we use to describe things can privilege some individuals and continue to produce a series of binaries. This is an important and appropriate post to the list and I hope that we can take her questions and concerns seriously. Her question and debate are related to disability activism and studies and have been incorporated into Internet/new media studies by such people as Gerard Goggin and Chrisopher Newell. A variety of academics have indicated how we often associate seeing and visual processes with knowledge and truth (see for instance Martin Jay, Downcast Eyes: The Denigration of Vision in Twentieth-Century French Thought. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994). To say something like "I see what you mean" indicates comprehension. Unfortunately, statements like "are you blind?" suggest that the person cannot recognize the obvious, is deficit, and stupid. Therefore, when we use the word "blind" to indicate that someone is less perceptive, unknowing, or clueless, we also denigrate individuals who are described as blind because of the ways their eyes function. In doing this, we establish a norm and indicate that the physically blind are deficit. This may be unintentional but it does have serious consequences for the ways bodies are understood and people are valued or devalued. I certainly have found my language to sometimes unintentionally dismiss and categorize people. I believe that it is worth thinking about the ways we say things and how this may have unintentional consequences and support powers and authorities that we would rather critique. All my best, Michele _______________________________________________ The air-l@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/