Ending the "R" word:

       There is currently a movement to discontinue the use of the word "retarded" and replace it with intellectual differences, developmental delays, and others. I'm not a fan of the "r" word myself but I have mixed feelings. I support finding the most positive, respectful, and inclusive language possible in identifying special needs as do most people who work in human services. A problem is that people, including those with special needs themselves don't always agree on what words are most appropriate. I think the context in how a word is used is even more important than the word itself. This is all part of the euphemism treadmill that I discussed in previous posts. I would like to discuss this well-meaning movement (http://www.r-word.org/) and also address some alternative points of view such as this one: http://www.diamondbackonline.com/the-r-word-missing-the-point-1.2044368.
       In the "end the r-word" website there are many good points, though some may be overstated such as classifying the r-word as hate speech. I mean it can be hate speech depending on how it is used but using too much overstatement can hurt the cause and numb people to the term "hate speech". Not long ago the term "mental retardation" was the euphemism of choice to replace the harsher language of the past. Many well meaning people still use this term, especially in a clinical context. I do believe it is good to avoid this term as much as possible, but I don't want to see any well meaning people who can't keep up with this "euphemism treadmill" to end up demonized and humiliated. Perhaps it's not the movement itself I am questioning but more the smug and self-righteous tone some (also well-intentioned) people are taking on. Putting the general public on thin ice is not going to make them more sympathetic. In some ways it seems that yesterdays "good guys" are now today's "bad guys". I also don't like to see division in the humanitarian community caused by constant "moral one-upsmanship". It's not good for morale to have otherwise caring people constantly looking over each others shoulder waiting for that "gotcha" moment where they can catch someone else in a faux-pas (for one thing we all make faux-pas at times). Chips on the shoulder are never good. There are enough "bad guys" in the world and no need to create more. There is also enough hate speech in the world that I wouldn't want to dilute the gravity of the term (hate speech).
       Another thing that needs to be considered is the individual in question. A person with a "disability" may not feel as comfortable with being referred to as "differently abled", while for others it may be the opposite. For people with Autism for example the new term "intellectual disabilities" may be misleading since many Autistic people- including those with more severe cases- even though it is still not as bad as the "r" word. The problem is many on the Autistic spectrum are well advanced intellectually but have other hurdles to deal with. I am skeptical on whether there is a term inclusive enough to include all individuals with special needs. Autism is Autism, Downs-Syndrome is Downs-Syndrome, there are mild "disabilities" and profound. I don't want to see good hearted people become divided on finding the perfect word. Even the word Autism is not perfect as it literally means "self-centered" but I still prefer it over the term Aspergers Syndrome for myself. I am still fine with either term for now. Others on the spectrum call themselves "Aspies" and resent the word "Autistic". "Special Needs" is a very inclusive term though it is so inclusive that one can say everyone has special needs from those with Schizophrenia to an overall successful adult living with Arthritis or Diabetes. Lets also not forget some of the elderly who may suffer cognitive decline but are certainly not intellectually disabled (yet they still have special needs).
       This movement is starting to resemble a fad, but I don't say that to imply that I'm against it or that all fads are bad. I do see a lot of celebrities endorsing it just as they are with "Autism Awareness", "Don't Shop, Adopt", "Brest Cancer Awareness", Livestrong bracelets, "Anti-Bullying", and other cases that have faded such as "AIDS Awareness" in the 1990's, "Say No To Drugs" in the 1980's", and others. All these mentioned are virtues, and it's certainly better to see a virtue become a fad than a vice (such as binge-drinking or hazing). A concern I have with all these positive causes and slogans is that when it becomes a fad it can also become superficial and therefore the results can become superficial. There is also this strange love/hate relationship that our culture has with labels. It's fashionable do shun labels- especially if they come out of someone Else's mouth, but it is also fashionable to come up with new and improved ones as long as they come out of our own mouth. Another thing is that while I strongly condemn the use of the n-word for those of Sub-Saharan African descent, I wish people would stop comparing every negative word to the n-word. The r-word is bad too but all these comparisons are getting overdone. All slurs are bad as well as any good word used with bad intentions but to keep comparing them to each other can over-simplify things. (I'm not alone in feeling this way as you will see in this link: http://newsone.com/entertainment/newsonestaff4/glee-rword-psa-retarded-nword-video/)
       In a nutshell I fully support the goal of this movement and want it to succeed; but for that reason I have concerns about it which I am trying to address. I will never deny that words have power, but I just don't want people to unwittingly give some words more power than they deserve. Here is another link to a good blog article with some insightful comments included on the page: http://englishcowpath.blogspot.com/2011/06/euphemism-treadmill-replacing-r-word.html