In the constant back and forth about the use of so-called “person first” language (that is, “person with autism” or the like), a dangerous gambit or concession emerges. The “person first” camp, with all of their smugness and self-entitled ignorance of the implications, like to tell us that it is up to what the individual prefers. This seems perfectly reasonable at first, in spite of how some of them attempt to use this as a platform from which to bully us into adopting it. But just like “person with blackness” or “person with Hebrew” or “person with Chineseness”, to cite just a few potential examples, are unacceptable and not a matter of preference, neither is “person with autism”. I do not care what you have to say for yourselves, “person first”ers. I could be the only autistic individual in the world who feels this way about your separationistic language. That would only mean I am right, and everyone else is wrong. Continue Reading
Offensive language. Real offensive language, I mean.
Posted by Kronisk on December 21, 2012
Posted in: Autistic Identity, Linguistics, Personal Stuff. Tagged: "person first" is a contradiction in terms, "person first" is abusive to children, barack obama, batman, brian doyle-murray, bryan singer, caddyshack, christopher fairbank, dark angel, frank langella, george orwell, inadequate word availability == stagnation, jessica alba, keanu reeves, language must flow, mario puzo, meaning < context < intent, nineteen eighty-four, person-first makes you an asshole, person-firsters == nazis in waiting, political correctness, reality > popularity, reality > your preferences, retarded ageing, stephen king, sweet november, this is what you want… this is what you get, word availability is sacrosanct, word choice, word-forbidders are childish, x-men, x-men first class. Leave a comment