posted
So I wrote this paper for my english class about Forrest Gump (it wasn't my idea but we had to do it). My teacher, who for some reason thinks I write well (I promise you I don't), encouraged me to submit my paper into this contest. I guess last year only 11 people entered. My reason for entering was because the first place winner gets $100 (and published in our college literary thing). I was only in it for the money though. With lots of revision help from my boyfriend, i submitted it and actually won. Yay-$100 for me and my boyfriend.
Anyways, my teacher told me that she wanted to have me change a few things about my paper before being published (I really wish it weren't being published but whatever). She wants me to change the word "crippled" to "handicapped" because it is more politically correct. I wasn't wrong in saying that Lt. Dan had to live his life as a cripple after his legs were gone. I also thought cripple was a word that encompassed more sympathy than handicap.
I understand that it is not politically correct but why is there such a strong push towards being that way? How do you guys feel about this? I mean, why is it that we have to be so concerned with being politically correct. Are people too sensitive now? Or am I just crazy for thinking that being politically correct all the time is nonsense?
ps. I'll probably change the "crippled" thing anyways
Posts: 306 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
I can't give you PC advice because I'm usually not very PC myself. I'm terrible at it, though living in Portland has warped....er, improved me some. Posts: 6415 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think it depends on the situation. In general, calling someone 'crippled' would be an insult...since it has more of a negative connotation that simply saying that they have a physical handicap.
However, I think in the context of the movie...the word crippled would work. Lt. Dan saw himself as someone who was crippled...not someone who was 'handicapped.' His injury defined himself and he let it cripple him emotionally. Of course later in the movie he changed and (due to Forest bringing him into the shrimp company) and at that point I think using the word crippled would be inappropriate.
Of course if he was a real person, I would avoid using the word crippled in either situation...but I think it is OK to use it to make a point about a fictional character.
Posts: 1901 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I believe the term is disabled. Your teacher may be wrong because I'm under the impression that handicapped is a pejorative term, with the sense of a person's cap in their hand, begging.
quote: I understand that it is not politically correct but why is there such a strong push towards being that way? How do you guys feel about this? I mean, why is it that we have to be so concerned with being politically correct. Are people too sensitive now? Or am I just crazy for thinking that being politically correct all the time is nonsense?
I don't think you are crazy, I do think that you are an abled-bodied white guy with the entire western world bent to your whims. Think about it, though, if handicap's origin is that of of begging, wouldn't you want someone to call you a different name because of your disability.
Posts: 5600 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:[A] The origins of handicapped go back to the eighteenth century. The first senses were connected with sport, including the handicapping of horses by adding weights to even out a contest. The figurative senses first appeared in the late nineteenth century, derived from the sporting sense. As the Oxford English Dictionary puts it, it would then have meant: “any encumbrance or disability that weighs upon effort and makes success more difficult”, which is very much the way you would like to use it. But for a large part of this century the word has been closely linked with physical and mental handicap, though this use, in Britain at least, is now considered dated, and to some people possibly even offensive. It is still feasible to use the word in wider senses (as well as in the original sporting sense, of course), though its connections with disability require care in deciding when to use it, and it is usually best to find another word.
posted
Yeah, I forgot about that. Handicapped is only to be used in reference to a specific kind of parking spot. But it's been about half a year since I had my PC lesson in an English class, so I can't tell you the proper term anymore.
Posts: 3003 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
*chuckles* Portabello, if you click three times with red slippers on, will that make it so? By the way, you think that if passover were a big Christian Holiday, we'd have this weekend off?
Posts: 5600 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
PC is overrated. I call whoever whatever makes the most sense, not what people tell me I should call anyone. African American is a mouthful and too formal, I say black. I can't think of any others off the top of my head, but I don't think it is necessary to cater to all these different peoples and make things unnecessarily complicated.
And until it becomes common practice to refer to me as French Canadian American, and not white, I don't see anything changing my mind.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
"I do think that you are an abled-bodied white guy with the entire western world bent to your whims."
Compared to a false and bigoted remark like that, there's absolutely nothing wrong with "crippled." I sincerely hope the remark was meant ironically.
Crippled is a direct English word that is far more expressive than wimpy words like "handicapped" or "disabled."
People who are determined to be offended and angry will be offended and angry no matter what you say. Today's euphemism quickly becomes tomorrow's pejorative - hence the change from handicapped (once the preferred term) to disabled. And remember "differently abled"? So many people puked over that lie masquerading as a kindness that they finally gave it up.
If you have to edit and rewrite so that NOBODY ANYWHERE can possibly be offended, your essays will always look like this:
"Please don't be angry with me."
Posts: 2005 | Registered: Jul 1999
| IP: Logged |
I'm hispanic, and I have *never* seen "the white man" act the way you say they do *just* because they are white. If you criticize a man for doing something bad and then say it's because of a smaller amount of melanin in his skin, you've stopped focusing on the bad action committed.
A bad white man is not bad because he's white, he's bad because he's the kind of person who would use whatever advantage he has for his personal gain.
If he lives in a time, place, and culture in which being white gives him any sort of advantage over any group of people, then either he is uneducated, or he's the kind of PERSON who'd deliberately use his skin color to his own advantage. But it's not something inherent in his race, and I've seen you constantly assert on Hatrack that there are a bunch of plotting white "dudes" with an evil gene inherent in their whiteness.
Why in the world should their skin color matter? Because there was a time in American history when many people believed the lie that people with white skin were superior to blacks? If someone is so uneducated or deliberately obtuse or evil as to believe that now, then condemn them for that part of their character, not their skin color.
I'm sure there are many whites who still DO believe that they are superior to blacks, because for awhile there, that was the popular opinion. But it has nothing to do with something inherent in their skin color and everything to do with their willingness to use anything they can to cater to their need to control SOMEone.
I've known exactly three black people with any degree of closeness, all while I was in highschool. Two of them were big fat guys who were arrogant and mean, who'd beat up small guys in the locker rooms. The other one was a great girl, who I ran with in cross-country until she moved away. I don't think the two guys were jerks because they were black, I think they were jerks because they were jerks. I even saw them use their skin color to call one guy a "racist" when he dared to fight back. The girl wasn't "rising above her black-ness" by being awesome to hang around with, she was just Jamie, a great girl who happened to have more melanin than I.
Edit: which has nothing to do with the topic at hand, which I have nothing useful to add that others haven't said already. *grin*
posted
After being scolded multiple times for using the word "Jew" to describe a Jewish person and the word "cripple" to describe a crippled person, I'm convinced that whether or not a term is considered politically correct has everything to do with whether or not it's ever been used on South Park.
posted
*blink* Assuming no inappropriate adjectives were employed, what's wrong with calling a Jew a Jew?
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:I do think that you are an abled-bodied white guy with the entire western world bent to your whims.
In addition to the problems already stated, I should point out that Rackhams referenced having a "boyfriend" in the original post. Which means that he/she is either female or gay, neither of which falls under the stereotype of the privileged white male ...
[ April 19, 2005, 04:57 AM: Message edited by: A Rat Named Dog ]
Posts: 1907 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:*blink* Assuming no inappropriate adjectives were employed, what's wrong with calling a Jew a Jew?
Billy Crystal once said in an interview that "Jew" was somehow insulting, and that he preferred "Jewish person." I've heard it repeated many times. Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I could understand that sentiment, Dag, in the sense that saying "Jew" can be seen as a separatist term, and if you don't feel separated, then "Jewish person" better describes how you see yourself.
That doesn't mean there aren't many people perfectly happy with "Jew" though [EDIT: (and don't recognize the separate-ness that others feel)].
posted
Haha, It doesn't sound like a girly name because I, her boyfriend, helped her create it a couple years ago.
You didn't tell me about this correction! As your editor , I suggest disabled rather than handicapped if you are going to change it.
But look at it this way. I helped you come up with the wording for that particular paragraph, and I am a very un-PC guy. So perhaps the problem does not lie with you, but with me.
Congratulations on winning again. I am looking forward to you taking me out on a date to spend my half of the money.
--ApostleRadio
Oh yeah, thanks Geoff for being the first to notice she was probably a girl, it was annoying me.
EDIT: I should say that while I think you should use disabled if you are changing it, I still believe crippled is the best wording based on the context and content of your paper. Dan was angry with life and himself because of being crippled, which is exactly what you are writing about. Makes sense....
I do not have cable. In any case, really not my sort of show.
quote: Billy Crystal once said in an interview that "Jew" was somehow insulting, and that he preferred "Jewish person." I've heard it repeated many times.
While Mr. Crystal is of course entitled to request being called anything he likes, I think that's idiotic. Then again, I don't think there's anything wrong with Jews feeling (at least a little bit) separate.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
You won the contest with the version of the paper that used crippled. Except for some minor editing (finding a misspelled word, adding a comma, etc.), you really don't need to change anything.
prolixshore has obviously read your paper and thinks that crippled is the best word for the context.
posted
The idea of Jews not wanting to be called Jews sounds about as silly as Mormon friends of mine who try to get people to call them "Latter-day Saints". Come ON, guys. Mormon isn't a pejorative term, and we've used it ourselves for years. Why NOT go by that name?
Posts: 1907 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think Mormons should be referred to as 'el-dees'. We 'jay-dubs' shouldn't be taking all the gruff. And Je...er, people of the Jewish faith, should be... Potjf....maybe just "pee-jay".
Posts: 2292 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
Actually, our church leaders have really backed off from that stance. www.mormon.org is our website to which we direct people interested in the church.
posted
I was just teasing. I think it's kinda silly, too. But the press is still requested to refer to us as something else (although I'd say not too many of them heed that).
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Politcial correctness used to be called politeness.
When it was just good old fashioned politeness, idealogues on the left and right couldn't use it as an ideological bludgeon. So the conceptual shift made it much for useful rhetorically for everyone with an agenda, and politeness becomes a battleground. Hurrah.
Rackham - go ahead and use it, but be aware that it will potentially inspire complaints to the editor or to you that the term handicapped is not PC, or polite for that matter. If that's fine with you, then do as you will. If you'd rather not have that reaction, then try "disabled."
I haven't read the piece, of course, but unless you are making a point with the term "handicapped," then using "disabled" may allow you to reach the widest audience possible without causing any interference because of word choice. Choose your goals, then write to them.
posted
I think the funniest thing I've been called is an "LSDer". The guy was trying to say "LDSer", which is itself amusing, but got the letters switched. Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I depends on if you talked about "crippled" being a metaphor for the impact of Vietnam on America emotionally. But that's from the director's commentary. And in the end we are shown that being crippled was more in his attitude.
But then, political correctness is for me in the intent and not in what is actually said. Which is difficult to get at, so the way someone reacts does count for something. Unless you realize over time that that person gets offended by everything.
"The theres the recriminations with the 'it's not you, it's me' and the 'it's not me, it's you' but Universal Man knows, it's always you."
Posts: 2010 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Actually, we refer to ourselves as LDS quite a bit.
As we refer to ourselves as JWs quite a bit, but that's completely different than "jay-dub". Maybe you guys could just be "Elds". Hmm...
Posts: 2292 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
She wants me to change the word "crippled" to "handicapped" because it is more politically correct.
Unky Orson responds:
If you have to edit and rewrite so that NOBODY ANYWHERE can possibly be offended, your essays will always look like this:
"Please don't be angry with me."
Ah- but RR did not indicate that her teacher wanted her to use a more politically correct term so as not to ‘offend.’ Using a word like ‘crippled’ will cause a lot of readers in this day and time, to do a double take and try and figure out what you are saying- it may be disruptive to the flow of the paragraph you are using it in. You may need to do more set up to convey that crippled is how Dan saw himself and not assume your reader will understand that this is where you are coming from. Using the term crippled can be effective- but will require you to use care so the effect creates the response from readers most closely with what you intend.
You mention that you wish your paper were not being printed- this would lead me to suggest you change the word so that you will not find yourself spending time dealing with reaction to it. This could be why your teach suggested you change it. Or maybe your teach is being lazy and thinks it better to avoid things that require a little extra care.
But I would not react by feeling that you should not be careful because to be careful will leave you with nothing to write except "Please don't be angry with me." It is precisely the demand for extra care, generated by politically correct thinking (different from politeness) that helps ‘white men’ (and anyone else for that matter) remain conscious of our advantages (among other things)- and if we weren’t conscious of our advantages, how could we humbly handicap ourselves?
Posts: 8 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:The idea of Jews not wanting to be called Jews sounds about as silly as Mormon friends of mine who try to get people to call them "Latter-day Saints". Come ON, guys. Mormon isn't a pejorative term, and we've used it ourselves for years. Why NOT go by that name?
Okay, that's my question too. We went on a cruise last week, and while I'm not one to just talk to people I don't know, that's what you do on cruises, so I got to talking with a really stunningly pretty woman around my own age. She was wearing a swimsuit and had the figure to carry it off. We talked about kids, and I was surprised to discover that out of that slim body, she'd borne EIGHT babies. I mentioend that I grew up next to a family with 12 kids -- a Mormon family. She replied she was too. When I admitted that I grew up in the Mormon church, she said "You're LDS?"
Through the rest of the conversation, she always referred to it as LDS. Never Mormon.
I don't think I offended her, but I wondered why it was always LDS and never Mormon. I remember mostly saying I was Mormon while I still was, and occassionally saying I belonged to the LDS church. But I don't remember ever saying I was LDS.
'Course, that was 20 years ago. Is this something that has changed in the last 20 years?
And back on topic, I think you should leave it the way you wrote it originally, RR.
Posts: 5948 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
My dear mother died this year at the age of 83. Shortly after WWII she contracted polio. Although she was able to walk with aids such as a walker and cane when she was younger, she spent most of her life in a wheelchair. Mother was a remarkable woman who never let her handicap hold her back.
Mother was not disabled, she was handicapped. Disabled means inoperative or impared. Handicapped means a disadvantage or hindrance. Mother had a disadvantage; she could not walk. But she was very able.
Rackham:
It is ok to call Lt. Dan crippled to make a vivid point.
But if I remember correctly Lt. Dan had no legs. Would that not make him handicapped? I get the impression that a crippled person has limbs that will not work.
We always hated that word growing up, but I would use it to describe a character in a story, but never a real person.
posted
I don't see why you should change it. crippled people have other things to care about than worrying about being called a cripple. Its not like they really care which word you use. (At least thats my opinion). And yes, Lt. Dan does call himself a cripple.
Posts: 3389 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Handicap" is such a sterile word. The current vogue thing is people-first language. So, last quarter I participated in a writing workshop with adults with mental disability. The person ("adult") comes before the label ("mental disability"). Words like "handicapped" or "disabled" without the person first wouldn't be PC anyway. It's cumbersome.
Posts: 152 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
RR's point in the paper was about human misery, and Dan's misery came from viewing himself as crippled. That's why I believe it is the most correct term. Crippled evokes more emotions that disabled or handicapped because of the negative stereotypes that go along with it. Watering the word choice down, in my opinion, would detract from the point being made. ::shrug::
Since I have read the paper, and other jatraqueros have not, I am at an advantage. So I will speak of it no longer.
In reference to her teacher possibly being lazy, I would say that incompetant is the better word. From what I have been told of her writing instruction, I would not want her help in editing an AIM message.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
, I suggest disabled rather than handicapped if you are going to change it. ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Grumble]](graemlins/grumble.gif)
