Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT
WCDT Strips 3941-3945 (18-22 February 2019)
Cornelius:
I haven't much contribued to this discussion, but here's one anecdote of mine.
A couple of years ago, we had a couple of new hires joining us: all four of them happened to be black. So, on their first evening, one of them came to me with a question about access to our documentation, and after I helped her, I asked: "By the way, where are you from?" Her answer: Rwanda. My reply: "That's interesting, but I meant where do you live?" I had just checked my connection home, and had found an accident blocked the closest station.
Just to say, even if you can bring anecdotes to show that people don't mind being asked, or that sometimes it is an innocent question, the simple fact that many people will just default to that answer straight away, does show you something about their experience.
Also, the US approach to ethnicity is sometimes very baffling this side of the ocean. I had an American tourist - while abroad myself - rattle off about a dozen of nationalities, when they found out I wasn't local. Some ancestor of theirs was Belgian, apparently. And trying to quantify just how much of each. Strange.
alanari:
--- Quote from: Drunken Old Man on 23 Feb 2019, 23:11 ---Brun's doctor should not have told her she was autistic. He should have said that Brun had autism. Maybe she would still like doctors then. In my field were taught...and I myself have taught others...not to reduce e people that way. If you are a person ith autism you can be a person with other things too...like a knowledge of c!ocks or skill ith a harpoon. If I call you an autistic person that implies that that is all you are.
--- End quote ---
That is something I never understood, honestly. Being autistic, being an autist, having autism, being someone with autism. It all effectively means the same, I never saw a difference. And it seems to be random which of those phrases are "better" than others. I've pretty much used them all and it never made a difference to me. Those are just words. What matters for me is what I'm describing. And for me, that doesn't change with the words I'm using.
It seems that, for some people, the words they use change the image in their heads. I'm not worth more or less than others because of who I am. Words won't change that.
Tova:
In my opinion, the problem wasn't the doctor.
The problem was all of the people who turned the word "autistic" into an insult in the first place. If not for those people, then Brun's dad would not have been so upset at the term, and Brun might have a different relationship with doctors.
Drunken Old Man:
--- Quote from: alanari on 24 Feb 2019, 02:02 ---
--- Quote from: Drunken Old Man on 23 Feb 2019, 23:11 ---Brun's doctor should not have told her she was autistic. He should have said that Brun had autism. Maybe she would still like doctors then. In my field were taught...and I myself have taught others...not to reduce e people that way. If you are a person ith autism you can be a person with other things too...like a knowledge of c!ocks or skill ith a harpoon. If I call you an autistic person that implies that that is all you are.
--- End quote ---
That is something I never understood, honestly. Being autistic, being an autist, having autism, being someone with autism. It all effectively means the same, I never saw a difference. And it seems to be random which of those phrases are "better" than others. I've pretty much used them all and it never made a difference to me. Those are just words. What matters for me is what I'm describing. And for me, that doesn't change with the words I'm using.
It seems that, for some people, the words they use change the image in their heads. I'm not worth more or less than others because of who I am. Words won't change that.
--- End quote ---
Ah, lemme preach on that...just as I used to to new employees.
I am severely nearsighted, to the point of near-helplessness without the glasses I've worn since I was six.
If you take me to a party and introduce me as "the nearsighted guy", you have reduced me to that one tiny part of who I am. I am now Mr. Magoo, Velma Dinkely, a cartoon, a cariacture. Your guests will expect me to run into things,to trip over my own feet. They will go home disappointed if, at some point during the festivities, I do not drop my glasses and crawl around on the floor looking for them.
If you introduce me instead as "a person with nearsightedness", that implies that I am, first and foremost, a person. You are no !onger defining me by my handicap.
To address your comment, Tova, I am not saying the doctor was at fault. But, in the mental health field, referring to someone as autistic is a faux pas. The correct term is "person with autism" and I theorize that Brun might have reacted less strongly to that phrase than to one that she had been conditioned to consider an insult.
But what do I know? I'm just a drunken old man...
Tova:
Well. I'm just zis guy, you know.
And I promise that, if we ever meet, it wouldn't even occur to me to introduce you as either "the nearsighted guy" or "a person with nearsightedness." They are equally terrible ways to introduce someone, in my view.
But if someone were to ask why you wear glasses, on the other hand, I would probably say you're nearsighted. Well, at least, I would have without your implication that such wording upsets you.
I'm honestly surprised that you would interpret this statement as reducing you to a single stereotype, yet somehow using the clumsy wording "he has nearsightedness" does not. I don't understand, honestly. I would daresay that the majority of people would treat the two statements as synonymous. But, hey, I'd be happy to accommodate you if that's what you prefer.
Referring to someone as autistic is a faux pas only because of its previous use as a pejorative. Otherwise, it would be no more of a faux pas than referring to me as asthmatic (which you are free to do, by the way, because I am).
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version