I stirred up a storm here--and would like to clarify and apologize to all those I offended

[alp227]

Earlier today I posted a thread about the Washington Post article "Mentally disabled 'self-advocates' oppose use of word 'retarded'". Unfortunately, my skepticism got a little too misguided, and I posted comments like "PC run amok?" and "I wonder if this is proper linguistic revisionism or excessive political correctness. To be honest, we shouldn't deny the existence of people who are totally out of their minds in addition to those who at least have some conscience."

It generated 20 replies but a bunch of unrecs, including some who accused me of bigotry with my "out of their minds" remark. Then I tried to clarify that I wanted to know how to say the right things about sensitive matters like this, but my poor word choice gave others the impression that I said "all mentally ill people have low IQ". This all gets me thinking. Had I merely posted an excerpt and provided a "read more" link, the discussion would've focused more on the article at hand rather than my PC/conscience remarks, which I admit were made without much thought.

So instead of complaining about "linguistic revisionism" (my initial concern), instead I decided to look into the really compelling reason for the change.

According to Wikipedia's article about mental retardation, the American Association on Mental Retardation became the American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities: "Part of the rationale for the double name was that many members worked with people with pervasive developmental disorders, most of whom do not have mental retardation." (Source for "most of whom...": JAMA paper from 2001 "Pervasive Developmental Disorders in Preschool Children") AAIDD explains its change of name "emphasizes the sense that intellectual disability is no longer considered an absolute, invariable trait of a person" and "aligns with current professional practices that focus on providing supports tailored to individuals to enhance their functioning within particular environments", among other things that intend to empower such people. (Source: The FAQ page on the AAIDD website) What I comprehend from these facts (and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, something I always welcome) is that the word "retard" is a bit vague and prone to abuse and misunderstanding.

I've been a member of DU since September of last year and have enjoyed reading and participating in discussions with all the great, insightful members. They have really helped open my mind about issues beyond the status quo fed by government and mainstream media. Once again, thank you all for setting the record straight for me about sensitivity towards people with special needs and why "political correctness" is a frickin' myth. (There's a book by that title, I better read that!) I hope to continue to participate in discussions about current events and other topics on DU and keep learning.

[AllentownJake]

1. I use the word more often than I probably should

and I have a brother with autism, the word doesn't offend me when directed at a functional adult acting stupid, if someone called my brother that, I'd punch them in the face.

When someone refers to Sarah Palin's child with down syndrome using the word, I'll take issue. If someone calls Sarah Palin the word or any other functional adult, I'd shrug.

Probably should be offended at both uses.

Who knows.

Good on you to apologize to people though.

[Hekate]

2. I missed that thread, but this is a lovely apology. Life is about learning. KnR.

:hi:

[northofdenali]

3. It takes courage to admit a wrong.

I appreciate it, and also appreciate your attempt to speak to our many and varied members regarding the language we use, whether intended or not. I screw up, too, being of an age when PC-oriented speech was not PC - except for my mom's swift use of the flyswatter or back of a wooden spoon.

Thank you for being a DU'er, and for your ability to think, explain, and remain on this crazy (oops, did I step in it?) board. It's more than just a forum for many of us. It's a reality-check. I make some major idiotic remarks from time to time, and hope that when I do, I have as much integrity as yours in order to apologize for same. :fistbump:

I agreed, in the most part, with your original post, and found no offense in the wording as written. Others did; your apology and honesty are refreshing.