As someone who works in the design and construction world, accessibility and inclusivity upgrades are becoming a very, very big (and good) thing (and high priority). There's so many buildings and facilities out there that require accessibility upgrades, it's nuts. The good thing is that accessibility consulting is now becoming the norm on design teams (whereas even five years ago it was rare), and in Canada designers can get their Rick Hansen accessibility certification, which is a qualification in modern accessible and inclusive design. The other good thing is that lots and lots of new infrastructure is getting built now with proper and sufficient accessibility and inclusivity features. It is being taken very seriously in this line of work.
Before becoming a Rick Hansen Certified Accessibility Certification professional, I was a wheelchair user for 18 years and studied Architectural Technology.
I shockingly learned a great deal from this training; how to design for vision loss and blindness, hearing loss and deafness, and some cognitive disabilities (this is where I am now focusing much of my research, it's a difficult area in universal/ inclusive design).
The current building code effectively only takes a physical disability into account and with that primary the aspects associated with a wheelchair user. The National Building Code - Alberta Edition which was adopted not too long ago had an opportunity to require CSA B651-18 Accessible design for the built environment to be required in certain circumstances, but it was omitted.
ACA legislation and associated design guidelines will put universal/ accessible/ inclusive design into action, at least for the proactive architect, developer, and publicly funded built environments.
__________________
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to GreatWhiteEbola For This Useful Post:
Then we can politely agree to disagree on this very civil forum.
On the topic of empathy, I think we can all have more empathy for the victim. The majority of posts here are just calling Briere names. Piece of crap, piece of garbage, dbag, piece of sheet, donkey. We can all focus more energy on sympathy / support / understanding on the victim instead of rage against the perpetrator.
I think it's great that someone in a wheelchair shared their view. I am sad that it was, to me, too extreme and only stoked more outrage.
With all your experience in the field of accessibility could you share an analogy that would better suit your sensibilities? I believe my responses were gauged and measured not to provoke your outrage, yet we still must find an analogy that isn't too extreme for you—maybe breaking one leg, or cutting a leg or two off? Maybe it should be noted as a slight inconvenience, and as OOTC put it she hit the jackpot. I have tried to impart how a person often relates to a wheelchair as a functional extension of their body and yet you cannot grasp this. It's this type of thinking that makes my life challenging almost every day. You somehow know better what's in my best interest.
"My disability exists not because I use a wheelchair, but because the broader environment isn't accessible" - Stella Young
__________________
The Following User Says Thank You to GreatWhiteEbola For This Useful Post:
I just want to encourage people; In the past terms like deaf and mute, crippled, or handicapped were hurtful and derogatory terms used to describe a person with a disability. No one wants to be labeled a hanicapped. A handicap actually refers to a physical barrier; For example a curb on a sidewalk presents a physical handicap. Also rather than using the term "disabled person" I encourage you to use the person's first name. People who work in the field and advocates, as well as people who have a specific disability have worked really hard to change the hurtful and derogatory lables over the years. Society has come a long ways to help people learn to to associate with the person first and the disability second. As a person who has a disability myself and as an advocate, I have personally traveled all over Western Canada and parts of USA to promote awareness. If you can juat make the effort to avoid using labels; It really goes a long way and it gives an uneducated person the opportunity to use the right vocabulary. Especially when they meet someone who is deaf or uses a wheelchair, or may have other challenges.
I saw posts in here from people who meant well but were using labels to describe the people they are talking about.. We are not labels, we are real people. If the people who mean well are part of the growing process of diversity and inclusion, it really makes for a stronger argument.
Last edited by DazzlinDino; 03-16-2023 at 03:29 PM.
The Following 19 Users Say Thank You to DazzlinDino For This Useful Post:
I just want to encourage people; In the past terms like deaf and mute, crippled, or handicapped were hurtful and derogatory terms used to describe a person with a disability. No one wants to be labeled a hanicapped. A handicap actually refers to a physical barrier; For example a curb on a sidewalk presents a physical handicap. Also rather than using the term "disabled person" I encourage you to use the person's first name. People who work in the field and advocates, as well as people who have a specific disability have worked really hard to change the hurtful and derogatory lables over the years. Society has come a long ways to help people learn to to associate with the person first and the disability second. As a person who has a disability myself and as an advocate, I have personally traveled all over Western Canada and parts of USA to promote awareness. If you can juat make the effort to avoid using labels; It really goes a long way and it gives an uneducated person the opportunity to use the right vocabulary. Especially when they meet someone who is deaf or uses a wheelchair, or may have other challenges.
I saw posts in here from people who meant well but were using labels to describe the people they are talking about.. We are not labels, we are real people. If the people who mean well are part of the growing process of diversity and inclusion, it really makes for a strongerargument.
Further to this, "handicap" is related to "cup in hand", or a beggar. Handicapped parking? Not too sure how effective that type of parking would be... designated accessible parking, sure that makes sense.
__________________
The Following User Says Thank You to GreatWhiteEbola For This Useful Post:
I just want to encourage people; In the past terms like deaf and mute, crippled, or handicapped were hurtful and derogatory terms used to describe a person with a disability. No one wants to be labeled a hanicapped. A handicap actually refers to a physical barrier; For example a curb on a sidewalk presents a physical handicap. Also rather than using the term "disabled person" I encourage you to use the person's first name. People who work in the field and advocates, as well as people who have a specific disability have worked really hard to change the hurtful and derogatory lables over the years. Society has come a long ways to help people learn to to associate with the person first and the disability second. As a person who has a disability myself and as an advocate, I have personally traveled all over Western Canada and parts of USA to promote awareness. If you can juat make the effort to avoid using labels; It really goes a long way and it gives an uneducated person the opportunity to use the right vocabulary. Especially when they meet someone who is deaf or uses a wheelchair, or may have other challenges.
I saw posts in here from people who meant well but were using labels to describe the people they are talking about.. We are not labels, we are real people. If the people who mean well are part of the growing process of diversity and inclusion, it really makes for a strongerargument.
Deaf is derogatory now? What about blind?
No one wants to be reduced to just a label of a condition, and there's certainly more to any one person than a particular affliction they may unfortunately have...but we need words to describe what goes on in the world. Deafness is a condition that exists, we need a term for that, don't we? I'm genuinely confused, are you saying another, more new age euphemistic term like "hard of hearing" should be used? Or are you saying we should just never talk about people that can't hear at all, which sounds a lot like erasing deaf people and also very counterproductive and not helpful to treating people with deafness. And educating people about how to avoid becoming deaf or assisting family members that are deaf. Respectfully, this take doesn't make a lot of sense.
Further to this, "handicap" is related to "cup in hand", or a beggar. Handicapped parking? Not too sure how effective that type of parking would be... designated accessible parking, sure that makes sense.
This just goes to show how important using appropriate terms are. What some people don't understand is it if you label a child who has a disability, that hurt is real and can linger with them for a lifetime.
It's unfortunate but a lot of people find it really easy to say hurtful things even if they mean well about someone who's made some bad mistakes. Our society needs to work a little harder at how we relate to others by using better examples.
Last edited by DazzlinDino; 03-16-2023 at 03:42 PM.
No one wants to be reduced to just a label of a condition, and there's certainly more to any one person than a particular affliction they may unfortunately have...but we need words to describe what goes on in the world. Deafness is a condition that exists, we need a term for that, don't we? I'm genuinely confused, are you saying another, more new age euphemistic term like "hard of hearing" should be used? Or are you saying we should just never talk about people that can't hear at all, which sounds a lot like erasing deaf people and also very counterproductive and not helpful to treating people with deafness. And educating people about how to avoid becoming deaf or assisting family members that are deaf. Respectfully, this take doesn't make a lot of sense.
You don't think deaf and dumb or deaf mute is derogatory? Care to explain. And what about those people who see a blind person coming towards them with a guide dog but talk to the dog instead of the blind person?
No one wants to be reduced to just a label of a condition, and there's certainly more to any one person than a particular affliction they may unfortunately have...but we need words to describe what goes on in the world. Deafness is a condition that exists, we need a term for that, don't we? I'm genuinely confused, are you saying another, more new age euphemistic term like "hard of hearing" should be used? Or are you saying we should just never talk about people that can't hear at all, which sounds a lot like erasing deaf people and also very counterproductive and not helpful to treating people with deafness.
No, I think referring to the person as "the deaf guy", or "the blind lady" is what's not good. "Gary who is deaf", "Sydney who is a wheelchair user" .. that type of language is more acceptable. I am completely immersed in this world and I still don't know what is the correct phrases/ terms to use at all times. It will take some time but I think we'll all get it eventually.
__________________
The Following User Says Thank You to GreatWhiteEbola For This Useful Post:
No one wants to be reduced to just a label of a condition, and there's certainly more to any one person than a particular affliction they may unfortunately have...but we need words to describe what goes on in the world. Deafness is a condition that exists, we need a term for that, don't we? I'm genuinely confused, are you saying another, more new age euphemistic term like "hard of hearing" should be used? Or are you saying we should just never talk about people that can't hear at all, which sounds a lot like erasing deaf people and also very counterproductive and not helpful to treating people with deafness. And educating people about how to avoid becoming deaf or assisting family members that are deaf. Respectfully, this take doesn't make a lot of sense.
I am just saying if you're addressing someone who is deaf just use the first name or learn sign language to communicate with them. We should never label them deaf and dumb, which some of the older generations still does. Sometimes it is because that's the language that they learned at the time. As a deaf person myself, I understand these terms and how they are hurtful; But I am really proud of the people who've become educated, who treat me as an equal just like everybody else.They don't see my deafness, they just see a person. I like that and I hope that that continues to grow so that everyone can enjoy the same experience. I guess I'm just saying it starts with education but it does get better.
Last edited by DazzlinDino; 03-16-2023 at 03:52 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to DazzlinDino For This Useful Post:
I just want to encourage people; In the past terms like deaf and mute, crippled, or handicapped were hurtful and derogatory terms used to describe a person with a disability. No one wants to be labeled a hanicapped. A handicap actually refers to a physical barrier; For example a curb on a sidewalk presents a physical handicap. Also rather than using the term "disabled person" I encourage you to use the person's first name. People who work in the field and advocates, as well as people who have a specific disability have worked really hard to change the hurtful and derogatory lables over the years. Society has come a long ways to help people learn to to associate with the person first and the disability second. As a person who has a disability myself and as an advocate, I have personally traveled all over Western Canada and parts of USA to promote awareness. If you can juat make the effort to avoid using labels; It really goes a long way and it gives an uneducated person the opportunity to use the right vocabulary. Especially when they meet someone who is deaf or uses a wheelchair, or may have other challenges.
I saw posts in here from people who meant well but were using labels to describe the people they are talking about.. We are not labels, we are real people. If the people who mean well are part of the growing process of diversity and inclusion, it really makes for a stronger argument.
Maybe I'm being too literal here, but let's say I'm wanting to have a planning meeting with some contractors about making my building more useable/accessible... Saying things like "John", "Bob" or "Albert" aren't really going to get me there. Words like "blind" or "deaf" aren't insults in and of themselves. They can be used as insults, but they can also be used with validity for the purposes of context.
To me, the problem shouldn't be the word "blind", it should be the way "blind" is used by people with ulterior (or especially derogatory) motives. Why don't we just get rid of donkeyholes instead of words? We can ban the word "blind" but all that does is make it more difficult to have purposeful conversations, because donkeyholes will always find a new way to insult someone - meanwhile the people who care about not hurting others are the ones who have to constantly worry about which words they can or cannot say.
TLDR: Stop eliminating words, start eliminating the donkeyholes who use them as insults.
Last edited by FanIn80; 03-16-2023 at 04:05 PM.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to FanIn80 For This Useful Post:
Maybe I'm being too literal here, but let's say I'm wanting to have a planning meeting with some contractors about making my building more useable/accessible... Saying things like "John", "Bob" or "Albert" aren't really going to get me there. Words like "blind" or "deaf" aren't insults in and of themselves. They can be used as insults, but they can also be used with validity for the purposes of context.
To me, the problem shouldn't be the word "blind", it should be the way "blind" is used by people with ulterior (or especially derogatory) motives. Why don't we just get rid of donkeyholes instead of words? We can ban the word "blind" but all that does is make it more difficult to have purposeful conversations, because donkeyholes will always find a new way to insult someone - meanwhile the people who care about not hurting others are the ones who have to constantly worry about which words they can or cannot say.
TLDR: Stop eliminating words, start eliminating the donkeyholes who use them as insults.
Well said. Using terminology such as ; "We need more devices and accessablity for the deaf and the blind isnt the issue." The word deaf and blind is not derogatory, I have explained it as much as I intend to but your clarification is quite good and helpful.
I just want to encourage people; In the past terms like deaf and mute, crippled, or handicapped were hurtful and derogatory terms used to describe a person with a disability. No one wants to be labeled a hanicapped. A handicap actually refers to a physical barrier; For example a curb on a sidewalk presents a physical handicap. Also rather than using the term "disabled person" I encourage you to use the person's first name. People who work in the field and advocates, as well as people who have a specific disability have worked really hard to change the hurtful and derogatory lables over the years. Society has come a long ways to help people learn to to associate with the person first and the disability second. As a person who has a disability myself and as an advocate, I have personally traveled all over Western Canada and parts of USA to promote awareness. If you can juat make the effort to avoid using labels; It really goes a long way and it gives an uneducated person the opportunity to use the right vocabulary. Especially when they meet someone who is deaf or uses a wheelchair, or may have other challenges.
I saw posts in here from people who meant well but were using labels to describe the people they are talking about.. We are not labels, we are real people. If the people who mean well are part of the growing process of diversity and inclusion, it really makes for a stronger argument.
Yes.
No one wants their disability attached to their identity whenever they are addressed or referred to at work, at home or at social functions.
While it's important to embrace your situation so that it isn't an emotionally triggering minefield to navigate the world when any one at any time can choose to point it out (and you can never guarantee that every one has the same level of tactfulness), it also makes perfect sense to want to be addressed as your name, first and foremost.
In this discussion, I just used "disabled person" because I didn't have a name to put to the victim, and to help differentiate who I'm speaking about. I suppose "young lady" would've sufficed, though. I'll try to consider that next time.
A bit of a tangent from your point, but as someone with a minor physical disadvantage but one that isn't as noticeable as someone in a wheelchair, in my own experience I've found that the less your predicament matters to you, the less it will matter to other people. Really we show other people how to see us by how we see ourselves.
Funny enough I've wound up dating people who initially made fun of my condition when I met them, because they learned to look past it. Since you can't ensure everybody else has manners no matter how much you try, the next best thing you can do is make sure it doesn't rattle you, and let who you are shine brighter than your difference/s.
But I'm fully on board with eliminating these labels as the social "norm" and moving to change the culture and stigmas around disabilities. Also making places for mingling and connecting accessible to every one
Nowadays there is all this chatter about inclusiveness and normalization for minorities and sexual orientations, but I feel like those with disabilities are still being forgotten in the background and are those that arguably need it the most. And I really wish we would address this more frequently.
Last edited by TrentCrimmIndependent; 03-16-2023 at 04:56 PM.
No one wants their disability attached to their identity whenever they are addressed or referred to at work, at home or at social functions.
While it's important to embrace your situation so that it isn't an emotionally triggering minefield to navigate the world when any one at any time can choose to point it out (and you can never guarantee that every one has the same level of tactfulness), it also makes perfect sense to want to be addressed as your name, first and foremost.
In this discussion, I just used "disabled person" because I didn't have a name to put to the victim, and to help differentiate who I'm speaking about. I suppose "young lady" would've sufficed, though. I'll try to consider that next time.
A bit of a tangent from your point, but as someone with a minor physical disadvantage but one that isn't as noticeable as someone in a wheelchair, in my own experience I've found that the less your predicament matters to you, the less it will matter to other people. Really we show other people how to see us by how we see ourselves.
Funny enough I've wound up dating people who initially made fun of my condition when I met them, because they learned to look past it. Since you can't ensure everybody else has manners no matter how much you try, the next best thing you can do is make sure it doesn't rattle you, and let who you are shine brighter than your difference/s.
But I'm fully on board with eliminating these labels as the social "norm" and moving to change the culture and stigmas around disabilities. Also making places for mingling and connecting accessible to every one
Nowadays there is all this chatter about inclusiveness and normalization for minorities and sexual orientations, but I feel like those with disabilities are still being forgotten in the background and are those that arguably need it the most. And I really wish we would address this more frequently.
Thanks for sharing your insight, I totally understand your use of the terminology "disabled" it is after all a learning minefield out there. I too just try to be myself and not think about being deaf. I fully accept it and it is part of who I am and who I want to be. Like you, sometimes I meet people who are unsure how to approach me or talk to me and thats normal. It is when they see it is not really an issue they feel so much better. It is on all of us to be better and more understanding.
Last edited by DazzlinDino; 03-16-2023 at 05:13 PM.
I am just saying if you're addressing someone who is deaf just use the first name or learn sign language to communicate with them. We should never label them deaf and dumb, which some of the older generations still does. Sometimes it is because that's the language that they learned at the time. As a deaf person myself, I understand these terms and how they are hurtful; But I am really proud of the people who've become educated, who treat me as an equal just like everybody else.They don't see my deafness, they just see a person. I like that and I hope that that continues to grow so that everyone can enjoy the same experience. I guess I'm just saying it starts with education but it does get better.
I would never use your or anyone else's deafness as a reason to insult them or mistreat them. So I think I get what you're saying in that sense, but I guess I'm pushing back against a blanket ban on the word "deaf" in totality because it's a useful word to describe something. Like I can't acknowledge you or where you're coming with your own personal journey with deafness unless we can both use the word to communicate what specific affliction we're talking about. And that goes for mute, blind, lame, handicapped, anything. It seems to me we're in danger of banishing these words because they're old school, but they convey meaning of very real conditions that exist and people still need to deal with whether or not the old word gets used for them.
In the end I think we can agree with what someone else here said, crack down on losers who insult people for their conditions but don't blanket banish the words. Or something in that vein.
I would never use your or anyone else's deafness as a reason to insult them or mistreat them. So I think I get what you're saying in that sense, but I guess I'm pushing back against a blanket ban on the word "deaf" in totality because it's a useful word to describe something. Like I can't acknowledge you or where you're coming with your own personal journey with deafness unless we can both use the word to communicate what specific affliction we're talking about. And that goes for mute, blind, lame, handicapped, anything. It seems to me we're in danger of banishing these words because they're old school, but they convey meaning of very real conditions that exist and people still need to deal with whether or not the old word gets used for them.
In the end I think we can agree with what someone else here said, crack down on losers who insult people for their conditions but don't blanket banish the words. Or something in that vein.
I think you may have over-reacted, because a ban was never mentioned. I think the poster was making the point that a lot of labels have been used in a derogatory fashion, so that when possible, use the person’s name or acknowledge them as a person instead of identifying them solely as or by their disability.
I know I’ve done it and that’s as someone who has grown to hate being identified by one aspect of their identity/reality and should know better, so I don’t see it as a particularly controversial point. It was just a good reminder for people to think about.
