AXSLIB-L Archives

Liberation Throough IT Accessibility (an EASI member list)

AXSLIB-L@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
joe redman <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Library Access -- http://www.rit.edu/~easi
Date:
Mon, 23 Jul 2001 08:57:53 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (25 lines)
Disability issues often fit the civil rights model.
Objectively, the term Colored (as in "people of color") may seem less
discriminating but its historical connotations make it offensive. Since 1990
the preferred term is "disabled" not "handicapped." The use of "people"
first would put librarianship on the forefront instead of 10 years behind
the times.
Joe
----- Original Message -----
From: "Drew, Bill" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 8:37 AM
Subject: Re: Why People first language is needed


> >Colored, Negro and Black mean the same thing.
> >There is a reason for using the correct terms!
>
> I don't think this is a fair comparison to handicapped and disability.
> Colored and Negro have a definite negative meaning in society.  Black is
> positive.  What I am asking is if the meaning of disability is really any
> more positive than handicapped?  I don't think so!
>
> Bill Drew
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2