There are so many euphamisms for disabled people. Just off the top of my head there is:
- Differently-abled
- Handi-capable
- Special (needs)
- Challenged
- The r slur
- Crippled*
Why do we have so many terms when it’s so much easier to say disabled?
Non-diabled people have always been uncomfortable with disability. This can stem from the historical treatment of disabled people. Disabled people were institutionalized, abanonded by their families, castrated, and lobotomized. They were seen as “less than” and a deviant to society. This created ableism as we know it.
Non-diabled people are fearful of diabled people, or feel uncomfortable around disabled people. They even struggle to address them. Such as speaking to the hearing person next to a Deaf person. Or speaking to a caregiver of a non speaking person, instead of directly to the disabled person.
Choosing to identify disabled people with euphamisms is a direct line to ableism and this fear of disability. They are so fearful of it they can’t even use the word disabled. For a long time person-first language was the preffered method of speaking to and about disabled people. However this was mainly pioneered by non-disabled people, like caregivers, doctors, and parents. Recently, identity-first language has been a way for disabled people to express their pride in being disabled. It takes away the negative conotations of the word and celebrates the identity of disabled people.
However, there are many older disabled people that grew up with the person-first language and prefer that to idenity-first language. It is best to ask the disabled person their preference before referring to them in any specific way.
*Note: More recently the term “crip” (from cripple) has been reclaimed by the disability community.
