9 ms·

This article is great. The usual advice is "just treat disabled people as people" but it isn't super useful because humans don't "naturally" treat anyone like

This article is great. The usual advice is "just treat disabled people as people" but it isn't super useful because humans don't "naturally" treat anyone like anyone. Much of our social interaction is cultural and learned. So it's extremely helpful to give specific, actionable advice ("just tell your child to wave"). I have to admit to occasionally looking away, or doing other things mentioned in the article. It's not because I think disabled people are "worse" or because I'm an asshole. It's because I get a momentary "shit, this isn't automatic, what do I do" feeling, and by the time I arrive at a conscious decision of what to do a few moments later it's too late. There is a lot of shaming of people that I think would be much better replaced with education. Most people aren't assholes. They just don't automatically know what to do. We can fix it by giving people specific actionable norms.

goldenkey 9y ago
The trick is not to get all panicky and think "what if they see me looking at them deliberately?!" Would you really need to tiptoe around a turtle? You don't have to treat a retarded [1] person as if they aren't impaired. Just don't be condescending. Treat them nicely, knowing that they aren't going to sleuth every cue you unconsciously emit, because well..retarded people don't make the best true detectives. Healthy folk don't either. Ever smoke cannabis and get the feeling everyone is looking at you and judging you..? But then you realize that feeling is totally irrational -- that most people are oblivious to just about everything -- people are oblivious in public. Just be a nice person and smile or wave back...everyone understands good will, love, and happiness. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arc_of_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arc_of_the_United_States
- stordoff 9y ago
  If your citation is intended to suggest your usage of "retarded" is reasonable, you may wish to read further down the page: > The Arc called the portrayal [of a man with an intellectual disability] "offensive" and also objected to the use of the words "retard", "moron", and "imbecile" throughout the movie. [...] the Arc continued to criticize the film as containing hate speech, promoting offensive stereotypes of people with intellectual disabilities, and being offensive to people with disabilities and their families.
  - Freak_NL 9y ago
    Goldenkey might be referring to the euphemism treadmill mentioned in the summary of that article; the never-ending cycle of replacing neutral words for a group of people when they have (inevitably) shifted in meaning to a pejorative (like 'imbecile' and 'retard').
  - gowld 9y ago
    "a retard" is different from "retarded person". Tropic Thunder mocked retarded people, it didn't use those terms in neutral usage. Tropic Thunder was all about putting offensive stereotype behind a layer of indirection ("actors playing actors playing X", and used that layer to dodge criticism, but it's a complex scenario to try to untangle. Much of the entertainment value that the audiences perceived was in "making fun of X", not "making fun of actors playing X"
    - stordoff 9y ago
      From Arc's broader statements made at the time, I'm not sure they would agree with your first statement, or agree that there _is_ a neutral usage: > “In our culture, `retard’ and `retarded’ carry a lot of baggage from the days when people were institutionalized in large state facilities,” [...] They don’t deserve to be treated in such a dehumanizing way.” > Leaving aside the movie’s offensiveness or lack thereof, the uproar also serves to highlight the evolving standards of acceptable terminology [...] “Adults with retardation self-advocated. They clearly told us that the use of the word `retarded’ was very hurtful. https://www.dailynews.com/2008/08/13/some-give-tropic-thunder-an-f-over-the-r-word/ https://www.dailynews.com/2008/08/13/some-give-tropic-thunde... FWIW, I don't necessarily agree with them in totality -- I have various disabilities and have zero issue with "disabled person" or "the disabled" (unlike the linked article) -- but linking to Arc doesn't appear to support the use of "retarded", even where the intent is neutral.
      - gowld 9y ago
        Thanks for clarifying. Fun fact, in the years since "person-centered language" ("person with X") has now also fallen to the euphemism treadmill, as modern advocates say it stigmatizes the disability X by separating from the person as a modification, instead of accepting it as part of a respected whole person.
tw1010 9y ago
This is such an important point. The world would be a wonderful place if we defaulted to feeling an enthusiastic opportunity to pedagogically and patiently teach people something when we notice they're naive about it (instead of shaming or dismissing them as stupid).
- reificator 9y ago
  There's always a relevant XKCD: https://xkcd.com/1053/ https://xkcd.com/1053/
smoyer 9y ago
My son has trisomy-21 (Down Syndrome) and I think you're whole post misses a big point. You have a huge amount in common with a severely disabled individual (most of your genes in fact). And all it really takes is to treat them like you would anyone else their age. If you're running at a park and ignoring all the kids on the playground, don't stop to greet (or gawk at) a disabled child. If you're greeting all the kids at Sunday school, don't skip over them (or switch to baby-talk just for them). So if you default to treating them like any other human, they'll be happy and you'll make their parents happy. And at this point, parents will happily let you know if there are any specific ways to interact with their child. Note: Some kids have aural sensitivities ... don't yell at them like their deaf during your first interaction. I usually start with a voice slightly lower than my regular speaking volume.
- jasallen 9y ago
  In fact your whole post misses the grandparent post's point. Their point was that they _absolutely intend to do_ what you just said. However, very little of what we do as humans in conscious decisions. Most of it is autonomic pattern response. Forgetting disabilities for a moment: if you are not used to being around _children_ then the first time you are surrounded by them you'll act completely weird. Because they are different than you're usual pattern. With sufficient exposure you adapt, you integrate that slight variation into the pattern and all is well. For some patterns you act differently (you act different for children than adults) for some you won't act differently (for most disabled children you act the same as for other children) but in all cases exposure is the key because we humans are imperfect pattern recognition machines. Also though, some people are just assholes. I mean don't baby talk to anyone ever.
- pc86 9y ago
  > I usually start with a voice slightly lower than my regular speaking volume Which goes against your entire point, doesn't it?
  - tudelo 9y ago
    Well, maybe they mean when talking to children. That does not.
toxican 9y ago
For me it's usually an attempt to not come across as staring. A lot of people grow up hearing "don't stare!" when it comes to people who look different because it's rude. So it's really hard for me to shake that. I don't look away because I'm weirded out by a person or because I think less of them. It's because I don't want my initial glance to be mistaken a stare. It's ironic that apparently that can come across as rude as well. Then again I'm socially awkward and struggle to make eye-contact with non-disabled folks just as much.
- gowld 9y ago
  Next time you're caught "maybe staring", try this: Smile or nod and then look away, instead of rushing to look away. You might be surprised how many smiles and nods you get back and return, and realize that most people are happy to have a moment of mutual acknowledgement. The key is to consciously acknowledge that you were looking at someone, and realize that you are forced to "justify" your look -- was it innocent and friendly, or creepy and rude? If it was innocent and friendly, then commit to it! If was creepy and rude, you messed up, do better next time.
  - PJDK 9y ago
    If someone did this to me, I'd probably smile and nod back. But I'd also spend the rest of the day confused and worried why I couldn't remember who the person was who greeted me like a passing acquaintance.
    - eagsalazar2 9y ago
      Lean into that uneasiness. In addition to a nod, give them a long meaningful wink also. Then instead of an awkward accident, you have a fun puzzle for everyone think about for years afterward. Practice this at bars when you accidentally make eye contact with someone and be at peace with the beautiful chaos that will 100% ensue.
    - gowld 9y ago
      That's OK. Maybe you'll see them again next time you go around the same way, and you'll remember this time, and you'll start building a relationship with your neighbor.
muzani 9y ago
This brings up an interesting insight that it's not realistic to treat "people as people". A lot of people have trouble interacting with the opposite sex. Or even with someone outside their friend circle. In an Asian village, people might freeze on meeting someone black or white. They're not really assholes, but they get confused on how to act and may overcompensate. Is it appropriate to smile at a coworker of the opposite sex? Or to instant message them about work late at night? This can result in a lot of strange reactions.
- draugadrotten 9y ago
  Just to be clear, in case there are people actually wondering: > Is it appropriate to smile at a coworker of the opposite sex? Or to instant message them about work late at night? No. And no-no.
  - jakebasile 9y ago
    I agree about messaging someone of any gender about work at night (without prior agreement), but why would it be wrong to smile at a coworker no matter who they are?
    - hermitdev 9y ago
      I disagree about messaging coworkers at night. I do it occasionally. Sometimes it's about something humorous, instructional or enlightening that I stumbled on while at home. Other times, it's serious and about work. I've had very productive and candid discussions with my CEO at 11pm. If I have something useful to share, I want to do it while I remember about it, instead of trying to remember the next day. Thing is, when I randomly message someone at night, I don't expect a response, nor do I view my recipient unfavorably if they don't respond until morning or at all. Of course, it's different if the entire team is working late, but that's only happened a few times in the past 2 years I've been at my current company.
  - kimdcmason 9y ago
    Wat? You just stated that it's inappropriate to smile at a co-worker of the opposite sex. That's sufficiently bizarre that I assume you misread the original post... (I'm applying Occam's razor).
djanogo 9y ago
"..social interaction is cultural and learned.." or may be, just may be we are genetically programmed to avoid things which starts uncomfortable thought process. "They just don't automatically know what to do" This might not socially acceptable thing to say out loud, may be, people don't have _enough_ time or inclination to imagine other people's condition in everyday life. Like you remembered some cases where you looked away, there might be more cases where you didn't even notice that somebody disabled was around you.
- LordKano 9y ago
  Dogs will naturally break away from your gaze if they're not sure they could take you in a physical confrontation. That's not cultural. Some things are just built into us, not that we don't have the power to override them through the application of will but they didn't just appear out of nowhere.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
chopete 9y ago
Your comment is a great follow up to the article. I am copying(with slight modifications) a few actions highlighted in the article. >> Staring isn't staring if you're smiling. Or waving. Or if you say hi. Adults- do stare but do it smilingly or say hi >> Just tell your child to wave. >> And don't worry if he(your child) asks an awkward question, like, "Can't she talk?" That's a welcome chance for us to introduce Esprit. >> Just ask a disabled child's parents whether the planned activity will work for their son or daughter. If an adjustment is needed we can figure it out together. >> A nuisance like leaving a picnic early is normal (for parents with disabilities), so don't make a big deal out of an annoyance with a portent-filled comment like, "I don't know how you do it." >> They desire the human contact that most of us take for granted. So increase your awareness, by reaching out to one of them.
- gowld 9y ago
  And like most things, the cure for fear is exposure. The more time you spend with disabled/diverse/different people, the more natural it will feel to you, and the less weirdly you will act. This goes for your encounters with people with visible disabilities and differences, mental disabilities and differences, racial differences, linguistic differences, religious differences. . .

goldenkey 9y ago

The trick is not to get all panicky and think "what if they see me looking at them deliberately?!" Would you really need to tiptoe around a turtle? You don't have to treat a retarded [1] person as if they aren't impaired. Just don't be condescending. Treat them nicely, knowing that they aren't going to sleuth every cue you unconsciously emit, because well..retarded people don't make the best true detectives. Healthy folk don't either. Ever smoke cannabis and get the feeling everyone is looking at you and judging you..? But then you realize that feeling is totally irrational -- that most people are oblivious to just about everything -- people are oblivious in public. Just be a nice person and smile or wave back...everyone understands good will, love, and happiness. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arc_of_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arc_of_the_United_States

stordoff 9y ago
If your citation is intended to suggest your usage of "retarded" is reasonable, you may wish to read further down the page: > The Arc called the portrayal [of a man with an intellectual disability] "offensive" and also objected to the use of the words "retard", "moron", and "imbecile" throughout the movie. [...] the Arc continued to criticize the film as containing hate speech, promoting offensive stereotypes of people with intellectual disabilities, and being offensive to people with disabilities and their families.
- Freak_NL 9y ago
  Goldenkey might be referring to the euphemism treadmill mentioned in the summary of that article; the never-ending cycle of replacing neutral words for a group of people when they have (inevitably) shifted in meaning to a pejorative (like 'imbecile' and 'retard').
- gowld 9y ago
  "a retard" is different from "retarded person". Tropic Thunder mocked retarded people, it didn't use those terms in neutral usage. Tropic Thunder was all about putting offensive stereotype behind a layer of indirection ("actors playing actors playing X", and used that layer to dodge criticism, but it's a complex scenario to try to untangle. Much of the entertainment value that the audiences perceived was in "making fun of X", not "making fun of actors playing X"
  - stordoff 9y ago
    From Arc's broader statements made at the time, I'm not sure they would agree with your first statement, or agree that there _is_ a neutral usage: > “In our culture, `retard’ and `retarded’ carry a lot of baggage from the days when people were institutionalized in large state facilities,” [...] They don’t deserve to be treated in such a dehumanizing way.” > Leaving aside the movie’s offensiveness or lack thereof, the uproar also serves to highlight the evolving standards of acceptable terminology [...] “Adults with retardation self-advocated. They clearly told us that the use of the word `retarded’ was very hurtful. https://www.dailynews.com/2008/08/13/some-give-tropic-thunder-an-f-over-the-r-word/ https://www.dailynews.com/2008/08/13/some-give-tropic-thunde... FWIW, I don't necessarily agree with them in totality -- I have various disabilities and have zero issue with "disabled person" or "the disabled" (unlike the linked article) -- but linking to Arc doesn't appear to support the use of "retarded", even where the intent is neutral.
    - gowld 9y ago
      Thanks for clarifying. Fun fact, in the years since "person-centered language" ("person with X") has now also fallen to the euphemism treadmill, as modern advocates say it stigmatizes the disability X by separating from the person as a modification, instead of accepting it as part of a respected whole person.

tw1010 9y ago

This is such an important point. The world would be a wonderful place if we defaulted to feeling an enthusiastic opportunity to pedagogically and patiently teach people something when we notice they're naive about it (instead of shaming or dismissing them as stupid).

reificator 9y ago
There's always a relevant XKCD: https://xkcd.com/1053/ https://xkcd.com/1053/

smoyer 9y ago

My son has trisomy-21 (Down Syndrome) and I think you're whole post misses a big point. You have a huge amount in common with a severely disabled individual (most of your genes in fact). And all it really takes is to treat them like you would anyone else their age. If you're running at a park and ignoring all the kids on the playground, don't stop to greet (or gawk at) a disabled child. If you're greeting all the kids at Sunday school, don't skip over them (or switch to baby-talk just for them). So if you default to treating them like any other human, they'll be happy and you'll make their parents happy. And at this point, parents will happily let you know if there are any specific ways to interact with their child. Note: Some kids have aural sensitivities ... don't yell at them like their deaf during your first interaction. I usually start with a voice slightly lower than my regular speaking volume.

jasallen 9y ago
In fact your whole post misses the grandparent post's point. Their point was that they _absolutely intend to do_ what you just said. However, very little of what we do as humans in conscious decisions. Most of it is autonomic pattern response. Forgetting disabilities for a moment: if you are not used to being around _children_ then the first time you are surrounded by them you'll act completely weird. Because they are different than you're usual pattern. With sufficient exposure you adapt, you integrate that slight variation into the pattern and all is well. For some patterns you act differently (you act different for children than adults) for some you won't act differently (for most disabled children you act the same as for other children) but in all cases exposure is the key because we humans are imperfect pattern recognition machines. Also though, some people are just assholes. I mean don't baby talk to anyone ever.
pc86 9y ago
> I usually start with a voice slightly lower than my regular speaking volume Which goes against your entire point, doesn't it?
- tudelo 9y ago
  Well, maybe they mean when talking to children. That does not.

toxican 9y ago

For me it's usually an attempt to not come across as staring. A lot of people grow up hearing "don't stare!" when it comes to people who look different because it's rude. So it's really hard for me to shake that. I don't look away because I'm weirded out by a person or because I think less of them. It's because I don't want my initial glance to be mistaken a stare. It's ironic that apparently that can come across as rude as well. Then again I'm socially awkward and struggle to make eye-contact with non-disabled folks just as much.

gowld 9y ago
Next time you're caught "maybe staring", try this: Smile or nod and then look away, instead of rushing to look away. You might be surprised how many smiles and nods you get back and return, and realize that most people are happy to have a moment of mutual acknowledgement. The key is to consciously acknowledge that you were looking at someone, and realize that you are forced to "justify" your look -- was it innocent and friendly, or creepy and rude? If it was innocent and friendly, then commit to it! If was creepy and rude, you messed up, do better next time.
- PJDK 9y ago
  If someone did this to me, I'd probably smile and nod back. But I'd also spend the rest of the day confused and worried why I couldn't remember who the person was who greeted me like a passing acquaintance.
  - eagsalazar2 9y ago
    Lean into that uneasiness. In addition to a nod, give them a long meaningful wink also. Then instead of an awkward accident, you have a fun puzzle for everyone think about for years afterward. Practice this at bars when you accidentally make eye contact with someone and be at peace with the beautiful chaos that will 100% ensue.
  - gowld 9y ago
    That's OK. Maybe you'll see them again next time you go around the same way, and you'll remember this time, and you'll start building a relationship with your neighbor.

muzani 9y ago

This brings up an interesting insight that it's not realistic to treat "people as people". A lot of people have trouble interacting with the opposite sex. Or even with someone outside their friend circle. In an Asian village, people might freeze on meeting someone black or white. They're not really assholes, but they get confused on how to act and may overcompensate. Is it appropriate to smile at a coworker of the opposite sex? Or to instant message them about work late at night? This can result in a lot of strange reactions.

draugadrotten 9y ago
Just to be clear, in case there are people actually wondering: > Is it appropriate to smile at a coworker of the opposite sex? Or to instant message them about work late at night? No. And no-no.
- jakebasile 9y ago
  I agree about messaging someone of any gender about work at night (without prior agreement), but why would it be wrong to smile at a coworker no matter who they are?
  - hermitdev 9y ago
    I disagree about messaging coworkers at night. I do it occasionally. Sometimes it's about something humorous, instructional or enlightening that I stumbled on while at home. Other times, it's serious and about work. I've had very productive and candid discussions with my CEO at 11pm. If I have something useful to share, I want to do it while I remember about it, instead of trying to remember the next day. Thing is, when I randomly message someone at night, I don't expect a response, nor do I view my recipient unfavorably if they don't respond until morning or at all. Of course, it's different if the entire team is working late, but that's only happened a few times in the past 2 years I've been at my current company.
- kimdcmason 9y ago
  Wat? You just stated that it's inappropriate to smile at a co-worker of the opposite sex. That's sufficiently bizarre that I assume you misread the original post... (I'm applying Occam's razor).

djanogo 9y ago

"..social interaction is cultural and learned.." or may be, just may be we are genetically programmed to avoid things which starts uncomfortable thought process. "They just don't automatically know what to do" This might not socially acceptable thing to say out loud, may be, people don't have _enough_ time or inclination to imagine other people's condition in everyday life. Like you remembered some cases where you looked away, there might be more cases where you didn't even notice that somebody disabled was around you.

LordKano 9y ago
Dogs will naturally break away from your gaze if they're not sure they could take you in a physical confrontation. That's not cultural. Some things are just built into us, not that we don't have the power to override them through the application of will but they didn't just appear out of nowhere.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

chopete 9y ago

Your comment is a great follow up to the article. I am copying(with slight modifications) a few actions highlighted in the article. >> Staring isn't staring if you're smiling. Or waving. Or if you say hi. Adults- do stare but do it smilingly or say hi >> Just tell your child to wave. >> And don't worry if he(your child) asks an awkward question, like, "Can't she talk?" That's a welcome chance for us to introduce Esprit. >> Just ask a disabled child's parents whether the planned activity will work for their son or daughter. If an adjustment is needed we can figure it out together. >> A nuisance like leaving a picnic early is normal (for parents with disabilities), so don't make a big deal out of an annoyance with a portent-filled comment like, "I don't know how you do it." >> They desire the human contact that most of us take for granted. So increase your awareness, by reaching out to one of them.

gowld 9y ago
And like most things, the cure for fear is exposure. The more time you spend with disabled/diverse/different people, the more natural it will feel to you, and the less weirdly you will act. This goes for your encounters with people with visible disabilities and differences, mental disabilities and differences, racial differences, linguistic differences, religious differences. . .