PDA

View Full Version : OT: Activism by GU Students



ID ZAGFAN
04-21-2013, 08:46 AM
Campaign to ‘spread the word to end’ the R-word is spreading

http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2013/apr/21/r-word-removal/


There is a nationwide campaign urging people to stop using the “R-word” which stands for “######” or “######ed.” In March, Gonzaga University students created a video featuring students and their friends with intellectual disabilities – all urging an end to the R-word.

The “spread the word to end the word” campaign is spreading, thanks to men and women who have been labeled with the R-word, and family and friends who love them.

Megan Edmonds, a GU senior, has a brother with a disability. She is now one of the coordinators of Gonzaga University Specialized Recreation, an outreach program where students buddy up with community members with disabilities.

The organization sponsors sports activities, puts on plays and throws seasonal parties.

The group’s mission: “Creating a safe place that fosters equality and inclusion.”

Edmonds and Megan Soldati, a sophomore, were the prime movers behind the recent campus campaign to end the R-word. In March, they asked students to sign a pledge to no longer use the word; nearly 500 did. And the two women oversaw the making of a two-minute video, now on YouTube, that shows students and community members making the pledge.

In the video, the participants hold up signs showing what they are interested in. Examples: “Being sassy” and “being artistic.”

Amanda Moore is in the video. Her sign reads “basketball.”

It’s a powerful, fast-moving video, filmed by GU student Andrew Opila, in which the word “######ed” is never used.

“The word hurts,” says one of the community members. The video urges people substitute the R-word with another word that starts with r – respect.

Read lots more at the link. GU students are wonderful!

(Mods, move if you wish, but I wanted this to be seen by the most people.)

ZaGranny

jazzdelmar
04-21-2013, 08:58 AM
"R" for reassuring. An important campaign. Thanks for sharing.

drvenkman05
04-21-2013, 09:27 AM
I think it is great that GU students are part of a campaign to stop the pejorative use of the word "######" and the associated stereotypes of people with this disability. However, this campaign was doomed to fail from the start, because it is about simply changing word usage rather than the real underlying problem, classifying people solely based on their "intellect" (i.e., the label for this disability has been changed throughout history because the label begins to be used pejoratively, hence the problem with simply changing the label). The term "intellectual disability" only perpetuates this problem - this new term labels people with mental ######ation as being "deficient" solely in their intellect, when in fact the disability equally affects "intellectual skills" and "non-intellectual skills" (e.g., social skills, communication skills, daily living skills, etc.).


Campaign to ‘spread the word to end’ the R-word is spreading

http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2013/apr/21/r-word-removal/


There is a nationwide campaign urging people to stop using the “R-word” which stands for “######” or “######ed.” In March, Gonzaga University students created a video featuring students and their friends with intellectual disabilities – all urging an end to the R-word.

The “spread the word to end the word” campaign is spreading, thanks to men and women who have been labeled with the R-word, and family and friends who love them.

Megan Edmonds, a GU senior, has a brother with a disability. She is now one of the coordinators of Gonzaga University Specialized Recreation, an outreach program where students buddy up with community members with disabilities.

The organization sponsors sports activities, puts on plays and throws seasonal parties.

The group’s mission: “Creating a safe place that fosters equality and inclusion.”

Edmonds and Megan Soldati, a sophomore, were the prime movers behind the recent campus campaign to end the R-word. In March, they asked students to sign a pledge to no longer use the word; nearly 500 did. And the two women oversaw the making of a two-minute video, now on YouTube, that shows students and community members making the pledge.

In the video, the participants hold up signs showing what they are interested in. Examples: “Being sassy” and “being artistic.”

Amanda Moore is in the video. Her sign reads “basketball.”

It’s a powerful, fast-moving video, filmed by GU student Andrew Opila, in which the word “######ed” is never used.

“The word hurts,” says one of the community members. The video urges people substitute the R-word with another word that starts with r – respect.

Read lots more at the link. GU students are wonderful!

(Mods, move if you wish, but I wanted this to be seen by the most people.)

ZaGranny

jazzdelmar
04-21-2013, 09:35 AM
I think it is great that GU students are part of a campaign to stop the pejorative use of the word "######" and the associated stereotypes of people with this disability. However, this campaign was doomed to fail from the start, because it is about simply changing word usage rather than the real underlying problem, classifying people solely based on their "intellect" (i.e., the label for this disability has been changed throughout history because the label begins to be used pejoratively, hence the problem with simply changing the label). The term "intellectual disability" only perpetuates this problem - this new term labels people with mental ######ation as being "deficient" solely in their intellect, when in fact the disability equally affects "intellectual skills" and "non-intellectual skills" (e.g., social skills, communication skills, daily living skills, etc.).



Baby steps.

drvenkman05
04-21-2013, 09:42 AM
I don't disagree with your sentiment, but we've been in the baby steps stage for too long. We've been changing the label for over 100 years but have made no change to the underlying problem of classifying people based solely on their "intellect," with the most recent change in terminology being a true step backwards.

I think GU has, and produces, the type of people that could be the leaders in bringing about this change.


Baby steps.

jazzdelmar
04-21-2013, 10:38 AM
I don't disagree with your sentiment, but we've been in the baby steps stage for too long. We've been changing the label for over 100 years but have made no change to the underlying problem of classifying people based solely on their "intellect," with the most recent change in terminology being a true step backwards.

I think GU has, and produces, the type of people that could be the leaders in bringing about this change.

Ok, gotcha. And same thing can be said for people with physical disabilities. The euphemisms have evolved/devolved thru the years from crippled to invalid to handicapped to disabled to PWD. Still, the overall public negative perception and disinterest persists.

MickMick
04-21-2013, 11:26 AM
The new replacement word will be banned eventually.

It is all about connotation and perception. Forget that the literal meaning was well intended and appropriate when first applied.

For example, people will not want to use the term "special needs" in about twenty years and then a new descriptor will need to be invented. About the time when "Special needs" is commonly used in hateful jokes, another change will be required.

Make no mistake. People will always be put in to groups. Some times it is necessary so that such folks can meet eligibility for assistance. When that group receives a name, that name will eventually become poison, and a new moniker will arise.

Hate and fear are a guiding force in language evolution.

jazzdelmar
04-21-2013, 11:27 AM
The new replacement word will be banned eventually.

It is all about connotation and perception. Forget that the literal meaning was well intended and appropriate when first applied.

For example, people will not want to use the term "special needs" in about twenty years and then a new descriptor will need to be invented. About the time when "Special needs" is commonly used in hateful jokes, another change will be required.

Make no mistake. People will always be put in to groups. Some times it is necessary so that such folks can meet eligibility for assistance. When that group receives a name, that name will eventually become poison, and a new moniker will arise.

Hate and fear are a guiding force in language evolution.



Euphemistically speaking, MM? 😉

drvenkman05
04-21-2013, 11:45 AM
The new replacement word will be banned eventually.

It is all about connotation and perception. Forget that the literal meaning was well intended and appropriate when first applied.

For example, people will not want to use the term "special needs" in about twenty years and then a new descriptor will need to be invented. About the time when "Special needs" is commonly used in hateful jokes, another change will be required.

Make no mistake. People will always be put in to groups. Some times it is necessary so that such folks can meet eligibility for assistance. When that group receives a name, that name will eventually become poison, and a new moniker will arise.

Hate and fear are a guiding force in language evolution.

You (and Jazz) are right on target. For over 100 years, we've tried to change the general public's views by simply changing the label. We have failed, miserably. If we want to change the general public's views on disability, we first need de-link "intellect" and disability. Then, we can begin real education about disabilities. I think this is where GU students and alumni, by virtue of our values and education, can do great things. Yes, it will take time, but will ultimately be more effective that changing the the word in perpetuity.

Aside from the lack of progress made by name changes (most in the general public have neither the time nor interest to keep up with the multiple name changes), I also think these campaigns can actively hinder changing the general public's views. These campaigns equate using a word with actively disrespecting a group of people. However, most people do not disrespect people with disabilities - they simply use a word they know. This kind of finger-pointing and blaming only serves to turn away otherwise sympathetic members of the general public.

jazzdelmar
04-21-2013, 12:00 PM
Differences scare people, though the huge majority are predisposed to be totally accepting of them. Just compare the reactions or lack of them when a young child and an adult come into the presence of a disabled person.