[no subject]

>     I've also had lots of difficulty accepting politically correct
>    language. For example, why do we say disabled (not able to do
>     something, a less-offensive form of "invalid") instead of handicapped
>    (having a disadvantage compared to non-handicapped people)? The latter
>     is both more accurate and less offensive.

I remember reading once that there is an evolutionary process for such
names.
A new name comes into being because the old name has too many negative
connotations. Then, after some time, the new name starts to take on all
the negative connotations that the old one had, and the cycle starts again.

For example: invalid, handicapped, disabled...
             colored, negro, black, african-american...

Has anybody else heard of this phenomenon?

I agree with Rose W. that we should endeavor to call people by
whatever name they choose; I'm just suggesting where those names
might have come from, as a point of interest.

BTW, I don't think this progression exists for women; instead, we
are trying to change the words that refer to OTHERS so that they
are more inclusive (e.g. people, not men). There is also a trend
toward using feminine pronouns and names unexpectedly, so as to
make people more aware that women DO exist in a particular field
(e.g., "The engineer collected her blueprints."). I really like
this last practice, because I think it truly does make the reader
think a little.

--
Glenda Jeffrey                                     Email: jeffrey -at- hks -dot- com
Hibbitt, Karlsson & Sorensen, Inc                  Phone: 401-727-4200
1080 Main St.                                      Fax:   401-727-4208
Pawtucket, RI 02860