TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Rick said, "As a genuine member of a "disabled" group--I've
been deaf for over 30 years--and as a literate fellow who wants to
choose the right words for the right situations, I must admit I am
distressed by the hoops people try to make the English language jump
through in order to avoid real or imagined slights to others." etc.
Excellent! That's exactly right! I, also, speak with first-hand
authority on this subject of the use of politically correct language.
A couple of days ago I said that it is silly. Rick's message is the
reason I say so. It gets ridiculous. Personally, I have a problem
with the words "crippled" and "gimp." But that's just me, and I don't
expect the whole world to jump through hoops to please me. Likewise,
I don't think I should have to write in fear that someone *might* be
offended.
For example, only (this hasn't really come up with me), I feel it is
terribly wrong to refer to someone as "nigger." But "black" versus
"African-American"? In the news I've noticed that reporters usually
say "African-American" rather than "black" nowadays. I would tend to
say "black" just because it's shorter and easier to say and type, and
because I may not know for a fact that a person is black because
his/her ancestors were African. Should I, then, be afraid that
someone might be offended? That's jumping through hoops.
(But please don't call me "crippled" or "gimp," or I'll rip your head
off. :-) ) Beth