Blind and Visually Impaired Community
↑
6
↓
Vision impaired vs visually impaired? (self.Blind)
submitted by LeftAl
Which do you prefer? It’s been contentious in my blind group, whether people prefer vision impaired or visually impaired, because the latter makes it sound like the person physically looks like they’re impaired rather than their vision
BenandGracie 5 points 1y ago
I don't have a preference. The only problem I have is people refusing to call me blind. I don't have any vision, and I have had sighted people tell me that I am not blind. They will insist that I am visually impaired, and I have to explain to them that being visually impaired implies that I might have some vision, which I do not.
Dietzgen17 3 points 1y ago
"Vision impaired" doesn't sound grammatical. I have been doing significant volunteer work with an organization that helps the visually impaired; the preferred term is "a person with a visual impairment." It's a little wordy, but I understand why the emphasis is placed on the person.
I've never heard of the interpretation of "visually impaired" shared by some members of your group. The impairment is always understood to apply to vision.
I've never heard of the interpretation of "visually impaired" shared by some members of your group. The impairment is always understood to apply to vision.
team_nanatsujiya 4 points 1y ago
Seconded!
...except for the person-first language ("person with a visual impairment") being preferred part. It is, in my experience, largely only "preferred" by abled people who are speaking over disabled voices. Respectfully, are you blind or otherwise disabled? and if not, is anyone who told you that person-first language is preferred blind/disabled? Orrr was it abled peope telling you that? If it was a disabled person/people, or if you yourself are blind/disabled--great! But be aware that not eveyone agrees, and if someone asks you to not use person-first language to refer to them, respect that.
Granted, I'm not super involved with the community in-person, and I mostly have seen this opinion on some blog sites and whatnot, so the reddit blind community as a whole could have a different opinion than those on other sites I have been a part of for much longer--but I haven't heard many actually disabled people who do agree with pushing person-first language. For starters:
・ Being blind is not a bad thing. Being disabled is not a bad thing. It shouldn't be shameful for me to be a "blind person" because that's what I am and that's okay.
・You shouldn't have to use person-first language to remind yourselves or others or us that we are people
・For many people, you can't separate the "person" from the "blind." It is a part of our identity, for probably most of us.
There are people out there that do prefer person-first language, sure. If a disabled person tells you that's how they want you to refer to them, listen.
...except for the person-first language ("person with a visual impairment") being preferred part. It is, in my experience, largely only "preferred" by abled people who are speaking over disabled voices. Respectfully, are you blind or otherwise disabled? and if not, is anyone who told you that person-first language is preferred blind/disabled? Orrr was it abled peope telling you that? If it was a disabled person/people, or if you yourself are blind/disabled--great! But be aware that not eveyone agrees, and if someone asks you to not use person-first language to refer to them, respect that.
Granted, I'm not super involved with the community in-person, and I mostly have seen this opinion on some blog sites and whatnot, so the reddit blind community as a whole could have a different opinion than those on other sites I have been a part of for much longer--but I haven't heard many actually disabled people who do agree with pushing person-first language. For starters:
・ Being blind is not a bad thing. Being disabled is not a bad thing. It shouldn't be shameful for me to be a "blind person" because that's what I am and that's okay.
・You shouldn't have to use person-first language to remind yourselves or others or us that we are people
・For many people, you can't separate the "person" from the "blind." It is a part of our identity, for probably most of us.
There are people out there that do prefer person-first language, sure. If a disabled person tells you that's how they want you to refer to them, listen.
DecisionThot 3 points 1y ago
I *am* super involved with the community. I am a TVI who has worked with hundreds of students who are blind / low vision, and volunteer for vocational outreach programs every year.
Person-first language has nothing to do with the disability being a bad thing or a good thing, and everything to do with putting the person before the diagnosis and help eliminate stereotypes. Simple as that. You do not have to be abled or disabled to participate in this concept.
It may not matter to you, but it is not about just you. Stereotypes about people who are low vision in 2021 have drastically changed from how they were in 1950. People who are blind and low vision have gone from being restricted to learning in hospitals alongside children with intellectual disabilities, to now occupying high-level careers across a wide professional landscape and becoming contributing members of their communities. This is all because there were people before us who fought and won battles we can't even fathom that led to securing equal rights and education for those from which it was once denied.
Part of that ongoing battle is something as simple as language. You don't have to file litigation or organize protests to help the cause, but simply changing a couple words in your vernacular is a very good way of being on the right side of history.
Just remember, people who were blind long before you fought very hard and lived very different, less fortunate lives than you so that you and other people with vision conditions can have the lives you do. Person-first language is about paying tribute to those who came before us and respecting the plight we have ahead of us.
Person-first language has nothing to do with the disability being a bad thing or a good thing, and everything to do with putting the person before the diagnosis and help eliminate stereotypes. Simple as that. You do not have to be abled or disabled to participate in this concept.
It may not matter to you, but it is not about just you. Stereotypes about people who are low vision in 2021 have drastically changed from how they were in 1950. People who are blind and low vision have gone from being restricted to learning in hospitals alongside children with intellectual disabilities, to now occupying high-level careers across a wide professional landscape and becoming contributing members of their communities. This is all because there were people before us who fought and won battles we can't even fathom that led to securing equal rights and education for those from which it was once denied.
Part of that ongoing battle is something as simple as language. You don't have to file litigation or organize protests to help the cause, but simply changing a couple words in your vernacular is a very good way of being on the right side of history.
Just remember, people who were blind long before you fought very hard and lived very different, less fortunate lives than you so that you and other people with vision conditions can have the lives you do. Person-first language is about paying tribute to those who came before us and respecting the plight we have ahead of us.
team_nanatsujiya 2 points 1y ago
Part of my point was that many disabled people feel that non-disabled people are talking over us in regards to person-first language. You don't seem to be disabled. I am. I said I'm not involved *in person,* because of geographical reasons--but I've seen a lot of disabled people's opinions online, and I'm telling you that I and many others prefer identity-first (or at least don't prefer person-first) and why. I'm not saying that you have no knowledge and experience with the disabled community. However, I would again ask you to consider from what sources have you learned that person-first language is preferred, abled or disabled. If it's schools and volunteer programs, I'm guessing it's abled people. Try searchng "person first language" here on reddit and you will find a lot of disabled people saying something similar to what I've said.
Unless there's some history specifically about person-first language I'm unaware of, I don't see how it's relevant. Yes, people before me have fought for my privileged life. Yes, things have changed. We're still fighting, and it's not for person-first language. That doesn't disrespect the history.
"Putting the person before the diagnosis" is exactiy the problem that some of us have with PFL. You can't separate the person from the diagnosis for many people, as I said. It is a part of our identity. We still can fight stereotypes without having to remove part of our identity. I want people to respect treat me because they don't have any prejudices against blind people, not because they see my blindness as some descriptor thrown in as an afterthought that can be overlooked for the sake of respecting me.
Edit: I forgot to point out that even if people have fought for PFL in the past it doesn't change my point. Sometimes the language people prefer changes. The community now is who you should be listening to.
Unless there's some history specifically about person-first language I'm unaware of, I don't see how it's relevant. Yes, people before me have fought for my privileged life. Yes, things have changed. We're still fighting, and it's not for person-first language. That doesn't disrespect the history.
"Putting the person before the diagnosis" is exactiy the problem that some of us have with PFL. You can't separate the person from the diagnosis for many people, as I said. It is a part of our identity. We still can fight stereotypes without having to remove part of our identity. I want people to respect treat me because they don't have any prejudices against blind people, not because they see my blindness as some descriptor thrown in as an afterthought that can be overlooked for the sake of respecting me.
Edit: I forgot to point out that even if people have fought for PFL in the past it doesn't change my point. Sometimes the language people prefer changes. The community now is who you should be listening to.
DecisionThot 2 points 1y ago
To answer your question, my source is from a wide, wide breadth of professional mediums. Two of which would be the two master degrees I hold in TVI and O&M. Both of which are staffed with board of admin and adjunct professors who are blind. Any and every accredited institution for educating professionals in the field of VI and O&M are teaching person-first language, and as far as I know, the same goes for every category of ECE. Perkins SftB, NFB, ACB, the list goes on and on, all have people who are blind on their board of directors, and all are teaching person-first language. It's not about abled or disabled.
I do hear you, and I do understand what you are saying. You are saying that you and others like you are the actual blind community, and the opinion of the majority of people you meet online should be the standard. However, what is not learned online is what is actually happening in the trenches where TVIs and O&M instructors are working with the developing children with low vision and their parents, and trying to teach them about how the world has viewed people who are blind for decades and how important it is to be empowered, and to empower others.
It is not about separating the person from the diagnosis, rather, separating the diagnosis from the stereotype.
I do hear you, and I do understand what you are saying. You are saying that you and others like you are the actual blind community, and the opinion of the majority of people you meet online should be the standard. However, what is not learned online is what is actually happening in the trenches where TVIs and O&M instructors are working with the developing children with low vision and their parents, and trying to teach them about how the world has viewed people who are blind for decades and how important it is to be empowered, and to empower others.
It is not about separating the person from the diagnosis, rather, separating the diagnosis from the stereotype.
FaerilyRowanwind 2 points 1y ago
Depends on the person. Everyone will have a different answer. Ask their preference
Tarnagona 2 points 1y ago
For myself, “mostly blind” or “low vision” as it gets the point across most succinctly. I’m also fine being called blind, as it is also accurate. I’m not a fan of being called impaired, given its negative connotations, but I’ve always seen/used “visually impaired”, so the ambiguity never occurred to me.
I work for the CNIB, and we use “sight loss” as the catch-all term, which isn’t entirely accurate for me (I’ve never lost any sight, because I didn’t have it in the first place), but I’m okay with it, because it’s the best catch-all I’ve yet come across.
And “person with sight loss” doesn’t sound as awkward as “person with blindness” or “person with a visual impairment”. The latter two sound like you’re deliberately flipping words around just to sound nicer. (I have no real preference for or against person-first language, but tend to prefer whatever sounds more natural/less awkward; I don’t want to be “a person with blindness” instead of “a blind person” just to make you feel better)
I work for the CNIB, and we use “sight loss” as the catch-all term, which isn’t entirely accurate for me (I’ve never lost any sight, because I didn’t have it in the first place), but I’m okay with it, because it’s the best catch-all I’ve yet come across.
And “person with sight loss” doesn’t sound as awkward as “person with blindness” or “person with a visual impairment”. The latter two sound like you’re deliberately flipping words around just to sound nicer. (I have no real preference for or against person-first language, but tend to prefer whatever sounds more natural/less awkward; I don’t want to be “a person with blindness” instead of “a blind person” just to make you feel better)
This nonprofit website is run by volunteers.
Please contribute if you can. Thank you!
Our mission is to provide everyone with access to large-
scale community websites for the good of humanity.
Without ads, without tracking, without greed.
scale community websites for the good of humanity.
Without ads, without tracking, without greed.
©2023 HumbleCat Inc • HumbleCat is a 501(c)3 nonprofit based in Michigan, USA.