Power of Language Must Be Inclusive. An SC Judgment Leads Us in That Direction

After all, language is a powerful instrument and the only means by which the mind engages with the world.

The phrases “the power of language” and “the language of power” are not commutative in their significance. They differ in their import and what they can achieve when used, particularly in the context of differently-abled people. In this context, language must be taken to include not only words but also actions.

The judgment of the Supreme Court regarding the stereotyping of differently-abled persons in films and visual media drives home this point. The judgment rightly denounces the use of derogatory words to refer to the differently-abled and/or the incorrect portrayal of their abilities as ‘extraordinary’ or ‘super-abilities’.

Such a demeaning use of language and inaccurate depictions not only inflicts irreparable damage to the self-esteem and dignity of differently-abled people but worse still, creates stereotypes and promotes a discriminating attitude in society— leading to decreased opportunities for those individuals to prove their actual abilities.

What is needed is more public awareness and representation, and the participation of such individuals in mainstream discourse. In this regard, much progress has been made and the recent judgment is a step in that direction. Nonetheless, a lot remains to be achieved for this category of individuals.

Language is a powerful instrument and the only means by which the mind engages with the world. The power of language is immense for it reflects one’s thoughts and how one is received and understood by peers. Often, differently-abled adults are treated in a manner that is “patronising” and “paternalistic,” all with supposedly ‘good’ intentions.

The “infantile” treatment of differently-abled young adults often has a debilitating effect on their self-perception. They do not want to be treated as children. It hurts their constant efforts to emulate others around them and to be like others their age. People tend to look “beyond them" and not "at them, " judging their ability by comparing it with an arbitrary standard of “normal” society has created.

An effort must be made to channel differently-abled persons’ abilities in the best possible way - more importantly giving them opportunities, not charity. Both speech and actions must be guided by this understanding. The power of language must be inclusive and not exclusionary.

The point about the distinction between “disabling humour” and “disability humour” in the judgment of the Supreme Court suggests this. The former is disabling the self-esteem of the individual while the latter can, perhaps, enable a better understanding. But humour can easily be hurtful, so discretion and sensitivity are needed regardless.

The power of language must be inclusive and not exclusionary. The point about the distinction between ‘disabling humour’ and ‘disability humour’ in the judgment of the Supreme Court is suggestive of this point. The former is disabling the self-esteem of the individual while the latter can, perhaps, enable us to understand them better. But here too, the sensitivities of the individuals or people close to them must not be harmed.

The language of power is also relevant in this context. Those in a position of power need to realise that language, including actions, is an effective bridge to understanding differently-abled individuals and for them to understand us. Parents, teachers, caregivers and employers must undergo training to gain an empathic understanding of their impediments and the special context in which they are situated.

Efforts need to be made to understand their physical/ intellectual abilities. No further restrictions must be imposed upon them due to derogatory speech and/or actions.

Equal treatment and equal opportunity are great values. In practice, one needs to shift from the idea that all cases must be treated alike to the idea that unlike cases should be treated in proportion to their difference. Hence, whether it is the home, school or place of employment, those who are in power must keep the principle of equity in mind. The language of power must have a bottom-up and not a top-down approach.

There is nothing like “disability.” There are only different levels of abilities which is what diversity is all about. The phenomenon of diversity teaches us a lot about people—a realisation that occurs only when one associates with diverse people.

Therefore, familiarity with differently-abled people is essential. Association or engagement with them can become more meaningful and effective for both parties when language is used to empower and empathise. We must recognise the enabling power of our language use, as much as the often disabling effects of the language of those in power.

(Dr (Ms) Shashi Motilal (Retd) Professor of Philosophy, Department of Philosophy, University of Delhi, India, obtained her PhD from the State University of New York (SUNY) at Buffalo, USA in 1986. She has been Visiting Faculty at the University of Akron, Ohio, USA and Carleton University, ON, Canada, TERI University, New Delhi and IIT/Delhi and ISPP, New Delhi. This is an opinion piece and the views expressed above are the author’s own. The Quint neither endorses nor is responsible for the same.)