Language Guidance for This Election Cycle
Guidance to Help You Craft Inclusive, People-First Language
By Jennifer R. Farmer
Years ago, The Opportunity Agenda, and then The Opportunity Agenda and Advancement Project, released a social justice phrase guide. The purpose of the guide was to share information on how to develop messaging that uplifts and unites. The guide was designed for persons working in the justice field whose aim was to make life better for others. But whether we realize it or not, our language can hinder or help our organizing. Our words can influence thoughts, feelings and even policy and political outcomes. Each of us should be mindful of the language we use, but justice-seeking people have a unique responsibility to do so. In our struggles to build power and achieve justice, our language can help or hinder. We also want to be sure that we use inclusive, language that builds rather than tears down.
July 26 marked the 34th anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act
The timing of this blog post couldn’t be more important. For instance, July 26 marked the 34th anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act. This historic legislation covers disabilities that are discernable as well as those that aren’t. So many times, the way we, including those of us with good intentions, discuss disabilities can be ableist and harmful. Guidance in this area is helpful and I encourage you to see these resources for more information.
Additionally, given the harmful political rhetoric that has characterized so much of American politics, reminders about how we use language may be helpful. In the hustle and bustle of political campaigning, political parties and pundits will adopt catchy words and phrases with the intention of defining their candidate and shifting public opinion to their side. But no one should do this at the expense of marginalized groups or people. The truth is that the language we use has consequences that will reverberate far beyond this election cycle. Let’s use our words to heal, not harm.
This document attempts to highlight the importance of people-first and inclusive language that honors the humanity of all people. This document is not exhaustive and serves only as food for thought. Below please see a few words and phrases you might consider embracing or abandoning.
Unhoused v. Homeless
We strongly recommend people first language as it places the person above their situation, which could be temporary. Instead of calling an unhoused persons ‘homeless,’ use “unhoused.” Recognize an individual’s personhood and agency first, and their condition only when absolutely necessary.
Returning Citizen/System impacted v. Felon
Words and phrases that ‘others’ another human being should be closely analyzed. Any word that undermines a person’s humanity, should be questioned. Words such as ‘felon,’ dehumanize and debase human beings. As Nobel Peace Prize nominee Desmond Meade has said, “the word is like as scarlet letter,” that justifies mistreatment, distrust and a lower standard of care. An alternative is to say returning citizen as most people who have been convicted of a felony may return to our communities. Fred Ward of Building Freedom Ohio recommends using the term system-impacted to characterize persons who have been entangled in the criminal justice system.
Differently Abled v. Persons with Disabilities
In a podcast interview with Dara Baldwin, I referenced the word differently abled. Baldwin reminded me that the word is not inclusive and problematic.
Suffers From
Suffers from suggest constant pain and a lack of agency or control. It prioritizes the condition or experience above the person. It also feeds into the notion that persons with disabilities have a poor quality of life and that the experiences of abled-bodied people are preferred. Instead of saying ‘suffers from,’ just say, a person has a disability.
In some instances, calling a person a victim undermines their agency, and what they did to survive a particular experience. It is true that a person may have experienced a harm, but that situation alone does not define them. Persons who have been victimized know what its like to have their voice, perspective, agency and power undermined. We don’t need to contribute to that feeling. Use survivor as an alternative.
These are the examples that immediately come to mind. What did we miss and why should we use or refrain from using that word or phrase? Leave a comment and let us know.