cyberdad wrote:
ASPartOfMe wrote:
The combination of a lot of autistic people having problems with change and the deliberate successful attempts to change definitions and what is acceptable spells big trouble for autistic people.
Really? PC pertains to very minor corrections in speech to not inflame, vilify or demean other people. How is this problematic for autistic people to learn. We don't need to crucify autistic people for saying something innapropriate in the same way I would give some license to somebody with Tourettes syndrome not being in control of swearing like a sailor.
Because of the euphemism treadmill. How many different words have we all been told over the years were the "correct" way to refer to ethnic minorities or disabled people? Just as soon as people eventually accept a new word as being the one singlular non-offensive way to refer to a person, suddenly somebody or some group comes along and stamps a big red "RACIST" stamp on it and campaigns for a new word to be used instead.
It doesn't actually solve racism or ableism or whatever (and often the "bad" words are used without malice anyway), it just makes it more likely that people who aren't trying to be racist get called racist even though they had no ill intent and may have been actively trying to not sound racist. The people who are trying to offend will continue trying to offend regardless of the words used, you can even be offensive without using any of the "bad" words if you want.
Coloured. People of Colour (somehow different from coloured). Black. Brown. Asian. Half-caste. "BAME".
In the US there's "African-American" and similar terms which make about as much sense as "Asian" when the person isn't of African or Asian heritage but we're told to use these catch-all words to describe somebody where using the wrong word might be called racist.
It's all just word games, they're all words for the same groups of people, they've all been acceptable until they weren't, and racist people are still racist.