In terms of disability labeling, I think visually impared is to vague. I like blind for totally blind people, and partial for people who have site. But I've always hated disabled, I like the term diffaabled. Differently abled. Disabled emplies we can't do sometime, diffabled emplies we do it differently. Take care. -----Original Message----- From: speakup-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:speakup-bounces at braille.uwo.ca] On Behalf Of Daniel Dalton Sent: Wednesday, April 08, 2009 11:30 PM To: speakup at braille.uwo.ca Subject: Re: debian gripes, accessibility, and labels, was: Re: IntegratingSpeakup/ESpeakup into Debian boot process On Wed, Apr 08, 2009 at 08:50:06PM -0700, Gregory Nowak wrote: > On Thu, Apr 09, 2009 at 01:08:55PM +1000, Daniel Dalton wrote: > > First, I don't think the term "handicapped" is a good one. > > Interesting that we should get onto that topic. I personally am not > that hot on the term disabled, it always makes me think of a car by > the side of the road, with both blinkers flashing. I suppose we could No neither am I... It's not exactly true, how is a blind person disabled... > have a lively discussion for days on end, about how we should label > ourselves, or about how others should refer to us, and we'd probably > never reach a consensus. We could, and I think your right! :) I personally think "vision impaired" is fine. Daniel. _______________________________________________ Speakup mailing list Speakup at braille.uwo.ca http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
