|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Captain Corea
Joined: 28 Feb 2005
Location: Seoul
|
 Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2014 1:33 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| wanderkind wrote: |
| le-paul wrote: |
| Captain Corea wrote: |
....MANY times in companies I've been in here, I've ... berated them (maybe too harsh a word, but definitely raised the issue) about the lack of handicapped workers in the offices.
........ |
This will sound pedantic, though its not intended to be (I do agree with your point about lack of disabled workers and applaud you for saying something - especially with likely adversity). But, but, but, (there's always one...) for someone who is interested in disabled peoples rights I find it interesting that you still use the word 'handicapped'.....
In England (I cant speak for the rest of the world), its considered to be very offensive, much like calling a Chinese person a 'chink' (because of the sound of their chains as the worked on the railroads). |
I'm pretty sure el Capitan is of Canadian extraction, and if I'm not mistaken it's still an acceptable term there. At least it was when I left. You have to get a handicap parking permit to use the handicap parking spaces, etc. Someone might have a physical or mental handicap. Again, I could be mistaken, but I think it is the preferred term over 'disability', although that term is used for job benefits and such still. Actually the parking spaces might be called 'accessible' parking now...but we don't say 'accessible person' so...not sure where that leaves us.
But let's get back to les gays and their shenanigans. |
Yup, it may have changed since I lived there, but when I did, handicapped was common and acceptable - with all the reasoning/examples you've pointed out.
I believe now, after looking online, they officially use the term "Person with a disability", and that's cool too. But it wasn't as common years back.
| le-paul wrote: |
This will sound pedantic, though its not intended to be (I do agree with your point about lack of disabled workers and applaud you for saying something - especially with likely adversity). But, but, but, (there's always one...) for someone who is interested in disabled peoples rights I find it interesting that you still use the word 'handicapped'.
The term has been around for about 4/500 years and means 'to be a beggar' (cap in hand) - but later the name became a game, yet still kept its original meaning for the disabled.
In England (I cant speak for the rest of the world), its considered to be very offensive, much like calling a Chinese person a 'chink' (because of the sound of their chains as the worked on the railroads).
I think the etymology is more pertinent here on the sparkling ROK as disabled people are very often 'begging' in some way (selling lighters or crawling around in a mermaid costume etc.)
Language and its use is an interesting old thing....
Disclaimer-
(I didnt check the interent on this btw, but I did write a paper on discriminatory language at uni. and remember this from that). |
No doubt it's regional then. Because it certainly isn't comparable to "chink" where I'm from. Heck, there are many organizations that use it in Canada
http://handicap-international.ca/en/
http://www.handicappedpetscanada.com
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assured_Income_for_the_Severely_Handicapped
http://www.torontosun.com/news/torontoandgta/2011/01/28/17073856.html
http://www.insideottawavalley.com/news-story/4546653-handicapped-parking-spot-not-being-removed-from-merrickville-s-canada-post/
It just doesn't carry that strong of connotation in Canada. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
atwood
Joined: 26 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2014 2:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
Handicapped is not the preferred nomenclature. Mr. Lebowski is "disabled'.
| Quote: |
| Completely agree. Many people think just putting a disclaimer before/after what they say somehow absolves them from any responsibility of the content of their words. The fact is, there is tons of homophobic language on this thread, but anytime you even approach the issue those posters just label you some sort of out of control PC activist, or that it's you that can't understand what they're saying. |
I don't know about you, but unlike say, the people who say bad things about Koreans (and when I pipe up you seem to ignore the very logic you are using now), I didn't refer to them in derogatory terms. I expressed an overall support for their cause and acknowledged the oppression they do face. However, I did object to their tactics and timing, which I'd do with any group who decided to march in such a time and manner (the aforementioned example of the teacher's union prancing about).
It's like the Palestinian cause. I think Palestinians are oppressed. However marching around in masks and waving guns instead of say, singing "We Shall Overcome" and doing sit ins, will result in a drastically different reaction from outside observers and affect their level of sympathy to your cause. You are free to wave guns or frolic and dance, but don't complain when people don't lend sympathy to your cause. |
So you're in favor of covert racism? As long as the people in question know their place and act according to what you consider proper decorum, then it's OK.
The same argument was used to oppose the civil rights movement in the U.S. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2014 2:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
It's like the Palestinian cause. I think Palestinians are oppressed. However marching around in masks and waving guns instead of say, singing "We Shall Overcome" and doing sit ins, will result in a drastically different reaction from outside observers and affect their level of sympathy to your cause. You are free to wave guns or frolic and dance, but don't complain when people don't lend sympathy to your cause. |
Great, now it's going to be, "There's a lot of barely-concealed Islamophobia here." |
Or people will complain "SO YOU'RE COMPARING DANCING TO WAVING GUNS?!?!?!?!" and totally miss the point. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mithridates
Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2014 4:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| le-paul wrote: |
| Captain Corea wrote: |
I don't need a "handi-parade" to advocate/support people with disabilities rights. Just like I don't need this parade to remind me that gay ppl should be treated equally.
MANY times in companies I've been in here, I've ... berated them (maybe too harsh a word, but definitely raised the issue) about the lack of handicapped workers in the offices.
Didn't need to be offended by some parade to do that - only needed to be aware that discrimination was wrong.
I really don't see the need for these parades, but I suppose then , I'm not the intended audience (?) |
This will sound pedantic, though its not intended to be (I do agree with your point about lack of disabled workers and applaud you for saying something - especially with likely adversity). But, but, but, (there's always one...) for someone who is interested in disabled peoples rights I find it interesting that you still use the word 'handicapped'.
The term has been around for about 4/500 years and means 'to be a beggar' (cap in hand) - but later the name became a game, yet still kept its original meaning for the disabled. |
Cap in hand is correct, but beggar is not:
| Quote: |
1650s, from hand in cap, a game whereby two bettors would engage a neutral umpire to determine the odds in an unequal contest. The bettors would put their hands holding forfeit money into a hat or cap. The umpire would announce the odds and the bettors would withdraw their hands -- hands full meaning that they accepted the odds and the bet was on, hands empty meaning they did not accept the bet and were willing to forfeit the money. If one forfeited, then the money went to the other. If both agreed either on forfeiting or going ahead with the wager, then the umpire kept the money as payment. The custom, though not the name, is attested from 14c. ("Piers Plowman").
Reference to horse racing is 1754 (Handy-Cap Match), where the umpire decrees the superior horse should carry extra weight as a "handicap;" this led to sense of "encumbrance, disability" first recorded 1890. The main modern sense, "disability," is the last to develop, early 20c. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
le-paul
Joined: 07 Apr 2009
Location: dans la chambre
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2014 5:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mithridates wrote: |
| le-paul wrote: |
| Captain Corea wrote: |
I don't need a "handi-parade" to advocate/support people with disabilities rights. Just like I don't need this parade to remind me that gay ppl should be treated equally.
MANY times in companies I've been in here, I've ... berated them (maybe too harsh a word, but definitely raised the issue) about the lack of handicapped workers in the offices.
Didn't need to be offended by some parade to do that - only needed to be aware that discrimination was wrong.
I really don't see the need for these parades, but I suppose then , I'm not the intended audience (?) |
This will sound pedantic, though its not intended to be (I do agree with your point about lack of disabled workers and applaud you for saying something - especially with likely adversity). But, but, but, (there's always one...) for someone who is interested in disabled peoples rights I find it interesting that you still use the word 'handicapped'.
The term has been around for about 4/500 years and means 'to be a beggar' (cap in hand) - but later the name became a game, yet still kept its original meaning for the disabled. |
Cap in hand is correct, but beggar is not:
| Quote: |
1650s, from hand in cap, a game whereby two bettors would engage a neutral umpire to determine the odds in an unequal contest. The bettors would put their hands holding forfeit money into a hat or cap. The umpire would announce the odds and the bettors would withdraw their hands -- hands full meaning that they accepted the odds and the bet was on, hands empty meaning they did not accept the bet and were willing to forfeit the money. If one forfeited, then the money went to the other. If both agreed either on forfeiting or going ahead with the wager, then the umpire kept the money as payment. The custom, though not the name, is attested from 14c. ("Piers Plowman").
Reference to horse racing is 1754 (Handy-Cap Match), where the umpire decrees the superior horse should carry extra weight as a "handicap;" this led to sense of "encumbrance, disability" first recorded 1890. The main modern sense, "disability," is the last to develop, early 20c. |
|
Ah well, if thats what the first page of google says, it must be true... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mr. BlackCat
Joined: 30 Nov 2005
Location: Insert witty remark HERE
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2014 6:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
It's just so funny that SR is using the Civil Rights Movement as some touchstone for how things 'should be done'. The established powers at the time used the same language then as he, and others, are using now. Do you not think that when Rosa Parks sat at the front of the bus many people were saying, "I don't have a problem with black people riding the bus, but why can't they just stay in the back? Why do they have to shove it in our faces?" Do you think sit-ins and marches and lawsuits challenging segregation was deemed 'noble' at the time? What a revisionist way of looking at history.
What about the women who refused to leave medical school during discussions of male anatomy? Do you think the men at the time thought, "Oh, what nice young ladies. Very respectful of them." No, they were called sluts and whores.
And by the way, the Civil Rights Movement wasn't all nice songs and holding hands. It was Malcolm X, the Black Panthers, fire hoses, police dogs, violent confrontations. SR has a very romantic view of the past.
It's interesting that such intelligent people allow some pictures on the internet and some second and third hand stories frame their whole opinion of an extremely diverse global struggle. For such smart people, they sure do let stereotypes and sensationalist media dictate their views on this particular issue.
Then again, how do you argue against a guy who believes the 99.9% of residents of Korea that are Korean are oppressed by a dozen or so 'haters' on some internet site? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
goat
Joined: 23 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2014 6:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| All the Catholic Priests who have molested young boys have been gay. Would you employee a gay Catholic Priest to work at your academy? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Captain Corea
Joined: 28 Feb 2005
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2014 1:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| goat wrote: |
| All the Catholic Priests who have molested young boys have been gay. Would you employee a gay Catholic Priest to work at your academy? |
VERY odd for you to tie homosexuality and molestation together.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mithridates
Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2014 2:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| le-paul wrote: |
| mithridates wrote: |
| le-paul wrote: |
| Captain Corea wrote: |
I don't need a "handi-parade" to advocate/support people with disabilities rights. Just like I don't need this parade to remind me that gay ppl should be treated equally.
MANY times in companies I've been in here, I've ... berated them (maybe too harsh a word, but definitely raised the issue) about the lack of handicapped workers in the offices.
Didn't need to be offended by some parade to do that - only needed to be aware that discrimination was wrong.
I really don't see the need for these parades, but I suppose then , I'm not the intended audience (?) |
This will sound pedantic, though its not intended to be (I do agree with your point about lack of disabled workers and applaud you for saying something - especially with likely adversity). But, but, but, (there's always one...) for someone who is interested in disabled peoples rights I find it interesting that you still use the word 'handicapped'.
The term has been around for about 4/500 years and means 'to be a beggar' (cap in hand) - but later the name became a game, yet still kept its original meaning for the disabled. |
Cap in hand is correct, but beggar is not:
| Quote: |
1650s, from hand in cap, a game whereby two bettors would engage a neutral umpire to determine the odds in an unequal contest. The bettors would put their hands holding forfeit money into a hat or cap. The umpire would announce the odds and the bettors would withdraw their hands -- hands full meaning that they accepted the odds and the bet was on, hands empty meaning they did not accept the bet and were willing to forfeit the money. If one forfeited, then the money went to the other. If both agreed either on forfeiting or going ahead with the wager, then the umpire kept the money as payment. The custom, though not the name, is attested from 14c. ("Piers Plowman").
Reference to horse racing is 1754 (Handy-Cap Match), where the umpire decrees the superior horse should carry extra weight as a "handicap;" this led to sense of "encumbrance, disability" first recorded 1890. The main modern sense, "disability," is the last to develop, early 20c. |
|
Ah well, if thats what the first page of google says, it must be true... |
Etymonline is one guy who uses the following:
| Quote: |
The basic sources of this work are Weekley's "An Etymological Dictionary of Modern English," Klein's "A Comprehensive Etymological Dictionary of the English Language," "Oxford English Dictionary" (second edition), "Barnhart Dictionary of Etymology," Holthausen's "Etymologisches Wörterbuch der Englischen Sprache," and Kipfer and Chapman's "Dictionary of American Slang."
|
Plus these other ones.
http://www.etymonline.com/sources.php |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sister Ray
Joined: 25 Mar 2006
Location: Fukuoka
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2014 2:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| goat wrote: |
| All the Catholic Priests who have molested young boys have been gay. |
They've all been catholic too. I tend to think their catholicism (specifically, enforced celibacy,) is what messed them up, not the fact that some of them may have been gay. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Cosmic Hum
Joined: 09 May 2003
Location: Sonic Space
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2014 3:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sister Ray wrote: |
| goat wrote: |
| All the Catholic Priests who have molested young boys have been gay. |
They've all been catholic too. I tend to think their catholicism (specifically, enforced celibacy,) is what messed them up, not the fact that some of them may have been gay. |
Or...perhaps...the fact that they may have been gay, messed up, and Catholic is what led them to becoming Priests....hmm...or led them to be cumming Priests.
It isn't fair to compare the male homosexual community to Catholic Priests.
It is this very type of thinking that has led to EFL teachers in Korea having to jump through hoops at immigration. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wanderkind
Joined: 01 Jan 2012
Location: Japan
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2014 4:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Cosmic Hum wrote: |
| Or...perhaps...the fact that they may have been gay, messed up, and Catholic is what led them to becoming Priests....hmm...or led them to be cumming Priests. |
lol, god dammit...
We're getting way off track here, and I'm pretty sure goat was just trolling anyway. REIN IT IN! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jazzmaster
Joined: 30 Sep 2013
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2014 5:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| goat wrote: |
| All the Catholic Priests who have molested young boys have been gay. Would you employee a gay Catholic Priest to work at your academy? |
Their sexual preference wasn't the problem, the problem was their repressed sexuality. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RangerMcGreggor
Joined: 12 Jan 2011
Location: Somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2014 6:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| goat wrote: |
| All the Catholic Priests who have molested young boys have been gay. Would you employee a gay Catholic Priest to work at your academy? |
Pedophilia =/= Homosexuality.
Pedophilia is based on attraction to prepubescent features and is outside the normal sexual attraction axis. You can be a heterosexual male and still molest gay boys. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
goat
Joined: 23 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2014 8:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Captain Corea wrote: |
| goat wrote: |
| All the Catholic Priests who have molested young boys have been gay. Would you employee a gay Catholic Priest to work at your academy? |
VERY odd for you to tie homosexuality and molestation together.
|
There aren't that many headlines about Straight Nuns molesting girls. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
