Well, it was just a hopeless jest. Mind you, this troubled me:
Guide towards an acceptable outcome? Who chooses the acceptable outcome, and how do you define “them”?
Hmmm-interesting take on my post. Yes, I spend hours every day, plotting my next insult for the handicapped community. Doesn’t everyone?
Deaf people playing charades is funny–mildly amusing (and probably not much fun for them–more like our 20 questions, no?).
Let me spell it out–or should I “dumb it down”? Hee… (I am tempted to do charades, but the medium is against me).
Charades is a game where you must communicate without using your voice, so essentially the demonstrator is dumb, and the audience is deaf (at least for the duration of the game). There’s an inherent irony here that is hard to miss and amuses me.
It would be like blind people needing/using a blindfold for blindman’s bluff–another party game destined for the outrage bin due to the oversensitive “differently abled”. Soon there will be no more hands in poker and the world will not play football, but weirdly patterned black and white ball (oops! no colors allowed) in order spare the feelings of those w/o opposable thumbs or pedestrian motion*.
FTR, I think the phrase “deaf and dumb language” ridiculous. I am defending the use of the phrase “deaf and dumb”. It’s obvious what was intended was sign language–not let’s diss the auditorily challenged or whatever the current phrase is. Awkwardly done–one might say lame, but let’s not go THERE.
Re deaf, dumb and blind. There is that one and then there is “the lame, the halt and the blind”. I think these are pithy descriptors of difficulties some people have to overcome–others see them as pejorative. YMMV.
- this is known as hyperbole–exaggeration to make a humorous point.
Wow. Talk about not taking my question in the spirit in which is was meant. I asked you to explain some inside joke I didn’t get, and you dream up a conspiracy theory.
Okay. I now see our disconnect. I’ve spent enough time with deaf people (and I’m bad enough at sign language), that I’ve basically had to play charades with them just to communicate. I saw nothing ironic or amusing about it. It’s just how we got our points across.
If I was at a party with a deaf friend and someone suggested charades, I’d say, “cool - I want him on my team” (because we’d do well). It wouldn’t be funny.
If it seems funny to you, okay. That’s fine. I think yellow-bellied marmots are funny. You think deaf people playing charades is funny. I guess we can move on now.
No “conspiracy theory” (are you high?)–it’s called sarcasm. I did explain the simple irony present but it still eludes you. Ah, well.
Maybe sarcasm doesn’t translate well in charades… I think the NOTION of deaf people playing charades is funny. I don’t consider sign language on par with charades. Sign language=vital method of communication; charades=silly parlor game. If I were to actually witness deaf people playing charades… I’d turn a blind eye to the whole thing. 
or do I want this one: 
LIGHTEN UP, FRANCIS! 
Ohhhh, I get it.
I just meant that, rather than asking the game company what they are going to do about it, she might get better results if she made some suggestions about what she thinks they should do. She is an expert on deaf issues. They are not. Their expertise lies in selling games. (That’s who the ‘them’ was in my post.)
To put it more simply…I can demand to know what my husband will do about the stack of computer stuff in the corner of the room. Or I could say, “You know, I feel like that stuff is really in the way there. Have you thought about using the closet space above the washer and dryer to store it?” If he says that he doesn’t want to do that, at least we are still engaging in conversation about it. More so than if I had just said, “I don’t like the computer stuff there. You need to do something about it.”
I have to admit, I didn’t know “deaf and dumb” was such a contentious phrase.
To me, on an emotional level, it’s pretty much neutral - a factual term meaning “unable to hear or speak”. Yes, I know “dumb” can also mean “stupid” (in both British and American English), but - to me - it’s obvious from the context that that’s not what’s meant.
Obviously, Francesca disagrees. Well, that’s language for you.
So, OK, consider my ignorance fought on this issue; clearly, there are people who find the phrase “deaf and dumb” offensive, so, out of courtesy to them, I’m prepared to avoid using it. (Not that I have much occasion to use it anyway - I agree with ZSofia and others, “deaf and dumb language” is [to me] a peculiar and clumsy way to describe sign language.)
But … might I suggest, for those inclined to be offended by this (or any other) turn of phrase … would it not be a good idea to step back, take a deep breath or two, and consider whether offense was actually meant?
That’s what settles it for me. If I said that someone was “dumb” then it could be honestly thought that I was saying that they were stupid due to the dual meanings of the word.
If I said that someone was “deaf and dumb” then I can’t imagine a reasonable person thinking I was using that term to mean that they were both deaf AND stupid. The term “deaf and dumb” is almost a term on its own.
Whatever happened to “deaf mute”? That is the term I grew up with that described a person who could neither hear nor speak.
One of the earlier links has earnestly explained that “mute” is inaccurate and offensive too. “Mute” implies unable to make sounds, and this is untrue of most deaf people, whose voice is in perfect working order; it is just that they cannot properly modulate it without being able to hear the sounds they make. Answers.com helpfully notes that the term is Often offensive whether as adjective or noun.
So, there is no term that is not offensive to someone somewhere to describe someone who both cannot hear and cannot/will not speak?
How is this helpful to anyone and society in general?
Steve Wright demonstrates a great deal of sense re this matter. Instead of looking for offense, perhaps it would be better for those so afflicted to stop and think that maybe none is intended, especially when there is no other acceptable phrase or descriptor to be had. (this refers only to the phrase “deaf and dumb”–not the game one of deaf and dumb language).
Can’t use “dumb”. Ok. Can’t use “mute” ok. Tongue tied? I don’t see that ending happily. Voiceless? Sounds too political. Inarticulate? Too broad and applies to those with all sensory abilities. Without power of speech? Am I the only one who finds this ridiculously cumbersome? (as well as factually inaccurate for many). What now? “Yo–that guy there, the one who could use his voice, but doesn’t because he can’t hear well enough to do it or something–tell him he plays a mean pinball!” This is a dilemma.
I put the burden on the disabled/handicapped/differently-abled /challenged/ sensory restricted/ auditorily or speech impeded/ whathaveyou to come up with a short, descriptive word or phrase that can be used in polite company–gender neutral, PC, culturally aware (that’s all cultures)–and make it easy to pronounce and spell.
Nonverbal.
QFT
I haven’t heard “deaf and dumb” for years. And “dumb” meaning “stupid” is perfectly well understood here, even though it’s an Americanism.
But in 1986 things were different. I used to live next door to a school for deaf children - and I literally mean next door. Parents of the deaf children at the school used to assume we were the school caretakers, and would knock on our door at all hours to let us know whenever something at the school needed attention, such as a damaged gate or whatever. They virtually always referred to it as “the deaf and dumb school”. And they were the *parents *of deaf kids. This was the 80’s, though. I doubt if that would happen today.
My goodness. You want ME to lighten up? I’m the one that said, “If it seems funny to you, okay. That’s fine. I think yellow-bellied marmots are funny. You think deaf people playing charades is funny. I guess we can move on now.” And you’re the one that said “are you high?”
I moved on. You need to get over it and realize that everybody finds different things funny or ironic. There’s no single “irony meter” we all work from.
<checking forum> Bollocks! (Or please tell me that a whooshing sound over my head… )
So… is “struck dumb” offensive when used to mean temporarily at a loss for words / temporarily unable to speak?
While “deaf mute” may be factually wrong in mean cases what term should be used for those folks who have lost all facility for speech if not mute?
Same as mute. Doesn’t work for all contingencies because some deaf people are indeed verbal, but choose not to er, verbalize. But thanks for the synonym–I had run out.
Yeah, as I was thinking of this in terms of what words I have used in my clinical work. Nonverbal does require additional discussion—do you mean they can’t make ANY sounds? Do you mean that they can’t speak or, as you’ve noted, they can but choose not to. (FWIW, I’ve always used this in the context of individuals with developmental disabilities, not necessarily deaf individuals).
Thing is, I don’t think you’ll ever get a word that covers all contingencies…and the same is true with a lot of descriptors. If I say that someone is poor, it still may warrant additional discussion—are they recently impoverished? Generational? Is it a temporary cash flow issue or do they have more long-standing issues that will need to be resolved. As people, I don’t think we’re always easily explained in simple phrases.
So…how far have I hijacked us here…?
Who is one of the other usual suspects?
/jeopardy
Yes, it was a whoosh, but it was just an example of how language can have meanings that people don’t grasp.
Worse than that, your entire manner of pursuing this inquiry has been unreasonable.
(1) You should not have demanded an apology to the “deaf community” and immediate withdrawal.
(2) You should not have expected an immediate response.
(3) You should not have expected that there would be some kind of “complaint procedure.” As they said, they don’t get many complaints.
It seems you have no understanding regarding how a commercial organization works.
Decent advice. “Don’t bring me problems, bring me solutions", may be a management chestnut, but there is a grain of wisdom there – don’t only bring problems, if possible suggest solutions.
Letting the game company know that one of their cards was likely to cause offence was a good thing Francesca, (as were the cites / references). Asking them to remove the offending term could have been better phrased along the lines of “when you next reprint”, and “replace the phrase ‘deaf and dumb language’ with ‘sign language’”. Requesting an apology for the deaf community was over the top. (IMHO).