Hacker News Reader

Comment by dahfizz | Hacker News Reader

> Instead of 'handicap parking', use 'accessible parking'

This is just insane. What is wrong with 'handicap parking'? 'Accessible parking' is objectively less descriptive. Its only accessible for the handicapped!

This is the perfect example of the euphemism treadmill. We started with terms like 'invalid' and 'cripple'. But over time, these labels are perceived negatively. So we move to 'handicap'. And now 'handicap' is offensive, so we come up with a new label. As if agonizing over what to label handicapped people makes their condition any better.

View on HN

It is hilariously backwards.

The most common cases of accessibility refer to accommodations made for deaf and blind people within day-2-day interfaces. Guess which 2 have no need for accessible parking ? -> Deaf and blind people.

We should start harvesting George Carlin's grave. It could power the entire world with how fast he's turning in it.

As opposed to inaccessible parking it is very clear: you can reach it. The fact that a handicapped person cannot reach it seems irrelevant.

Totally bonkers.

The issue here is that a lot of people who need a spot close to the door are not "handicapped." The obvious example would be someone gimping around in an ankle cast. You wouldn't, they wouldn't, and their doctors would not say they are "handicapped." They don't have "handicap" concerns, but they certainly have "accessibility" concerns.

Sure, I can see how in certain circumstances, the word "handicapped" is not the optimal descriptor. I still think "accessibility" is bad, but maybe "disability parking" covers your scenario better.

This is the nature of language. Any one word or image you use to represent something necessarily loses some nuance.

Not everyone who needs a handicapped spot is in a wheelchair, but the wheelchair symbol is a clear, obvious way to communicate that a spot is for handicapped people.

You're not supposed to bring all your brothers and sisters into the "family" restroom with you. Most people can look beyond the literal words on a sign and comprehend the meaning that is being conveyed.

The article is not about tweaking language to be more precise, its about banning _harmful_ language. The assertion that using the phrase "handicapped parking" is _harmful_ is absurd.

> I still think "accessibility" is bad, but maybe "disability parking" covers your scenario better.

It doesn't. A guy in an ankle cast with a fracture is neither "handicapped" nor "disabled." However, he does have a problem involving "access," hence the usefulness of a term like "accessibility."

> The article is not about tweaking language to be more precise, its about banning _harmful_ language.

Right, but your understandable reaction to that agenda is, in my view, blinding you to the fact that they accidentally snuck in a good recommendation and "accessible" is actually an improvement. Unlike the authors of the Stanford list I'm not going to castigate you for your disagreement, but I really think 'Accessible parking' is objectively less descriptive. is simply untrue.

I disagree strongly. It's entirely possible to be temporarily handicapped as the result of some kind of injury. There's a reason you can get temporary handicap parking permits.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com