Hello Avinash, way way off the mark is the editorial, according to me. the first part where the linguistic aspect is dealt with smacks of condescention which it has sought to avoid. yes, he might have donned the cloak of a statesman but of a patronising one, not one seeking to empower a marginalised section of society.
sincerely, Anirban Mukherjee On 12/29/15, avinash shahi <shahi88avin...@gmail.com> wrote: > Any reaction to this editorial on 'divyang' and 'man ki bat published today? > http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/editorials/ramping-up-2/ > > In his last Mann Ki Baat for 2015, Prime Minister Narendra Modi donned > the cap of concerned statesman. Among other things, the prime minister > spoke of how even though the word “viklang (disabled)” suggests > notions of incapacity, persons with disabilities, in fact, have “extra > power”. And so, he suggested “divyang (person with a divine limb)” > should be used instead. This public focus on the treatment of persons > with disabilities is welcome — and unfortunately rare. This is no > politically correct quibbling over words — after all, the politics of > language is powerful and resonates deeply. But well-meaning as the > PM’s intervention was, it may have roamed over well-trodden territory > — an old and largely settled debate. The phrase “differently abled” > was first proposed as an alternative to “disabled” in the 1980s but it > was rejected as it was seen as euphemistic and condescending. > > But the PM didn’t stop there. He rightly acknowledged the > infrastructure deficit, both physical and otherwise, that prevents the > disabled from accessing opportunities in education, employment and > leisure, or participating in public life, and which his government > seeks to address through the Accessible India programme. Take physical > accessibility, for instance: Even the most prestigious postcodes of > the national capital come up short on mobility audits — where there > are pavements, there are frequently bollards and trees blocking them, > or precipitous gradients difficult to negotiate. > > The 100 million-odd disabled persons in India arguably constitute one > of the most disadvantaged groups — a majority are illiterate and only > 25 per cent are employed. The UPA had introduced the Rights of Persons > with Disabilities Bill in the Rajya Sabha in 2014. The government > should dust it off and pass the bill, which views disability through > the lens of rights and entitlements, not charity and goodwill. > > -- > Avinash Shahi > Doctoral student at Centre for Law and Governance JNU > > > > Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility of > mobile phones / Tabs on: > http://mail.accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/mobile.accessindia_accessindia.org.in > > > Search for old postings at: > http://www.mail-archive.com/accessindia@accessindia.org.in/ > > To unsubscribe send a message to > accessindia-requ...@accessindia.org.in > with the subject unsubscribe. > > To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please > visit the list home page at > http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in > > > Disclaimer: > 1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of the > person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its veracity; > > 2. AI cannot be held liable for any commission/omission based on the mails > sent through this mailing list.. > Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility of mobile phones / Tabs on: http://mail.accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/mobile.accessindia_accessindia.org.in Search for old postings at: http://www.mail-archive.com/accessindia@accessindia.org.in/ To unsubscribe send a message to accessindia-requ...@accessindia.org.in with the subject unsubscribe. To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please visit the list home page at http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in Disclaimer: 1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of the person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its veracity; 2. AI cannot be held liable for any commission/omission based on the mails sent through this mailing list..
