From: "Marian Petrides" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Ummm... there's the literal definition of schizophrenic (see #1 below) and then there is the broader use of the term (see #2).
"Ummm" nothing. The dictionary merely contributes to the abuse of the word. Imagine if you suffered from a disease that ruined your life and had a suicide mortality rate (in some countries) near 50% (give or take which study you read). How would you feel when the your diagnosis is used for argumentative terms that misuse the term and contribute to a clinical xenophobia? People don't care about this stuff until it happens to *them* or a loved one.
Now can we change the topic. Please.
Well - he should have been more careful in how he abused his vocab and no I will not let it just drop because until people *get it* (as a society) people suffering from this disease (and others like it) will continue to be treated as "retarded" (when their IQ is generally higher than "normal people") and discriminated against in all aspects of their life to the extent where wonderful treatments like "ECT" can be exorcised by any quack who desires to do so and their "rights" under common law are removed without basis of need - just because people are ignorant and scared within that ignorance and turn a blind eye.
The English language is rich - we don't use racist terms generally in environments like this (which can also be referenced as "legitimate" depending on the dictionairy definition one chooses to use) so why do it to any other marginalized community?
Scott Kane
_______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [email protected] Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
