Nancy Mairs On Being A Cripple Analysis
Author, Nancy Mairs, in her essay, “On Being A Cripple”, clarifies why she decided to replace the common and too vague words made for disabled people with “cripple”. Mairs purpose is to make sure the readers know and understand in great detail why the word cripple describes herself and her disability better than any other word. She uses a confident tone in order to ensure that the readers alike and unalike herself know that she is ok with being a crippled.
Mairs begins her text with the strong clarification of what she is. She uses her feelings toward the normal words for someone with a disability to claim why she wants to call herself a “cripple” instead one of the several words meant for the disabled. She states, “I am a cripple.” (1) “I …show more content…
She stated, “Some realties do not obey the dictates of the language.” (34-35) “Mine is one of them. Whatever you call me, so long as it isn’t “differently abled” which strikes me as pure verbal garbage designed, by its ability to describe anyone, to describe no one.” (36-41) Although the definitions are meant to describe/explain exactly what it is and who it is supposed to apply to it doesn’t always work like that. “Differently abled” can describe anyone from a person with a learning disability to a person who is completely mentally or physically disabled. She then went on to say, “Call me “disabled or “handicapped” if you like. I have long since grown accustomed to them.” (48-50) “I use them myself. Society is no readier to accept crippledness than to accept death, war, sex, sweat, or wrinkles. I would never refer to another person as a cripple. It is the word I use to name only myself.” (51-55) Mairs is saying that its ok to call her whatever you’re comfortable with if calling handicapped or disabled makes you feel more comfortable than calling her a cripple then so be it. The world is not prepared to accept reality and call it what it is. She’s ok with it and for now that’s ok because eventually they will accept
Mairs begins her text with the strong clarification of what she is. She uses her feelings toward the normal words for someone with a disability to claim why she wants to call herself a “cripple” instead one of the several words meant for the disabled. She states, “I am a cripple.” (1) “I …show more content…
She stated, “Some realties do not obey the dictates of the language.” (34-35) “Mine is one of them. Whatever you call me, so long as it isn’t “differently abled” which strikes me as pure verbal garbage designed, by its ability to describe anyone, to describe no one.” (36-41) Although the definitions are meant to describe/explain exactly what it is and who it is supposed to apply to it doesn’t always work like that. “Differently abled” can describe anyone from a person with a learning disability to a person who is completely mentally or physically disabled. She then went on to say, “Call me “disabled or “handicapped” if you like. I have long since grown accustomed to them.” (48-50) “I use them myself. Society is no readier to accept crippledness than to accept death, war, sex, sweat, or wrinkles. I would never refer to another person as a cripple. It is the word I use to name only myself.” (51-55) Mairs is saying that its ok to call her whatever you’re comfortable with if calling handicapped or disabled makes you feel more comfortable than calling her a cripple then so be it. The world is not prepared to accept reality and call it what it is. She’s ok with it and for now that’s ok because eventually they will accept