transabled.org

 

• About
• Login
• Register
• Contact
• Accessibility

Google Search:
Web transabled.org Go

 

Home / Thoughts / BIID Sufferer? Language and concepts subtleties

BIID Sufferer? Language and concepts subtleties

Written by Sean on Thursday, March 20, 2008

I’ve been using the term "BIID Sufferer" on and off. It’s not an expression I particularly like. It seems… Somewhat negative, and as a friend says "ableist". It does not exactly describe me. Yet it uses a concept that most people can relate to and understand. So I continue to use it, despite it not describing the subtle difference in how I really feel about it. And that made me think of other subtleties of language.

Ronald said:

I do not consider myself to “suffer” from or with BIID. I am fine with it, I accept it, I live with it.

I also am fine with BIID. I do not feel shame, nor guilt at having BIID, even though I used to. I don’t have a problem with BIID itself. I have accepted I have BIID a long time ago. I do not deny I have BIID. So I guess that means I am not a "BIID sufferer".

But I do have BIID. And I do suffer.

My pain is due to the fact that I cannot become paraplegic. For a multitude of reasons I won’t discuss in this blog entry, it is not possible for me to acquire the paralysis I need. And that inability is what provides me with endless "provisions" of emotional anguish. Yes, I do suffer. So, I don’t suffer from BIID. I suffer from the fact that my BIID makes me require something that is not within reach.

There is a significant, albeit subtle difference there. And for most people first becoming acquainted with BIID, the difference is too subtle to be seen. They won’t grasp it. In a way, it’s very close to the social model of disability - the impairment is not the problem, barriers thrown in the way by society are the problem. And so I continue to use "BIID Sufferer" because in the discourse most people grasp that. Depending on my audience, I speak differently.

Another example of subtle differences, subtle concepts is my use of "transability" as opposed to my use of "Body Integrity Identity Disorder". At its very basis, one could use each term interchangeably. And I use both, a lot. Again, depending on the audience, I’ll select one over the other. "Body Integrity Identity Disorder" is a more formal term, it carries the weight of "medical acknolwedgement". It also pathologises our condition. In effect, it says "mental illness", and if not mental illness, an illness nonetheless. But it is a term that imparts concepts such as "it’s a real condition". As such, I continue to use it in discourse where people aren’t aware of the condition, or need some coaxing into accepting I have a "real thing", over which I actually don’t have control.

But I much prefer the term transabled, or transability. That seems to de-dramatise the condition. It makes it more human. It doesn’t imply such medical connotations. It describes the same thing as BIID does, but in a different light.

I don’t believe in political correctness for the same of it. But I do believe in the power of language, and how using different words can impart different understandings in people. I’ll use the expression which I think best fits the occasion and the audience. I don’t always get it right, obviously.

So, you may disagree when I say "BIID sufferer", or you may identify more to with the word "transabled" rather than "Body Integrity Identity Disoder". But you should be able to see the difference, and the nuances. It’s about the message. And before someone can see the subtleties of the concepts, they must understand the general concepts at hand.

And now you know why I use one over the other.

Tags: BIID, Paraplegic, Body Integrity Identity Disorder, Transabled, Mental Illness, Language