When we think of someone railing against the use of language that
spares discomfort to others, people like Rush Limbaugh and of course
that guy (whatshisname) who is leading the polls for the Republican
Presidential nomination comes to mind. I mean what could be wrong with
getting rid of the term "mental retardation" that is hurtful, and
replacing it with "developmental disability?"
I had been a volunteer at our local zoo, a pretty famous one, where I
would get great pleasure out of interacting with the people who came
from far and wide, often with children or older relatives in tow. It's
confusing place, so I relished the sense of relief when they saw me in
my official red shirt and felt help was at hand, that maybe they could
find their way to that exhibit they had traveled so far to see. I'm a
pretty outgoing guy, and people often respond in kind, and before long
there is often a conversation going.
Recently, a woman came over to tell me someone in their party was
lost. I had to ascertain first whether it was a child, or if not,
whether the person had unusual issues that required my radioing security
for an immediate search. When I asked these questions, the woman was
uncomfortable, saying "well, it's a difficult situation." After
pressing her, she said, "She does have problems, but we never talk about
them."
A few months before a mother came up to me saying her child was lost.
This is always an emergency, since it could be possible that it is an
abduction, so those at the exit need an identification to prevent such
an exit. But I was stumped. The mother and the father were of mixed
race, and since clothing could be changed I was about to ask the child's
race, color of skin, but I hesitated.
While this sounds rare, there are times when precision, whether of a
medical condition or of identity, is needed. In both of these cases at
the zoo the "crisis" was over quickly before I had to ask further
questions, as both lost persons showed up. In the case of the lost
adult, I understand why the friend had difficulty with a description.
The lost, now found, woman did have a confused demeanor, now middle
aged, I can only guess what her DSM diagnosis would be, but she was not
fully functioning. It was great that she was part of a group, maybe a
family, maybe something else, and everyone was happy she was back with
them.
Yet we need language that is precise, and sometimes have to ask
specific questions about mobility, health and other issues to determine
what kind of assistance is needed, and this risks possibly offending
someone. My pleasure in this gig, was that quite the opposite occurs,
that people appreciate my concern and there is a connection. But, the
fear of offending pervades the complex. We are constantly warned never
to have a personal conversation with anyone, as management can't be sure
whether there will be emotional harm.
Now a change of scene, from zoos to recreational tennis at public
courts, and a conversation today with Jim. Unlike the zoo, at these
games there is no one telling anyone what, or what not, to say to anyone
else. It's a diverse group of men and women, with a range of ages of
over 60 years, I often being the oldest of the twenty or more players on
a Tuesday morning. We play doubles, with the winners moving up and the
losers down the five courts. We sometimes talk politics during the
changeover break, but with care and never too seriously. Everyone knows
I'm always ready to hang around afterwards to continue an interesting
discussion.
Most of us enjoy winning, but there even more pleasure in a
stimulating competitive game with each player raising the others level.
And does Jim ever love to win!. He hustles to make shots like someone
in college not on Social Security. Yet, he is never even a bit miffed
at his partner when he/she misses a set up; but he will go after that
return with his face lighting up when he hits that ball down the line for a winner.
Just today, when time was called and he said, "we won" he caught
himself, saying, "I know I should never say that, as we are all winners,
and nobody loses." I was taken aback, and asked if he was serious. He
was, and then he described his career as a physical education teacher
before he retired not that long ago, and that the message was out that
instructors should never accentuate winning a tennis game, as that could
hurt the loser's feelings.
Now I have to try to get Jim's nature right for the reader. Jim has
never hurt anyone's feelings in the several years we have played
together. In fact, he energizes us, his vitality and drive inspiring
me to play better and focus on making that point.
And being fully in the moment is a rare joy, a relief
that although I often get playing these Tuesday games is at its best
with Jim, whether playing with him or against him.
So, I couldn't imagine anyone telling him not to share his
enthusiasm, his pleasure of winning a set, as I've never seen Jim cause
anyone discomfort. But, he explained this was the reality, that the
message had gone out when he was teaching, that no one was to be a
loser. What I had thought was a joke, "you came in first runner up,
rather than you lost," was no joke at all. No more of a joke than the
head of zoo volunteers telling me, and everyone else, never to have a
private conversation when interacting with the visitors. Oh, and with
the zoo, it wasn't only the chance of insulting them, but of
"harassment" --- better safe than sorry.
When the world watches in amazement as whatshisname continues to lead
the pack even while he is an obnoxious simplistic blow-hard,
there must be be something he is promising. Those volunteers in the
zoo, those teachers of phys. ed, and how many others who are told that
their conversations, unless vetted by authorities, could harm their
organization are living a diminished life, being denied the very human
(actually primate) pleasure of social interaction.
