"The Language of Advocacy"
By Harold A. Maio

Within every language is a Grammar of Common Prejudice that directs people's behaviors, establishes hierarchies, defines who has and does not have import in a society and to what degree. The only way to overcome that grammar is to recognize it, be aware of it, and decline to accept it. And above all, decline to repeat it.

Advocacy is employing language to a purpose. As a member of the disability community struggling to achieve equality in a society that promises equal rights to all, I have learned to look at language above all else.

"Disability" is itself an interesting term, and it's meaning has changed over time. As politics change, so does the definition of ability and disability. I am a Floridian. As an advocate for equal rights, I followed closely the actions of Florida's Constitutional Revision Committee, recognizing that "ability" is granted, or denied, in the constitution of a society. In 1997 Florida's Constitution was revised to recognize the empowerment, the "ability" of women. Basic Rights were granted to persons, "female and male" for the first time in Florida's history, but, the very same group insisted on retaining another noxious division that had been added to Florida's Constitution in 1967, an addition that granted rights to people with "physical" disabilities.

The committee, composed entirely of lawyers, one a Florida Supreme Court Justice another a University of Florida law school professor, insisted unanimously on dividing the disability community. None of the members objected. Not the women who had fought for grammatical inclusion they had long sought- they could not see the discrimination. Nor could the lawyer who proposed that the division be maintained, the same division that had enforced his "disability" for so long.

When Florida's first Constitution was written, rights were granted to "freemen", and to "freemen" only. After the Civil War, Florida amended its constitution to include "men", but the prevailing Grammars of Prejudice prevented any "freed" man from exercising rights. The word "men" was not replaced until 1967 with the term "human persons", tacitly including women. At that same time, people with "physical" disabilities were added as deserving of rights. The grammatical division may not have been intended, the person proposing the language had direct connection to physical disability and had witnessed the discrimination he wanted to end.

That was not so in 1997. The committee had asked for the services of a disability law professor from Florida State University and she had edited the word "physical" from the revision. Discussion ensued. Both tapes and a transcript are available from the Secretary of the Senate for that December 10th meeting- at which the lone African American member of the committee moved that the word "physical", the division "physical", be re -imposed.

What women had personally overcome, each now voted to impose upon another group. What African Americans in Florida had overcome, one now moved be imposed upon another group. The motion passed unanimously.

The disability community, with the exception of Justin Dart, did not respond, did not unite and oppose the discrimination, raised no voice against the division, most were not even aware of the power of that simple adjective. No paid advocacy raised its voice. No organization representing disabilities raised its voice, though one federal agency murmured quietly in the background. Florida's governor declined to react, as did each of his cabinet members. Agencies of Florida's government representing people with disabilities remained totally silent, and the media declined involvement, putting all their emphasis on the more attractive issue of including women. Disability issues are not attractive.

In 2007, Florida's Constitution will again be up for revision. Perhaps by then we will unite. One adjective disabled half a community, as in earlier constitutions. And no one noticed.