Person-first feelings?

[conuly]

I just saw a comment by somebody where they said "I have a lot of bitterness and anger over this", instead of the more straightforward "I still am bitter and angry".

One of the goals of The Infamous Person-First Language is to deliberately separate the disability from the person. The person comes first. The person is separate from the disability.

Which works for some things, but not for others. I certainly wouldn't be me if my brain weren't the way it is. And, arguably, nobody who is disabled would be the same person without that disability - the experiences of our lives shape who we are.

The more obvious result of person-first language is, of course, to verbally make the disabled person even *more* different and stigmatized - we don't, after all, separate positive qualities in this way. I'm not a person with intelligence, or femaleness or even heterosexuality.

And the same goes for emotions. I've seen this usage before. And nobody would ever say "I have a lot of happiness about this". I don't think they'd even say "I have a lot of sadness". But anger, fear, these are bad emotions. So they get the special treatment?

It doesn't seem fair, and it doesn't seem right. I don't distance myself from my good emotions, the ones that are socially acceptable to feel. If I'm happy (and I know it!), I'm happy. If I'm sad, I'm sad. And if I'm angry, that anger is a part of me while I feel it - it's not something I can take away like a bit of luggage. I don't have anger, I am angry. And if I am, there's probably a good reason for it.

Moreover, why does anger get to be a bad one? "It's not good to be angry". Even I believe that, to an extent - but that's not true. It's fine to be angry, if the anger is deserved. It's great if your anger causes you to do something productive. Anger caused the civil rights movement. Anger isn't bad if we deal with it properly, use it to send us to fix the problem.

But I'm not sure you can do that if you treat it like something scary you should avoid. Something you have rather than something that's in you when you feel it.

Of course, it's also entirely possible that it's 1:41 in the morning and I am reading waaaaaay too much into this.

Comments

[gingembre.livejournal.com]

Of course, it's also entirely possible that it's 1:41 in the morning and I am reading waaaaaay too much into this.

I am thinking maybe yes...

I will say, I only find anger useful in short bursts - otherwise it becomes very draining. I don't find *being* angry useful. I find examining the *cause* of my anger and working to *address* it useful. Big difference indeed there. Anger itself I do not like to experience muchly.

[wakasplat.livejournal.com]

This article (http://www.feminist-reprise.myeweb.net/docs/cardea.htm) addresses this in a good deal of depth. It's one of the ones I'm quoting from in the Really Long Post I haven't written yet. The political ideas might not be ones you'd agree with (unless you're secretly a lesbian-feminist), but the principle of the destructiveness of this stuff is the same regardless.

[brownkitty.livejournal.com]

I can see wanting to separate yourself from some emotions so that you can deal with an underlying situation. It's not a tactic I use often, but it is one I can understand.

[sparkofcreation.livejournal.com]

I don't think it's as much a "distancing oneself" thing as a more accurate description in some cases:

1. To me, "I have anger" or "I am full of joy" [had to throw in a positive one there!] or whatever probably mean the emotion is stronger; in any case, they mean that I feel the anger or joy as a physical welling-up-inside-of-me.

2. To me, "I am angry over this" means that I am angry, and it is for X reason. "I have anger over this" means that I am not generally angry nor am I necessarily angry right now; however, this particular thing makes me angry if I think about it too much. For example, I have anger over the war in Iraq and the adminstration's widespread incompetence (to put it mildly). When I read about some new horror they've committed, then I am angry. But right now I am not angry about the administration, I am angry about my coworker being a doink. But I still have anger over Bush&Co.

[ladyshrew.livejournal.com]

Well, I'm not really a good measure for this, because I enjoy using language in weird ways just for kicks. But I would say "I have happiness" just to be cute or something. We also say, "I get lots of joy from doing this," which is separation, but then I suppose the sentiment is that something else is causing your joy anyway.

But people also do say things like, "S/he has great intellect." I guess you hear that one more in the third person than the first though. Or even "You've got a good head on your shoulders" is said frequently too.

[gingembre.livejournal.com]

Of course, it's also entirely possible that it's 1:41 in the morning and I am reading waaaaaay too much into this.

I am thinking maybe yes...

I will say, I only find anger useful in short bursts - otherwise it becomes very draining. I don't find *being* angry useful. I find examining the *cause* of my anger and working to *address* it useful. Big difference indeed there. Anger itself I do not like to experience muchly.

[wakasplat.livejournal.com]

This article (http://www.feminist-reprise.myeweb.net/docs/cardea.htm) addresses this in a good deal of depth. It's one of the ones I'm quoting from in the Really Long Post I haven't written yet. The political ideas might not be ones you'd agree with (unless you're secretly a lesbian-feminist), but the principle of the destructiveness of this stuff is the same regardless.

[brownkitty.livejournal.com]

I can see wanting to separate yourself from some emotions so that you can deal with an underlying situation. It's not a tactic I use often, but it is one I can understand.

[sparkofcreation.livejournal.com]

I don't think it's as much a "distancing oneself" thing as a more accurate description in some cases:

1. To me, "I have anger" or "I am full of joy" [had to throw in a positive one there!] or whatever probably mean the emotion is stronger; in any case, they mean that I feel the anger or joy as a physical welling-up-inside-of-me.

2. To me, "I am angry over this" means that I am angry, and it is for X reason. "I have anger over this" means that I am not generally angry nor am I necessarily angry right now; however, this particular thing makes me angry if I think about it too much. For example, I have anger over the war in Iraq and the adminstration's widespread incompetence (to put it mildly). When I read about some new horror they've committed, then I am angry. But right now I am not angry about the administration, I am angry about my coworker being a doink. But I still have anger over Bush&Co.

[ladyshrew.livejournal.com]

Well, I'm not really a good measure for this, because I enjoy using language in weird ways just for kicks. But I would say "I have happiness" just to be cute or something. We also say, "I get lots of joy from doing this," which is separation, but then I suppose the sentiment is that something else is causing your joy anyway.

But people also do say things like, "S/he has great intellect." I guess you hear that one more in the third person than the first though. Or even "You've got a good head on your shoulders" is said frequently too.