#plain language

Is it just me or some of the words we use to describe capitalism is annoying and confusing? Like what is the point of the term fascism? Fascism is just a scarier form of capitalism. It's similar to other terms and descriptions.

What is the point of terms like vanguardism, state socialism, social democracy, and democratic socialism? The last two just don't make any fucking sense. It's just capitalism with extra steps. It uses characteristics of capitalism and socialism, but in a way that contains capitalism. Contained capitalism while fascism is the latter, uncontained. And wouldn't state socialism be essentially social democracy without the democracy part since it's a welfare state as well?

And vanguardism is taking control of a country and governing under the guise to help the people to get to communism (historically that is what the USSR/Soviet Union has and was also state capitalist as other countries that were influenced by them, though they approach it differently and got there differently).

But this can be also applied to other concepts. There is no need for some of these words. I think it's a way to make communication harder than it needs to be and makes it less accessible. There is nothing wrong with education or learning, but why do we have these words and why don't you explain? Not everyone knows what limerence or technocracy is. Hell, I didn't even know (and this is coming from someone who learns and likes learning).

Dave Hingsburger: "Plain can be Beautiful," Of Battered Aspect. 15 January, 2015.

Confession: I grew up with the story of how, as a toddler, I was almost misdiagnosed as Intellectually Disabled* because of my cerebral palsy, and how that almost condemned me to a life in an institution.

I was therefore bigoted against the intellectually disabled for much of my life (though if you asked me at the time, I would have denied it), because in the back of my mind, accepting those people into my cohort felt like a threat.

academic language is inaccessible to so many people! it’s really fucked up, especially when it’s disability theory. i write academically sometimes but theory should be for all of us, whether it’s articles or posts. i need to get better about adding accessible summaries or reblogs.

there are some articles, especially in journals about intellectual disabilities & learning difficulties, that have plain language summaries throughout the article. i think all journals need to require this.

the british journal of learning disabilities does this. i highly recommend the article ‘May we please have sex tonight?’ – people with learning difficulties pursuing privacy in residential group settings by Andrea Hollomotz. (one of my friends is doing a PhD under her!)

the essay Sixty Years in the Institution by Thomas F. Allen is written by an intellectually disabled man and is in plain language. i’m not sure if the rest of the book is accessible or not. this piece has content warnings for abuse during involuntary institutionalization.

i have a pdf of both of those, you can message me if you have trouble finding them!

i would also love to make more information accessible if i can help. i’m not an expert at plain language and need to get better at it. but if there are particular articles you want me to summarize, feel free to send them to me! i’m also happy to summarize articles i’ve read about topics you or other people are interested in.

i wrote a slightly more accessible summary of cyborg theory in disability studies here (link). it is not in plain language but it is not very academic.

Unless I make it clear that I don't like something and that a post is negative, you can always assume that my posts are neutral to positive. I mean what I say unless stated otherwise. I'll make it clear when I'm sarcastic or joking. Tone tags like /nf (no force), etc. confuse me because usually it wouldn't even have occurred to me that someone could have felt forced by it. I take things literally and mean things literally. If I don't, I'll make that clear ☝🏼

FAQ:

Frequently Asked Questions (medical and personal)

I don't understand AAC users, please help

Autism levels, support needs, severity, and terminology:

What's the difference between nonverbal and nonspeaking?

"Master-master post" about autism and terminology

Archive:

Words for when you suddenly can't speak anymore (based on suggestions; list is closed now)

What is receptive language disorder?

Why people still talk about "severity" in autism (double link)

Nonverbal/nonspeaking masterpost

Communication with autistics who are nonverbal "from birth"

Functional communication doesn't mean that you are able to self advocate

Support Needs and Support Levels masterpost

What trying to reclaim the R slur when you don't have ID implies (the reblog)

The disability stall discourse

I use "severe" as a self-descriptor because that's what I was diagnosed with and therefore that's what people always refer to me as. I use it to indicate that my symptoms are different from most autistics on Tumblr and that I probably can't relate to most "extremely relatable autism posts" on here. I would never(!) force a label on someone, it's solely for myself.

You'll find my tag system and other things under the cut:

PLAIN LANGUAGE: THE BRIDGE BETWEEN LAWYERS AND NON-LEGAL PROFESSIONALS

DISCLAIMER: THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE IN ANY SHAPE OR FORM AND SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN AS SUCH.

The disconnect between legal professionals and non-legal professionals seem more distant now than ever. There’s clauses for clauses, words the average person would never understand, and a bunch of mumbo jumbo in between you may think to yourself, “screw it I’ll sign this let’s just get this over already”.

However thinking back to Kanye’s tirade earlier this year about deceptive business practices in music contracts and even recently with Dave Chappelle’s situation with not wanting the Chappelle Show to be streamed anywhere(due to his lack of just compensation), maybe its just time to write contracts how we are actually speaking.

https://www.instagram.com/tv/CH-rR9znT3g/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link ( Dave Chappelle’s Unforgiven)

Thinking back to my drafting class in law school, our biggest assignment was to correct a lengthy contract and make it as plain/simple as possible. Let me be the first to tell you that was a real chore to do. If I had to see another “hereforth” “thereafter” or some other term we never say I was going to lose my wig. If I was feeling that as law student, with SOME understanding of the law, imagine a young guy/gal with NO LAWYER (or a very sleazy one) feel like.

Plain Language can operate as the much needed bridge between the legal world and those who operate outside of it. Legal Professionals think with a whole different brain than other people, some of the words I use with my non-legal friends, I know they say, “Harry what the heck are you talking about”. So Imagine an experienced Lawyer using their full arsenal of vocabulary in contract negotiations, it makes my head just thinking about it.

Even in my business practices, plain language has been at the core of my contracts, its as simple as “abc” and “xyz”. The question remains is why aren’t contracts reflecting plain language more often? Do Lawyers want to prove their extreme intelligence? Is it to hide deceptive practices in plain sight? Or is it a “this is how we’ve always done it” thing, so no one has the courage to break free from it?

Whatever the reason is, plain language need to be adapted, so each party can know exactly what is required from them in the deal and for absolute fairness to be ensured!

Visit gettothecorner.com