Mengikat Makna Diskriminasi: Penyandang Cacat, Difabel, dan Penyandang Disabilitas

Arif Maftuhin
* the State Islamic University of Sunan Kalijaga

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14421/ijds.030201

Abstract


The research is about the ‘struggle’ to name persons with disabilities in Indonesia. As in other countries that find naming as an important tool in the fight for equality, Indonesia witnessed various naming influenced by the way people see disability and persons with disability.  The research is aimed at understanding which naming that is more popular in terms of its usage and how a term is used. The data are gathered from the online use of three words: penyandang cacat, difabel, dan penyandang disabilitas. It seeks to see the poplarity of the words in three different levels: their trends, popular use in the online news media, and their academic use in the journals and books. The method to gather and analyze the data is mostly helped by Google search engine and its rich features. The researh concluded that there has been a dynamic use of the words across the level. ‘Difabel’ is the most popular word in trend; ‘Penyandang Disabilitas’ shared the popularity with ‘Difabel’ among news media; and surprisingly ‘Penyandang Cacat’ is still the most used term among scholars.
[Penelitian ini difokuskan untuk meneliti ‘perebutan makna’ dan penggunaan berbagai istilah terkait dengan difabel. Penelitian bertujuan melihat istilah mana yang paling banyak digunakan dan bagaimana istilah-istilah itu digunakan. Penelitian dilakukan dengan mengumpulkan data-data daring (online) terkait dengan tiga istilah kunci dalam wacana disabilitas di Indonesia: penyandang cacat, difabel, dan penyandang disabilitas. Penelitian dilakukan dengan mengumpulkan data-data online dan menganalisisinya dalam tiga aspek: tren penggunaan istilah; popularitas di dunia berita daring; dan penggunaan di dunia akademik. Penelitian menunjukkan bahwa ada dinamika menarik dalam penggunaan ketiga istilah itu di ketiga wilayah pencarian. Istilah ‘difabel’, meskipun tidak diakui sebagai istilah resmi undang-undang, adalah istilah yang paling populer di tren. Sementara istilah ‘penyandang disabilitas’ mencatatkan skor popularitas yang sedikit lebih tinggi dari ‘difabel’ dalam penggunaan di media daring. Sementara istilah ‘penyandang cacat’ justru masih sangat populer dalam penggunaan akademik.]

Keywords


stigma; disabled; persons with disability; difabel; differently abled; asal-usul istilah; penyandang cacat; difabel; penyandang disabilitas

Full Text:

PDF

References


Bolt, D. (2005). From Blindness to Visual Impairment: Terminological Typology and the Social Model of Disability. Disability & Society, 20(5), 539–552. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687590500156246

Devlieger, P. (1999). From Handicap to Disability: Language Use and Cultural Meaning in the United States. Disability and Rehabilitation, 21(7), 346–354. https://doi.org/10.1080/096382899297594

differently abled. (n.d.). Diakses pada 6 Juli, 2016, dari https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/differently_abled

Differently abled. (n.d.). Diakses pada 6 Juli, 2016, dari http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/111450.html

Fakih, M. (2002). Jalan Lain: Manifesto Intelektual Organik. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar bekerjasama dengan Insist Press.

Fakih, M. (n.d.). Akses Ruang yang Adil: Meletakkan dasar keadilan sosial bagi kaum difabel. Diakses pada 6 Juli, 2016, dari https://suryaden.com/syahadat-indonesia/analisis-kritis-diskriminasi-terhadap-kaum-difabel

Haller, B., Dorries, B., & Rahn, J. (2006). Media Labeling Versus the Us Disability Community Identity: A Study of Shifting Cultural Language. Disability & Society, 21(1), 61–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687590500375416

Hutchison, T. (1995). The classification of disability. Archives of Disease in Childhood, 73(2), 91–94. https://doi.org/10.1136/adc.73.2.91

Istilah Penyandang Disabilitas Sebagai Pengganti Penyandang Cacat. (2016, Mei). Diakses pada 6 Juli, 2016, dari http://daksa.or.id/istilah-penyandang-disabilitas-sebagai-pengganti-penyandang-cacat/

Komnas HAM. (2011). Konsistensi Mewujudkan Kemanusiaan yang Adil & Beradab (Laporan Tahun Komnas HAM 2010).

Llewellyn, A., & Hogan, K. (2010). The Use and Abuse of Models of Disability. Disability & Society. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687590025829

Marcoes-Natsir, L. M., Juliantoro, D., Wahono, F. X., Suharto, & Munandar, H. (2004). Pokok-pokok pikiran Dr. Mansour Fakih: refleksi kawan seperjuangan. Yogyakarta: SIGAB : Oxfam.

Pepper, P. (2016, November 22). We’ve Had All the Insults. Now We’re Reclaiming the Language of Disability. The Guardian. Retrieved dari https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/22/language-of-disability-stereotypes-disabled-people

Smith, J. (1985, April 9). Is the Language Itself Disabled in that It can’t Fairly Define the Handicapped? [Newspaper]. Diakses pada 6 Juli, 2016, dari http://articles.latimes.com/1985-04-09/news/vw-28150_1_handicapped-persons

Sri Moertiningsih Adioetomo, Daniel Mont, & Irwanto. (2014). Persons with Disabilities in Indonesia: Empirical Facts and Implications for Social Protection Policies. Jakarta: Lembaga Demografi Fakulutas Ekonomi Universitas Indonesia.

Stopa, D. (2012). The Language of Disability. Zeszyty Glottodydaktyczne, 2012(4), 145–154.

Suharto, S. (2016). Disability terminology and the emergence of “diffability” in Indonesia. Disability & Society, 31(5), 693–712. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2016.1200014

Tarsidi, D., & Somad, P. (2009). Penyandang Ketunaan: Istilah Alternatif Terbaik untuk Menggantikan Istilah “Penyandang Cacat”?, 8(2), 128–132.

Undang-undang Penyandang Cacat, Pub. L. No. 4 (1997).

Undang-undang tentang Penyandang Disabilitas, Pub. L. No. 8, 32 (2016).

Wilson, J. C., & Lewiecki-Wilson, C. (2001). Embodied Rhetorics: Disability in Language and Culture. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.

Zola, I. K. (1988). The Language Of Disability: Problems Of Politics And Practice. Journal of the Disability Advisory Council of Australia (Formerly the Australian Rehabilita­tion Review), 1(3).




Copyright (c) 2016 INKLUSI