Disability metaphors

I got this question recently from an editor:

What do you think about the term “blind” to describe the process of anonymizing a manuscript for review?

Here’s a little window into my thought process behind my answer to this question.

The first thing to consider is what blind and visually impaired people feel about this, keeping in mind that different people make different choices for a variety of reasons.

Anecdotally speaking, I have sometimes been surprised that blind and visually impaired people have what feels like less grievance with language choices like this than I expect they would (i.e., they often don’t find them as ableist as I predict). A little bit of Internet digging a few months ago, when I was curious about this for another project, told me that—at least among the blind who post online in places where I’m likely to come across their commentary—the jury’s still out. Of course, it always depends on the particular metaphor and the spirit in which it’s being used.

When there isn’t a single definitive answer from a community in a language choice like this, the next thing I consider is whether or not disability metaphors are being used in a pejorative sense. I (a typically sighted person, keep in mind) think when it comes to the process of anonymizing manuscripts, we aren’t likening blindness to ignorance in a negative way. It feels a little more figuratively descriptive than artfully pejorative: it’s quite simply that in an anonymization process we can’t see all of the information (in the case of peer review in publishing, that’s for good reason).

Then again, I’m generally of the mind that if there’s another term that works well enough in the language of operation that doesn’t lead to communicative breakdown, opt for that. For example, I use “out of touch” for “tone deaf” when it’s meant to describe being less attuned to knowledge, experience, or a particular perspective. I’m also currently working on eradicating sanist language from my vocabulary (replacing my oft used “crazy” with words like “hectic” or “wild” depending on my meaning).

In the case of this particular metaphor, my inclination would probably be to use “anonymize” in lieu of “blind” particularly if I were an editor and positioned to initiate and shape discourse about the publishing process. “Anonymize” is an easy and clear replacement which sacrifices nothing in terms of accuracy. If I were in the position to make that call, I would also choose to be purposeful in communicating via a clear and concise note somewhere about why I’m making the shift. But that’s just me; everything is a teaching moment.

p.s. here’s a style guide that I consult regularly. It doesn’t address the larger question about metaphorical language, but I find it incredibly helpful for choosing sensitive descriptors.