“Lame” is an ableist word. It’s an ableist word because it assumes that having difficulty walking is objectively bad, and that therefore, a word which is used to describe difficulty walking can be safely used as a pejorative to mean “this is bad.” Using “lame” reinforces ableism in our culture by reminding people that disability is bad, and that it’s so bad that it can be used as a shorthand code to talk about bad things in general.
The underlined phrases startled me, because I can't consider "being lame", "having difficulty walking" or any "disability" as something good. Maybe it's just a matter of understanding? So the QUESTION is:
When someone says "Being lame/blind/sick is bad" what do you hear? Do you hear "lameness/blindness/problems with health is bad, a person suffers from it" or "a person is bad because he is lame/blind/sick"?
ВОПРОС К РУССКИМ, знающим английский: если я права в своих предположениях, и в английском "быть хромым плохо" имеет такой же негативный оттенок, как "топтать газоны - плохо", то как, чёрт побери, сказать "быть хромым плохо", не имея в виду "человек плох\виноват тем, что он хром"?
EDITED: I believe I've touched the problem that is far bigger than philology... So... forget it.