Why it’s a problem: The AP reports today that “U.S. forces fired on and disabled two Iranian oil tankers on Friday after exchanging fire with Iranian forces in the Strait of Hormuz overnight.”

I will explain why this use of the word “disability” is wrong and ableist, but let me first explore what the authors, Adam Schreck, Ben Finley, and Michael Biesecker meant to imply when they say that two tankers have been “disabled.”

It seems like what the authors wanted to say is that the tankers were “put out of service,” “damaged,” or “destroyed.” This is not what disability means. And by using “disability” in this context thee authors are reinforcing society’s ableist ideas about disabled people as “better off dead,” impaired, broken, and unemployable.

The words “disability” and “disabled” should never be used to describe objects or nonliving things.

It seems like the authors need to go back and read the AP Stylebook, which states that when writing about disability, “Use care and precision, considering the impact of specific words.”

And they should listen to their own advice: “As in all writing, consider word choice carefully. Words that seem innocuous to some people can have specific and deeply personal or offensive meanings to others. Alternative phrasing is almost always possible.”

Source: AP News