[nabs-l] Philosophical Terminology

[T. Joseph Carter]

Harry,

I grew up being "visually impaired" or "legally blind" and not just 
"blind".  I have the scars to prove it, and I'm not kidding.

The techniques of blindness are frequently not taught to those with a lot 
of residual vision because it is assumed they don't need them.  The thing 
to consider is that when you're talking about "legal blindness", you are 
saying that in the best case scenario, a person has as much as 10% the 
visual acuity of anyone else.  There may be additional conditions as to 
when their vision is that good such as the need to have a lot of light, or 
as little as possible in my own case.

What do such people do in less than ideal situations?  The only really 
effective way to teach the skills of blindness is to remove vision from 
the equation.  If you don't do that, a person is going to use whatever 
vision they can as best they can.  What do they do when they can't, for 
whatever reason?

As the sort of person you're asking about, I can say confidently that 
there are times when I'm going to have a definite advantage because I can 
use my residual vision to see what's around me.  There's also going to be 
times you'll have the advantage because you won't have this searing pain 
to deal with.  When dealing with it, I promise, I see no more than you do.

Joseph

On Wed, Nov 05, 2008 at 04:37:10PM -0800, Harry Hogue wrote:
>I am confused.  If someone could please explain this to me, I would appreciate it.  I am totally blind, so I am not in denial of blidness, but to me there is a significant difference in having 20/200 vision and having no vision at all.  Your vision is then impaired, not completely gone; you do use alternative techniques, but are those not alternative techniques for someone with only partial visio nrather than complete blindness?
> 
>I'm not trying to irritate anyone; I truly do not know why the NFB is so adament about saying people are blind.
> 
>Thanks!
> 
>Harry
>
>
>--- On Wed, 11/5/08, Janice <snowball07 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>From: Janice <snowball07 at gmail.com>
>Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Philosophical Terminology
>To: "National Association of Blind Students mailing list" <nabs-l at nfbnet.org>
>Date: Wednesday, November 5, 2008, 4:33 PM
>
>Hello Karen, Terri and Listers,
>
>Wow, Karen!! I must say, thanks for calling us, as the nabs board and as
>nabs members,  out on this very interesting point. I have recently noticed
>something like this also. I think that Terri's point can be a good one. It
>might be important for the Federation to use terminology such as visually
>impaired or low vision, to try to attract a larger facet of people. These
>people might be uncomfortable with their blindness, they might not want to
>identify as blind... so, we say- Hey you visually impaired person... this
>group is for you too!
>Once we have their foot in the door so to speak, then
>we can teach them about our philosophy and educate them in the fact that we
>are all blind individuals> We can then wow them into believing that  the
>visual hierarchy does not matter. Even if you
>are legally blind,    the key word is blind. One is not going to be
>recognized as a legally visually impaired person, are they?
>
>However, I do wonder in certain instances where the lines get blurred and if
>we are sacrificing what we are as an organization to try to get these new
>individuals into our door. For example, not  to pick on one specific
>facebook group, but I will use the 411 group, since it seems to be the most
>recent one and has sparked some debate. The salutation line- "Attention
>blind and visually impaired high school students!" This makes some sense
>according to Terri's argument. We want those who self identify as visually
>impaired to come to our group. Yet, why would we need to use the terminology
>visually impaired among ourselves and within our Federation family?
>
>Why would we use the words low vision, visually impaired, to refer to other
>Federationist? One such example I an talking about is the email subject line
>:"for the sake of ne, in which the group was actually announced to the
>NABS
>list. the official heading was something like- Blind and Visually Impaired
>Teen Group on Facebook. why not just use something like, "new blindness
>group of facebook!
>? I am definitely not trying to point fingers at any specific group or
>person... I am really curious, because I have seen terms such as visually
>impaired, low vision, and high partial , in our literature recently, also. I
>am merely using the facebook post as the most recent and relevant example.
>Is this a new trend in Federation philosophy? or do we believe that perhaps
>trying to be all inclusive has caused us to become a little lax and blur
>the lines of philosophy? Are the philosophical boundaries of all blind
>members being equal, thus united we stand and divided we fall, not as solid
>, and binding, now, as when I first joined the Federation...?>
>
>I really am confused and would love to hear the philosophers among us debate
>this observation. What are the effects of these happenings, to our
>philosophy? Do we need to tighten our concepts about blindness and what it
>stands for within the Federation, or is inclusion the matter of importance?
>
>Thoughtfully yours,
>
>Janice
>----- Original Message ----- From: "Terri Rupp"
><terri.rupp at gmail.com>
>To: "NABS list serve" <nabs-l at nfbnet.org>
>Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 2:25 PM
>Subject: [nabs-l] Philosophical Terminology
>
>
>> Karen and all,
>> The NFB is using different outlets to try to reach out to nonmembers.
>> Facebook is just one of them.  Although as you said, the philosophy of the
>> federation is based on the word "Blind", that word
>"Blind" is sometimes a
>> negative things to those people struggling to deal or accept their
>> blindness.  It was only until a few years ago that I was one of them.  I
>> didn't want to associate with anything that labeled me as blind.  I
>felt
>> ashamed to be blind and called myself "visually impaired".  The
>acceptance
>> of one's blindness is a grieving process that each person goes through
>> differently.  What we have to do is serve as positive blind role models,
>> and show that being blind is no different than being short.  It is simply
>> a
>> characteristic.  Once we attract them to these groups, we can promote NFB
>> activities, scholarships, etc and reel them in with our philosophy.
>> 
>> Yours,
>> Terri Rupp, President
>> National Association of Blind Students
>> 
>_______________________________________________
>nabs-l mailing list
>nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for nabs-l:
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/carter.tjoseph%40gmail.com