[nabs-l] Philosophical Terminology
hannah
sparklylicious at suddenlink.net
Sun Nov 16 14:32:32 UTC 2008
Sometimes it's very hard for some people to talk about their
vission because they weren't used to talking about it throughout
childhood or they were brought up in a different culture. In
certain cultures a lot of times people aren't as open, so when
they come to the united states, it's very hard to adjest because
it's one of those things that adjests slowly; it's sort of like
affcetion because a lot of the cultures aren't as affectionate as
we are.
> ----- Original Message -----
>From: "Chris Westbrook" <westbchris at gmail.com
>To: "National Association of Blind Students mailing list"
<nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 08:11:49 -0500
>Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Philosophical Terminology
>I can't believe people are willing to let people assume they are
totally
>blind just to avoid explaining what they can and can't see. Does
that mean
>I should call myself deaf and force people to use sign language
by default
>just so I don't have to explain what I can and can't hear? Of
course I
>don't know sign language but the analogy is similar. Why are
people that
>uncomfortable about talking about their vision loss?
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "hannah" <sparklylicious at suddenlink.net
>To: "National Association of Blind Students mailing list"
><nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2008 11:03 PM
>Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Philosophical Terminology
>Sometimes it's easier for people who are not totally blind to
>call themselves blind or te say they are blind. Especially when
>explaining something to someone because when you say you're
>blind, then they'll get the fact that you are blind, but when you
>say visually impaired, they might question you about your vission
>and one thing leads to another. It's not a bad thing when they
>question you, but sometimes it can be umcomfortable because
>people would either assume that you can see more than you really
>could or less than you could.
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>From: Harry Hogue <harryhogue at yahoo.com
>>To: National Association of Blind Students mailing list
><nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>>Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2008 19:25:25 -0800 (PST)
>>Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Philosophical Terminology
>>Thank you! This has always bugged me that people who are merely
>legally blind or who read large print, or who are otherwise not
>completely blind would call themselves blind. To me, if you have
>some vision you are visually impaired. There is nothing negative
>about that at all. If you have no vision you are totally blind.
>Nothing wrong with that either. And if you have some light
>perception? If you can't read large print, you are still blind.
>But at the end of the day, it really shouldn't matter what you
>choose to call it, so long as you understand and accept within
>yourself that you have trouble seeing, and this is what you need
>to do alternatively (use a long cane, read braille, etc). What
>other people choose to call it shouldn't matter either. Just as
>you pointed out, when someone says they are deaf, I think of them
>as totally without the ability to hear; when they say they are
>hearing impaired, I say, "well they can hear some but
>> they are not totally deaf." And the same with blindness. You
>can take anything too far, and I am afraid the NFB and perhaps
>taken this a bit too far--the distinction needs to be made when
>it comes to what people need--if someone needs a cane fo steps,
>but can still read large print, what's wrong with calling them
>visually impaired? Just because someone has a cane does not
>automatically make them blind, although this is what most people
>think. And here again, you cna't please everyone. I gave up on
>that a long time ago.
>>--- On Sat, 11/15/08, Chris Westbrook <westbchris at gmail.com
>wrote:
>>From: Chris Westbrook <westbchris at gmail.com
>>Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Philosophical Terminology
>>To: "National Association of Blind Students mailing list"
><nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>>Date: Saturday, November 15, 2008, 8:10 PM
>>Also, I don't think that just because you call yourself visually
>impaired
>>you are necessarily denying your blindness. I will use an
>example with another
>>disability from my own life. I am hearing impaired. Notice I
>said hearing
>>impaired, not deaf. I choose not to call myself deaf, because
>deafness
>>generally implies profound hearing loss, sign language, the
>inability to speak,
>>etc. If any of you have been around me for a while, however, you
>no that I do
>>not deny my hearing loss. I wear two hearing aids. I also
>accept that certain
>>things are much harder if not impossible for me, such as street
>crossings and
>>socializing in crowded situations. Why is it deemed OK for me to
>call myself
>>hearing impaired when it is not OK for a visually impaired
>individual to call
>>themselves visually impaired? after all, even if you are totally
>blind you are
>>visually impaired. The more I think about these things, the more
>I find myself
>>struggling with some of the stricter points of NFB philosophy.
>>----- Original Message ----- From: "T. Joseph Carter"
>><carter.tjoseph at gmail.com
>>To: "National Association of Blind Students mailing list"
>><nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>>Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2008 8:24 PM
>>Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Philosophical Terminology
>>> I think you are all getting too hung up on empty words. The NFB
>>philosophy is about actions and attitudes.
>>> If you call me blind and mean by it that I am helpless, I will
>take
>>offense. If you call me impaired and mean that I just can't see
>much but am
>>otherwise like anyone else, I'll accept your words as respectful.
>>> I can almost always tell the difference, and I bet you can too.
>>> Joseph
>>> On Wed, Nov 05, 2008 at 11:06:10PM +0000, Corbb O'Connor wrote:
>>>> I didn't write the subject line, but I am assuming that was a
>>blanket marketing e-mail. That is, it was meant to be forwarded
>around. Just as
>>we want to attract new members (as has been said by me and
>others), we
>>wouldn't want to push people toward the delete button after only
>reading the
>>subject line. Marketing, my friends, it's marketing. I agree
>with all of you
>>-- we in the Federation are blind, even those of us with some
>residual vision.
>>Let's not push people away from our great organization before
>they even know
>>who we are and why we use the words we do. I don't think we're
>>undermining ourselves or our philosophy -- we're trying to find
>others out
>>there who don't see as well as their peers (seniors, students,
>>and...well...everybody else) to show them our positive philosophy
>on blindness.
>>>> -----
>>>> Corbb O'Connor
>>>> studying at the National University of Ireland, Galway
>>>> On Nov 5, 2008, at 10:33 PM, Janice wrote:
>>>> 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/sparklyli
>cious%40suddenlink.net
>_______________________________________________
>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/westbchri
s%40gmail.com
>_______________________________________________
>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/sparklyli
cious%40suddenlink.net
More information about the NABS-L
mailing list