[nabs-l] Philosophical Terminology
hannah
sparklylicious at suddenlink.net
Mon Nov 17 15:34:13 UTC 2008
I definitely agree!!!!
> ----- Original Message -----
>From: "Linda Stover" <liamskitten at gmail.com
>To: "National Association of Blind Students mailing list"
<nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 00:48:32 -0600
>Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Philosophical Terminology
>Thanks; this really is an excellent alternative for socializing,
>especially if you don't, as you pointed out, want to divulge
personal
>history to virtual strangers.
>Courtney
>On 11/16/08, Yolanda Garcia <yvgarcia at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Wow Heather, this was fabulously written in such a lucid and
succinct
>> manner! Thank you for sharing this "alternative" perspective, as
it's the
>> first time I have ever heard of this labeling term!!! I'm
definitely going
>> to test this method/theory out soon and see the reaction of
others!
>> Warmest,
>> Yolanda
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "H. Field" <missheather at comcast.net
>> To: "National Association of Blind Students mailing list"
>> <nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>> Sent: Sunday, November 16, 2008 10:35 PM
>> Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Philosophical Terminology
>>> Hi all,
>>> After long years of being discriminated against because of the
>>> hierarchy of sight beliefs, and after many various social
experiments,
>>> by way of responses, I have come up with the following approach.
And,
>>> I must confess that I took it from Federation literature. I do
so
>>> because I have found that using a term for which the general
public
>>> has no referent, no previous stereotypes or wrong ideas, it is
the
>>> most affective way of dealing with this problem of
discrimination.
>>> When I am asked how much I can see, I reply that I am,
functionally
>>> blind. They don't have a set of stereotypes or past experiences
with
>>> others who have used this term and so it allows me to answer
their
>>> questions with my own positive take on it. So, when they say,
"oh,
>>> well how much can you actually see?", I simply say "well, that's
not
>>> really the issue, what matters is that I don't rely on my vision
to
>>> get the job done because it's not functional vision." I then go
on to
>>> tell them all the positive, cool ways I have of doing things
without
>>> relying on vision. It has been my experience that, even though
people
>>> may want to know more or discuss the matter further, that they
let the
>>> matter lie. This is because I have demonstrated that their
concerns
>>> about what I may or may not be able to do is not related to how
much
>>> vision I do or don't have. They want a word they know, like
blind, or
>>> visually impaired, so they can think they know about me and my
>>> abilities. However, I have not actually given them an amount of
vision
>>> or a word which allows them to use their old, incorrect
stereotypes to
>>> help them determine how they will relate to me. This gives me
much
>>> more opportunity to have them treat me like they would treat
others
>>> because they don't know what else to do.
>>> It is usually simple curiosity that makes seeing people want to
keep
>>> asking. However, they know that it would be rude to persist
and,
>>> because they don't want to be thought of as rude, most people
stop
>>> asking. If we become friends then they usually ask again at
some later
>>> date, and I am happy to share my business with my friends. If
newly
>>> met, rude strangers actually do persist, asking "yes, but what
can you
>>> see. I mean, can you see light, shadows, colours, faces, large
print.
>>> What exactly?" I ask them why they are asking. If they manage
to come
>>> up with a specific, genuine concern such as, would I see them
wave to
>>> me or would I need people to speak to me to recognise them, I
answer
>>> that specific question and still don't give them an amount of
vision.
>>> It is my experience, however, that people basically, just plain
want
>>> to know. Usually, these folks, when I ask them why they are
asking me,
>>> confess to plain curiosity. I usually respond by politely
saying "oh,
>>> I see, you just wanted to know, I understand." Because of what
most
>>> people do with that kind of information, I choose to withhold it
from
>>> them. After all, it really is none of their business, it is
mine, and
>>> it is my choice who I tell. Of course, this is my general
approach and
>>> if I meet someone who is genuinely enquiring because they have
genuine
>>> reasons for asking, such as a friend or relative losing their
vision,
>>> I'm quite happy to discuss personal details with them.
>>> But, there is a more important reason than my privacy, why the
public
>>> doesn't need specific information on a first meeting with me,
and
>>> Carrie explained it well in discussing her son Jordan's
situation. It
>>> is well-known in the blindness field, that the actual numbers
used to
>>> describe the amount of clinically, measurable vision one
possesses,
>>> doesn't really say anything much about how functional one's
vision is
>>> in the real world and, from one situation to another. So, the
curious
>>> public can't do anything much useful with the information I
would give
>>> them anyway. For example, someone may have an eye condition
that
>>> allows them to read regular print but not see further than 3
feet in
>>> front of them and they have no peripheral vision. If that
person (and
>>> this is a real person known to me) says that they are vision
impaired
>>> they will undoubtedly be disbelieved when they pick up a
newspaper and
>>> read it on the train. However, when they say they are
functionally
>>> blind, this opens the discussion and allows a sharing of
accurate
>>> information about the nature of this person's particular version
of
>>> functional blindness.
>>> A number of my, low vision, vision impaired friends have also
taken to
>>> using this term because it always results in allowing them to
say that
>>> they are functionally blind but can see the following. They
have
>>> reported to me that this has kept the seeing people from
insisting
>>> that they should be able to see this or that, or able to do
something
>>> or other because they only have impaired vision.
>>> This is the way I have chosen to discuss the topic of my vision
when
>>> meeting new, seeing people. It has been refreshingly pleasant
not to
>>> have to deal with the old stereotypes before we have said ten
words.
>>> Yes, I truly believe it's respectable to be blind. However, I
also
>>> believe if I've found a way to lessen the discrimination and
annoying
>>> nonsense that the seeing carry on with, then I should use it to
our
>>> mutual advantage.
>>> Best regards,
>>> Heather Field
>>> ----- 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: Sunday, November 16, 2008 6:29 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Philosophical Terminology
>>> Dezman,
>>> There is something to that hierarchy of vision thing. That I
use a
>>> cane
>>> and that I describe myself simply as blind is these days used
against
>>> me
>>> on a daily basis. There really is something to it, though.
>>> The question we have to ask ourselves is whether or not we're
prepared
>>> for
>>> the consequences of being who we are or not--and no is an
acceptable
>>> answer, if not one I prefer.
>>> Joseph
>>> On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 03:57:28AM -0600, Dezman Jackson wrote:
>>>> I'll be volunerable here and say that when dealing with people
in
>>>> general, I feel that the word blind often carries a harder punch
>>>> than say
>>>> the phrase "visually impaired". I'll take for example instances
>>>> where I'm
>>>> scheduling a job interview or trying to volunteer in the
community.
>>>> Although I am totally blind and have no problem thinking of
myself
>>>> as
>>>> just simply blind, I sometimes struggle with saying such things
as
>>>> visually impaired in such situations to lighten the blow so to
>>>> speak. I
>>>> don't particularly have a problem with different phrases, but
it's
>>>> your
>>>> motivation behind the phrasing and for me it was to feed into
the
>>>> public's perception of what James Omvig calls the hierarchy of
>>>> sight.
>>>> This is basically the belief that your success in life is a
function
>>>> of
>>>> how much vision you have, the more vision you have, the better
off
>>>> you
>>>> are than someone who has less vision and vice versa. Of course,
this
>>>> concept is contrary to our philosophy. Alright I'll stop
babbling
>>>> now.
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Dezman
>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Harry Hogue"
>>>> <harryhogue at yahoo.com
>>>> To: "National Association of Blind Students mailing list"
>>>> <nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>>>> Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2008 9:25 PM
>>>> 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/jackson.d
ezman%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/carter.tj
oseph%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/missheath
er%40comcast.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/yvgarcia%
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/liamskitt
en%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