[nabs-l] Philosophical Terminology
hannah
sparklylicious at suddenlink.net
Tue Nov 18 03:10:25 UTC 2008
Blind people can do things that sighted people can do just as
well or perhaps even better... They might do it in a different
way, but at the end it's done. I would think that blind people
can cut Christmas trees just as well as sighted people.
Hannah
> ----- Original Message -----
>From: Harry Hogue <harryhogue at yahoo.com
>To: National Association of Blind Students mailing list
<nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 17:52:02 -0800 (PST)
>Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Philosophical Terminology
>As for me, I'm totally blind, so visually impaired wouldn't even
come up, and I wouldn't ever say i.
>
>You make a lot of sense. What really gets me is that I really am
not sure, deep down, if someone hwo is totally blind can do the
things that someone hwo has some partial vision can, and that is
the crux of the matter. They say, yes, but then I always am
wodnering, but can they really? Cutting Christmas trees, for
example. I don't know, but can a totally blind person really cut
down a Christmas tree with no sighteed help?
>
>Harry
>
>P.S. I really want to believe, I really, really do.
>--- On Mon, 11/17/08, T. Joseph Carter
<carter.tjoseph at gmail.com> wrote:
>From: T. Joseph Carter <carter.tjoseph at gmail.com
>Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Philosophical Terminology
>To: "National Association of Blind Students mailing list"
<nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>Date: Monday, November 17, 2008, 3:46 PM
>That's your right, of course. You're free to go on telling
people
>you're
>impaired--I've got better things to do than to encourage that
kind of
>thinking while simultaneously trying to change it. If you ask
the right
>person, I'm too blind to be a teacher. How exactly does me
saying,
>"But I
>am only visually impaired" change their minds? It doesn't--their
>minds
>were made up the second they saw the white cane, if not before
even then.
>All it does is give hem more ammunition to try and shoot me down.
And
>shoot they will, because blind people should receive special
education,
>not provide it. I'm not going to contribute to that.
>Joseph
>On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 10:11:22PM -0800, Harry Hogue wrote:
>>I'm sorry, I odn't know that I was very clear. I think
>politically correct language is riddiculous, but I understand
about why we call
>the techniques we use alternative... and that is the only term I
agree with out
>of the two - blind and alternative.
>>
>>Harry
>>--- On Sat, 11/15/08, T. Joseph Carter <carter.tjoseph at gmail.com
>wrote:
>>From: T. Joseph Carter <carter.tjoseph 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, 11:22 PM
>>Harry,
>>I object to the concept of political correctness outright. It
forces
>>people to say things they do not mean and mean things they do not
say.
>>Morally, that seems wrong to me.
>>I endeavor to say exactly what I think. Not everyone likes that.
And you
>>know what? That's fine. In fact, sometimes I'm wrong. Thing
is,
>>you've
>>got to be willing to accept responsibility for being wrong now
and then,
>>or you'd best not say anything.
>>Too often, politically correct speech is used as an excuse to
have
>>everything be so nebulous that anything you say can be
interpreted any
>>number of ways, none of which you can be held responsible for.
Down that
>>road lies the girlie-men from Joe Orozco's history lesson.
*grin*
>>Joseph
>>On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 07:34:36PM -0800, Harry Hogue wrote:
>>>Here's an interesting thought. We get all bent out of shape
about
>the
>>word "visually impaired," or any other kind of "politically
>>correct "language, and insist that we call things the way they
are,
>but yet
>>we also insist that the techniques we use be called
>"alternative." I
>>understand and agree with that one, because "substitute
>techniques"
>>does sound inferior, but I just think it's interesting how strict
we
>are on
>>our termonology.
>>>--- 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/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/harryhogu
e%40yahoo..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/harryhogu
e%40yahoo.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