[nabs-l] Philosophical Terminology

Jordan Richardson lilrichie411 at gmail.com
Wed Nov 19 03:58:11 UTC 2008


I don't really notice a change in tone of voice, but I do notice that
*some*people lean forward toward me as they talk to me.  It is mostly
older
people.  IDK if it is just the way people talk or if they think that I can't
hear them or have trouble hearing them.
Jordan

On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 7:56 AM, jonte <jonte711 at gmail.com> wrote:

> That happens to me too sometimes and I just ignore it and continue talking
> to them in a normal tone of voice, hoping that they'll come to their senses
> once they get to know me.
> Jonte
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: hannah <sparklylicious at suddenlink.net>
> Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 11:35 PM
> To: National Association of Blind Students mailing list <nabs-l at nfbnet.org
> >
>  Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Philosophical Terminology
>
> I have noticed that a lot of people use a different tone when
> talking to us; like we're babies or we'r old or...  I was
> wondering how you guys deal with it.  I just ignore it, but
> sometimes it's overwhelming and I get really mad when I'm alone
> or with friends who treat me equaally.
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Jessica Kostiw" <jessicac.kostiw at gmail.com
> >To: "National Association of Blind Students mailing list"
> <nabs-l at nfbnet.org
> >Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 22:10:18 -0600
> >Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Philosophical Terminology
>
> >I love it!!  I am going to try using that term as well!!  The
> only thing I
> >would wonder is, aren't these people going to just narrow in on
> the word
> >blind and therefore continue to treat me like an invilid?  It is
> my
> >experience that if you say any other word except blind, people
> back off.
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Yolanda Garcia" <yvgarcia at gmail.com
> >To: "National Association of Blind Students mailing list"
> ><nabs-l at nfbnet.org
> >Sent: Sunday, November 16, 2008 11:44 PM
> >Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Philosophical Terminology
>
>
> >> 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/jessicac.
> kostiw%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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/jonte711%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/lilrichie411%40gmail.com
>



More information about the NABS-L mailing list