[nabs-l] Retraction

[Jedi]

Actually, that's a good point. The prof's research should, if it 
doesn't already, have some additional controls, particularly if he has 
a well-defined and specific hypothesized relationship between blindness 
and sex knowledge.

Let's say that his hypothesis isn't terribly specific. Let's just say 
he's simply interested in what blind young adults know. From that 
angle, a questionnaire could be useful in getting some general 
information to use in studies that would seek to tease out why (for 
instance) a blind person's knowledge might differ from a sighted person's.

If he's got a more well-defined hypothesis, he needs to add more 
controls to his study to make sure that all the potential confounds 
(things that might give him false positives) are ruled out.

I'm guessing he's probably got a hypothesis that's kinda somewhere in 
between. In that case, general questions might be useful, but he may 
want to add some other general questions such as what kind of sex ed 
program was made available (abstinence only, abstinence plus, etc), at 
what age a sex ed program was implemented (that could be a confound 
especially if the blind students are enrolled in schools that have sex 
ed later in the school career than others), whether or not the student 
has attended public school (schools for the blind may have different 
accessibility options or may do sex ed a little differently than public 
schools), etc.

It is absurd to believe that blindness in and of itself would delay the 
development of sexual knowledge. However, there are a number of social 
factors that could contribute (some blindness-related, others not).

Joe, could you please forward this e-mail as I've lost the prof's address?

And to add one more thing: the prof's lit review should probably 
critique whether or not these social factors were addressed in previous 
studies or if the previous studies did find that blindness itself is 
the main cause of under-development of sex knowledge. If previous 
studies suggested that blindness is the cause, then he may want to 
address why a study would find it to be so and use that critical 
framework as one reason why his study is appropriate and useful. He may 
even want to include a small section on attitudes and stereotypes 
regarding blindness and sex (or disability and sex) since they 
definitely play a part in people's views of blind people and sex that 
can both confound previous studies and their findings or create serious 
barriers to gaining appropriate sex education for blind people.

Respectfully,
Jedi

Original message:
> I agree that I would not and still do not have a changed opinion based
> on the fact that the professor is himself blind. However, I still
> question the validity of a survey that only surveys an age range of
> two years, and why isn't he surveying sighted students as wel? I know,
> it's been done before, but the difference in time, location of the
> surveyors and/or students, how many sighted students were surveyed,
> and much more could make a difference.

> Also, could someone please send me the professors's contact
> information? I seem to have lost it, and I'd like to spek with him
> about his survey. My main question is: When is it expected that the
> approximage two years difference decreases and disappears altogether,
> and why not survey older people (20-40) to see what their education is
> like, in comparison, to find out where the gap ends?

> I am appalled by the ntote that the professor only recieved rude
> messages and hang-ups. I may not agree with the survey, but I
> certainly did not send him a rude message or harass him. I fear that
> whoever did send those messages has lost their sense of self-honour
> and honour for the blind movement in general. I'm sure I'm preaching
> to the choir here, though (at least I hope so!)



> On 2/4/11, Joe Orozco <jsorozco at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Dear list,

>> I spoke with the professor regarding his sex study of which there's been so
>> much discussion.  By way of a summary, there is research suggesting that
>> blind people are at least two years behind in their sexual development.
>> However, there is no research to fully explain why this is the case.

>> Last year he attempted to survey students ages 14-18.  Only 3 out of 70
>> parents gave consent for their children to participate, and naturally, this
>> is an insufficient sample.  If the research above is true, his next best
>> option is to interview young adults between 18 and 20, since theoretically
>> their sexual development would be at that of a 16 to 18-year-old.  He wanted
>> to stay as close to the original age range as possible.

>> The reason for the survey is to promote equal sex education among blind
>> students.  There are schools with no sex education.  There are schools where
>> the sex education is fully developed, but even these campuses are not fully
>> prepared to go beyond visual exhibits for their blind students.  Blind
>> people are therefore left without a real sense of sex, and even more
>> importantly, sexual safety.  Take it a step further, and research suggests
>> blind people are not fully aware of more serious conditions like signs of
>> cancer, a problem that could have been covered in a well-prepared sex
>> education curriculum using replicas and other tools.

>> Ultimately, the current study does not seek to teach blind people how to do
>> what would be self-explanatory.  Rather, it seeks to create an instrument
>> that teachers can use to educate blind people in a way sighted people are
>> educated from photos, diagrams and movies.

>> Having written all that, I retract my previous post.  I said to the
>> professor that his e-mail could have provided a little more information
>> without tainting the nature of his research.  He feels the reaction would
>> have been more positive if he had included the fact that he is also blind.
>> I disagreed with him, pointing out that I took the e-mail at face value.  My
>> reaction would have been the same with the information I was provided,
>> regardless of visual acuity.  I wish the professor the best in his studies
>> and hope its outcome serves of some value to younger students.  No, I do not
>> think equal sex education will make or break a blind person's total sexual
>> development, but I am looking at this from the standpoint of equal access to
>> the classroom.  If sighted people can process this information visually,
>> there should be methods to impress the same information among blind
>> students.

>> And, I do not retract my overriding point that as blind people we should not
>> feel compelled to defend ourselves on all fronts.  My reference to the study
>> was one example, but I think it also applies to mischaracterizations we
>> might see on television or come across in general media.  If we make a habit
>> of defending ourselves against every misguided notion, we will spend more
>> time educating and less time living, and living is sometimes the best method
>> of setting an example.

>> At any rate, it was great to be proven wrong on the study.  Anyone who can
>> respond to my loaded points with the poise the professor did deserves my
>> respect and public retraction.  It is my understanding that he offered to
>> speak to other people via phone to explain himself, and the only response he
>> received were rude messages and hang-ups.  I hope the additional information
>> will help us all see things from the perspective it was meant to be
>> perceived.

>> Best,

>> Joe

>> "Hard work spotlights the character of people: some turn up their sleeves,
>> some turn up their noses, and some don't turn up at all."--Sam Ewing


>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/herekittykat2%40gmail.com



> --
> ~Jewel
> Check out my blog about accessibility for the blind!
> Treasure Chest for the Blind: http://blindtreasurechest.blogspot.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/loneblindjedi%40samobile.net

-- 
Email services provided by the System Access Mobile Network.  Visit 
www.serotek.com to learn more about accessibility anywhere.