[nabs-l] A great article, FYI, a novel, sorry!

[Bridgit Pollpeter]

Elizabeth,

First, I can only speak from my own experiences. I draw on my
observations, thoughts and first-hand knowledge. I'm sorry if you've had
a less than stellar experience to the Federation.

I will more than likely be controversial now, though I don't think what
I have to say is. Any organization regardless of its purpose, can be
anchored by politics. As a collective, we speak with one voice, but as
individuals, we are varied in our backgrounds, life experiences,
culture, personality, etc. We are not robots working with minds that
view everything exactly the same way. If you go looking for hypocrisy in
every organization, every person, you will find it. Humans have flaws;
we make mistakes. Perfection is not possible.

To be honest and frank, it bothers me when people point out hypocrisies,
or alleged hypocrisies, determining a group, organization, person
completely useless and devoid of doing good things. Whether its consumer
groups, religious groups, government, etc., there are foundational ideas
or beliefs or concepts that are concrete. Does everyone follow these
tenants, no. Does everyone view each situation equally, no. This doesn't
mean a group is bad or wrong or not worth the time. The NFB, much like
religious institutions, has a core foundation with guidelines and a
philosophy shaping the structure of the organization. Unfortunately, as
individuals, people don't always adhere to these views and beliefs. This
does not make an entity and its fundamental values ineffective in
itself.

You misunderstand what I mean about hierarchies of blindness. When I
said the NFB does not, as a rule, create hierarchies of blindness, I
meant that regardless of what level of vision you may or may not have,
the NFB, as an organization, believes we are all equal. Totally blind,
useable vision, fully sighted, one is not better than another. Some
organizations, and people, set sight as the standard at which we should
achieve for, and the less vision you have, the worse off you are. The
NFB doesn't hold this view. If individual people don't follow this
thinking, it's not a reflection on the Federation's philosophy and
goals. This has nothing to do with providing support or excluding people
from support.

Do some people receive support and others not so much? I'm sure. This
has nothing to do with a hierarchy of blindness. If an affiliate or
chapter doesn't seem to support some members, perhaps they aren't aware
of the discrimination, or maybe resolutions were sought behind doors,
and success was achieved during negotiations, in which there might not
be much hoopla. Are these people speaking up asking for support? And
maybe it's worse-case-scenario: an affiliate or chapter is not
distributing support equally, picking and choosing who receives help and
support without investigating or thinking. It's sad, but true. A NFB
affiliate/chapter/division can only be as strong as it's leadership, and
if the leadership is weak, the group flounders. I'm not suggesting this
is true or referring to a specific NFB group, but it is possible. Maybe
then something must be done then. Contact national, campaign for change.
Online discussions are great and helpful, but emailing about loose
stones in the foundation does nothing if it stops at the email.

It's difficult to address this topic because so many variables are in
play. National doesn't jump into legal actions or campaigns without
first investigating the claims. Discrimination is a tricky matter,
believe it or not. Perhaps they find no evidence of discrimination;
maybe they are able to negotiate change during initial meetings; maybe,
it's a matter best resolved through self-advocacy. Moral support is one
thing. Friends and Federation members can provide information, advice,
counsel, guidance, but one of the goals of the NFB is to supply us with
tools and confidence to advocate for ourselves and blind issues
important to us. If every time we have difficulties or believe we've
been discriminated against, and we rush in with an entourage, how does
this look to others? We can't come to a person on our own to discuss a
situation?

Of course, some situations do require an extra advocate. And sadly, we
do have to take legal action against entities. But as I stated, so many
variables must be reviewed in cases like this. You make a vague
statement about members not receiving support, but what is this based
on? Do you refer to a personal experience? Did a friend experience this?
What was done on the part of the person claiming discrimination to bring
awareness of their problem and make clear what has happened and what
they want? The way your email reads, it's as though you expect all
50,000 members to be contacted on a daily basis, offering individual
support to each. I'm assuming you don't mean this literally, but it's
still unclear as to why you feel this way. I'm not suggesting your wrong
in your assessment; as I said before, unfortunately, these things do
happen, but without more specific information, it's hard to address this
topic. In my experience, if a Federation member comes to leadership
seeking support and help, it's given. If it's not requested, though, no
one is aware, or, if the situation is known among the membership, but
still no request is made, no one can deal with a situation, especially
as adults, without permission. It doesn't mean we don't ask how things
are going and extend the offer of support, but if dealing with work or
school or community, we can't be a hovering mother stepping in, taking
over, without permission.

And no one is a mind reader. If you need support, you need to be vocal
and request it. National, affiliates/chapters/divisions for that matter,
can't be tuned into each individual members and their daily life. If you
want something, need something, you have to step forward and speak up.

Just because one person, or one group, does something you deem wrong, or
acts hypocritically, how can you base an opinion on an entire
organization, or members belonging to that organization? That is a
preschool mentality. Again, you're vague as to how the Federation
ignores some, and that it doesn't challenge. State your examples,
specifics, experiences. In order to be an argument, you must have proof,
or at least specific observations, backing your claims. Based on your
email, you've supplied no material, no arguments, that make me inclined
to think you have a point. I will pause here to spell out that this
isn't an attack on your person; I'm simply stressing the fact that you
make an accusation, but have no corroborating evidence. Therefore, how
can I build an opinion one way or another?


The Federation was created in the 1940's when blind people were afforded
few rights. Beyond schools for the blind, it was rare for blind people
to pursue education. Employment was near impossible for those chasing
loftier goals than basket weaver, chair caner and piano tuner. Marriage,
family and home was only a dream for blind people. Many of us were still
shoved into institutions, usually housing psychologically and
developmentally disabled people to, along with very sick, diseased
people. The founders of the NFB knew blindness was not a factor holding
people back from seeking things just like our sighted peers. They
demanded change with the welfare system and sheltered workshops along
with adjusting attitudes about blindness.

State rehab agencies didn't work to create independent blind people. We
were expected to accept our place on the sidelines while friends and
family pursued goals, dreams- they lived while we only reflected life.
The NFB stormed into government agencies demanding reform. As bad as
some of us still have it, and as many agencies and groups that still
cling to antiquated ideas today, speak to members who were around 30,
40, 50 years ago or more.

Because of the NFB, government offices working for, and with, the blind
have to allow clients to choose a training center; laws now allow us to
pursue academic and professional routes; blind people can now speak for
themselves and choose what they do with their life. We have far to go,
and too many obstacles exist still, but at least we're moving now and
not just standing in place.

Until 1972, it was illegal for the blind to walk on city streets without
sighted guide. We could be cited for this. Were we asked about this, no;
did anyone run it by us before passing into law, no; this law, like
many, was based on arbitrary ideas and the perception of reality sighted
people knew for sure was truth, though none had ever been blind, and few
had exposure to blindness. We had no voice; the Federation gave us that
voice. The NFB was instrumental in initiating the White Cane law,
allowing us freedom to choose our own method of mobility as well as the
opportunity to walk freely about just like any other person.

Dr. Jernigan revolutionized how centers approach training. The method he
created, Structured Discovery, is the model considered the standard in
blindness training. Rehab agencies all over the country still seek out
facilities hoping to adopt this method. Not all centers; many disagree,
but Structured Discovery is the top accepted training method today. Any
good center employs this method. In fact, I only know a handful of
people who didn't learn under the SD method.

The Jernigan Institute is the first research center devoted to
blindness, but that is also led by blind people. For once, we are
initiating research that follows what we want; what we hope for. It's
not non-blind people, though well-intentioned perhaps, pursuing research
they think is beneficial or of interest to the blind.

These are found in most NFB literature, or at least some derivative of
them:
It is respectable to be blind."  "With proper training and opportunity,
the average blind person can do the average job in the average place of
business, and do it as well as sighted colleagues."

"The biggest problem of blindness is not the lack of eyesight, but
rather the common public attitude that blind people are less capable
than they truly are."

"Techniques exist that make it possible for blind people to do the
things they want to do at work, at home, and in their community. The
primary limitations of blindness are the inability to read print and the
inability to drive: nuisances, not disasters."

If these statements are true (and we believe they are) then blindness
can be reduced to the level of a physical nuisance.  Federation
philosophy is as simple and as far-reaching as this.

How many other blind organizations state similar ideas? Believe them?
None I know of. These statements alone challenge us to step out of our
comfort zones and discover what we were once denied. 

Each year, the NFB continues to provide and support programs and
initiatives important to blind people and the goals of the Federation.
The BELL program attempts to instill Braille literacy in children while
demonstrating how vital this skill is to blind people. I'd say this is a
challenge.

YouthSlam provides grammar school-aged students and middle and high
school students an opportunity to learn math, science and computer
technology, hands-on, something many never experience in their schools
and aren't expected to excel at or to learn period. This certainly
sounds like a challenge to me. The Federation is teaching the next
generation that they are capable and worthy, and that they should live
up to their full potential.

The mentor/mentee program pairs people with those seeking knowledge and
information. Mentees are challenged to explore possibilities and break
out of the stereotypical mold. Seems like challenging is central to the
success of this program.

The NFB listserves have the ability to instruct and challenge. NABS
posts tips and information, but also facilitates discussions challenging
us to explore ideas.

Those actually plugged into the Federation especially on the local level
find fellow members, new and vets, and we often find ourselves
challenging one another.

Challenging members is not necessarily saying, "Hey you, go do this
challenging exercise." Through disseminating information, creating
programs and observing fellow members, many are infused with ideas that
challenge them to explore, experience and question how blindness is
often viewed in society. These abstract challenges can be more effective
because we are allowed to draw our own conclusions and come to
understandings on our own instead of being spoon fed.

The Federation boasts 50,000 members. How accurate this number is, I
don't know. Regardless, I'm not sure how you expect an organization like
this to know every member and what is happening in their life. It's
physically impossible. This is why chapters are a crucial element of the
Federation. I will concede that I feel chapters do not receive the
support necessary to thrive, and the importance of chapters is often
misplaced and is not given proper, or enough, focus. Nonetheless, when
we actively engage in whatever Federation group/activity is offered in
our community or surrounding area, we network and socialize, learning
and discovering new things about ourselves and the world around us.

At the end of the day, the Federation philosophy is a challenge on its
own. It is not crafted as a theory; it's not science fiction; it is a
declaration stating how it is, setting the pace for all blind people,
setting the standard. This is based on the hundreds of people who prove
it daily. It's not hot air blowing up the asses of our detractors. The
Federation says vision has no or little bearing on our success as a
person. Blindness itself is rarely the obstacle, but it's society's
attitude and perceptions that create obstacles. How is this alone not a
challenge? If I belong to an organization stating it's a fact my
blindness isn't the huge obstacle many think it is, and allowing myself,
or anyone else, to hold me back, is because of my own inability to
accept reality rather than perceptions. I can no longer continue holding
myself back, remaining on the sidelines. This may be idealistic, but for
those evoked with an intellectual and emotional response, we challenge
ourselves to meet this standard.

I don't regurgitate what I read, what I'm told. My entire life has been
spent internalizing, mulling over, accepting and declining. I've made
myself question and ponder theories, concepts, beliefs- joining the
Federation was no different. I speak what I've experienced, and what
resonates with me.

You're not alone in your views, and you're certainly entitled to your
opinion, but if you focus on the negative aspects that exist in any
organization, you'll never be satisfied. If you feel so strongly about
the hypocrisy and structure, be proactive. Vocalize your concerns,
campaign for change, but also learn. Focus on what is good, what you
enjoy. People will disappoint, make mistakes, choose wrong directions
and some are intentional with motives that exclude, showing favoritism
and preference. We hope people walk on higher planes, but the reality is
that shit happens, and we have to deal. But if we start denouncing
organizations and groups and people because they don't achieve
perfection, we find ourselves stuck in a corner.

Sincerely,
Bridgit Kuenning-Pollpeter
Read my blog for Live Well Nebraska.com at
http://blogs.livewellnebraska.com/author/bpollpeter/


Message: 15
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 21:51:51 -0400
From: "Elizabeth" <lizmohnke at hotmail.com>
To: "National Association of Blind Students mailing list"
	<nabs-l at nfbnet.org>
Subject: Re: [nabs-l] A great article
Message-ID: <COL118-DS222B05856F408DA63B49CBA1E0 at phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
	reply-type=original

Hello Bridgit,

In your post, you state, "The NFB on the other hand believes blind
people 
are
capable of much more than is generally thought, and we challenge one
another to leave our comfort zones and discover ourselves and the world
around us." While I will agree with you that the NFB believes in the 
capabilities of blind people, I really wonder how the NFB challenges and

supports each and every individual within the organization. Perhaps it
is 
different in different parts of the country, but I am not quite sure how

well this attitude and philosophy holds true on a local level.

On one hand, the NFB does not claim to have a system of hierarchy, yet
at 
the same time, it seems to pick and choose who they are willing and not 
willing to help in a time of need. When certain people face
discrimination 
based on their blindness, the NFB seems to rally around them and provide

them with all the support they need. However, at the same time, there
are 
other people who face the exact same kind of discrimination, and they
are 
forced to deal with it on their own without being able to receive much
if 
any support from the NFB. I am sorry, but this only seems rather 
hypocritical to me.

Elizabeth