[nagdu] Inclusive discussion

[Vanessa Lowery]

I think I see where Mike is coming from here.  I won't make an attempt to add to his thoughts, but he makes sense.  

But I still see situations in which inclusivemeness poses restrictions, so of which may be needed under certain situations.  But when possible, every effort also needs to be made to include everyone with all of their diverse differences.



Vanessa Lowery, LGSW
Adult and Community Services Division
Adult Services Screening Unit
410-853-3550
VLowery at dhr.state.md.us


>>> "Michael Hingson" <info at michaelhingson.com> 7/8/2012 12:52 PM >>>
I view "Diversity" and "Inclusion" differently.  They are not on a
continuum, but rather should be two ways to get at the same thing.
"Diversity" is suppose to be about embracing difference, all differences to
put a fine point on it.  If we view ourselves as truly "diverse" then we
should have full respect for all even if some are different from us.  Here
is a definition of "Diverse":  www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/diverse,
differing from one another : unlike <people with diverse interests>. 2. :
composed of distinct or unlike elements or qualities <a diverse population>.
Mostly, however, I find that "diversity" when associated with discussions of
the kind we are having refers to culture, race, and sexual orientation, but
not disability.

I gave a definition of "inclusive" earlier.  I think there is no middle
ground if we really believe ourselves as "inclusive".  We include all or we
exclude someone in which case we are not truly "inclusive".  We can debate
fine points of this all day, but "inclusion" means that we include.

Others have shaped the definition of "Diversity" and they have left us out
which means that they don't really embrace full "diversity".  I, for one,
reject the concept of "full inclusion" or "partial inclusion".  You are
inclusive or you are not.  Let someone else make up some term they choose to
mean "partial inclusion" if they wish.  For my part, I believe that with
"inclusion" there is a quantum step between being or not being "inclusive".

These are my thoughts.  I am drawing a line in the sand and not allowing
others to equivocate and leave us out again.  "Inclusion" is or it is not,
and that means that we are included everywhere including taking our guides
with us and we are part of humanity if human beings truly believe that they
are "inclusive".

-----Original Message-----



***************************************************************************************************
This Email message and any attachment may contain information that is proprietary, legally privileged and/or confidential. This Email is intended solely for the use of the person(s) to which it is addressed. If you are not an 
intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivery of this Email to the intended recipient(s), you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this Email is strictly prohibited. If you have received 
this message in error, please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete this Email and any copies. 
***************************************************************************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: Vanessa Lowery1.vcf
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/nagdu_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120709/b139cdf7/attachment.ksh>