[nfbmi-talk] [NFBMI-talk] Here is something from FederationLiterature that you may wish to read.

Elizabeth Mohnke lizmohnke at hotmail.com
Wed Mar 6 03:36:23 UTC 2013


I honestly do not understand how a simple request to give one of our 
founding leaders the honor and respect he deserves to be such a big deal.

Elizabeth



--------------------------------------------------
From: "Fred Wurtzel" <f.wurtzel at att.net>
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 10:13 PM
To: "'NFB of Michigan Internet Mailing List'" <nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org>
Subject: Re: [nfbmi-talk] [NFBMI-talk] Here is something from 
FederationLiterature that	you may wish to read.

> Hi Elizabeth,
>
> With all due respect, Terry clearly did say the piece is from the NFB web
> site.  I don't think Terry did anything wrong.  I don't think you mean to
> take away from Dr. Jernigan's point or the point of the original post,
> either, but unfortunately we are talking about this rather than the very
> relevant comments that Dr. Jernigan is making about rehabilitation 
> agencies
> for the blind.  Our Michigan agency is facing some major challenges on a
> lack of course of direction and a commitment to sound principles of
> rehabilitation of the blind.
>
> You are studying Political Science.  Remember Machiavelli?  One of his 
> main
> tactics in defeating his opposition is to divide his enemies by getting 
> them
> fighting. We need to do our best to support one another to make us strong
> enough to bring about the necessary change in our agency.  Blind people 
> have
> been and are still being hurt by the unwise decisions, disregard for
> consumer input, lack of spending of the budget on services, the bloating 
> of
> top administration with multiple 100k personnel and the use of the agency 
> as
> an ATM for other programs.  When jobs for high-paid sighted people become
> more important than well-paying jobs for blind people it is time to work
> even harder together to reform the services.
>
> So, I am sorry to get on a rant or to preach to you, because I have a lot 
> of
> respect for your knowledge and understanding of law and policy.  I just 
> feel
> bad to see us picking at one another when none of us is the bad guy who is
> causing the Michigan agency to go so far off course.
>
> Warmest Regards,
>
> Fred
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NFBMI-talk [mailto:nfbmi-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf of
> Elizabeth Mohnke
> Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 4:50 PM
> To: NFB of Michigan Internet Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [NFBMI-talk] here is something from Federation Literature 
> that
> you may wish to read.
>
> And there is also this little thing called respect and giving credit when
> credit is due. If people are going to post things to this email list that
> are written by other people, they should be respectful and courteous 
> enough
> to give them the credit for writing it.
>
> When someone does not list the author for something they did not write, it
> comes across as something they wrote themselves. I understand that Terri
> probably did not mean to do this on purpose, which is why I simply 
> requested
> that she cite the author when posting things to the list that she did not
> write herself.
>
> Elizabeth
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Jordyn Castor" <jordyn2493 at gmail.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 3:12 PM
> To: "NFB of Michigan Internet Mailing List" <nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [nfbmi-talk] Here is something from Federation Literature 
> that
> youmay wish to read.
>
>> It just so happens that there is this little well-known tool called
>> Google.
>> If you type in "NFB To Man the Barricades" the very first link that
>> comes up is:
>> https://nfb.org/images/nfb/publications/convent/banque71.htm
>> Under the first heading is who it's by, where the address was
>> delivered, and the date if you need that information as well. Very easy 
>> to
> find...
>> So there you have it, the link to the properly cited article and all.
>> I hope you enjoy it.
>> Jordyn
>> On 3/5/2013 2:25 PM, Elizabeth Mohnke wrote:
>>> Hello Terri,
>>>
>>> If you are going to post works that are not your own, please give
>>> credit to the person who wrote it.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Elizabeth
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>> From: "trising" <trising at sbcglobal.net>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 1:08 AM
>>> To: "nfbmi List" <nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org>
>>> Subject: [nfbmi-talk] Here is something from Federation Literature
>>> that youmay wish to read.
>>>
>>>> Here is something from Federation Literature that you may wish to read.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> To Man the Barricades
>>>> Some of you may remember the story Will Rogers liked to tell about
>>>> his early career as a comedian in vaudeville. "I used to play a song
>>>> called 'Casey Jones' on the harmonica with one hand," he said, "and
>>>> spin a rope with the other, and then whine into the old empty rain
>>>> barrel ... and then in between the verses I used to tell jokes about
>>>> the Senate of the United States. If I needed any new jokes that
>>>> night, I used to just get the late afternoon papers and read what
>>>> Congress had done that day, and the audience would die laughing."
>>>>
>>>> This story reminds me of my own activities over the past twenty
>>>> years. I have gone all over the country as the guest of blind groups
>>>> and civic associations; and, like Will Rogers, I tell stories about
>>>> the Government of the United States-particularly the Department of
>>>> Health, Education, and Welfare, and the other "professionals" doing 
>>>> work
> with the blind.
>>>> And when I need any new jokes, I just get the latest reports from
>>>> the agencies and foundations and read what they have been doing
>>>> recently-and the audience dies laughing. Unless, of course, there
>>>> are people in the audience who are blind, or friends of the blind-and
> they die crying.
>>>>
>>>> Which is a roundabout way of saying that much of what goes on in the
>>>> journals and laboratories and workshops of the agencies for the
>>>> blind these days is a cruel joke. It is a mockery of social science
>>>> and a travesty on social service. Far from advancing the welfare and
>>>> well-being of blind people, it sets our cause back and does us harm.
>>>>
>>>> The blind, along with some other groups in our society, have become
>>>> the victims of a malady known as "R and D"-that is, Research and
>>>> Demonstration. The R and D projects are largely financed by the
>>>> Federal Department of Health, Education, and Welfare and account for
>>>> an ever-increasing chunk of its budget. The whole tone and direction
>>>> of programs for the blind in the country-rehabilitation, education,
>>>> social services, and the rest-have been altered as a result. The art
>>>> of writing grant applications, the tens of millions of dollars
>>>> available to fund the approved R and D projects, the resulting
>>>> build-up of staff in universities and agencies for the blind, the
>>>> need to produce some sort of seemingly scientific results in the
>>>> form of books and pamphlets to justify the staff salaries and the
>>>> field trips and conferences, and the wish for so-called "professional"
> status have all had their effect.
>>>> Blind people have become the objects of research and the subjects of
>>>> demonstration. They are quizzed, queried, and quantified; they are
>>>> diagnosed, defined, and dissected; and when the R and D people get
>>>> through with them, there is nothing left at all-at any rate, nothing
>>>> of dignity or rationality or responsibility. Despite all of their
>>>> talk about improving the quality of services to blind people (and
>>>> there is a lot of such talk these days), the research and
>>>> demonstration people see the blind as inferiors. They see us as
>>>> infantile, dependent wards. The signs of this creeping
>>>> condescension-of this misapplied science, this false notion of what
>>>> blind people are, and of what blindness means-are all about us. Some
>>>> things are big, and some are little; but the pattern is conclusive and
> the trend unmistakable.
>>>>
>>>> Consider, for instance, what has happened to the talking book. From
>>>> the very beginning of the library service back in the 1930's, the
>>>> first side of each talking-book record has concluded with these
>>>> words: "This book is continued on the other side of this record."
>>>> The flip side has always ended with: "This book is continued on the
>>>> next record." Surely no one can have any serious quarrel with this
> language. It serves a purpose.
>>>> The reader, absorbed in the narrative, may well not remember whether
>>>> he is on the first or second side of a record, and the reminder is
>>>> useful and saves time.
>>>>
>>>> In the last three or four years, however, something new has been added.
>>>> After the familiar "This book is continued on the next record," the
>>>> statement now appears: "Please replace this record in its envelope
>>>> and container." That one, I must confess, crept up on me gradually.
>>>> Although from the very beginning I found the statement annoying, it
>>>> took some time for its full significance to hit me.
>>>>
>>>> Here I was, let us say, reading a learned treatise on French
>>>> history-a book on Gallic statesmanship-one which presupposes a
>>>> certain amount of understanding and mental competence. The narrative
>>>> is interrupted by a voice saying "Please replace this record in its
> envelope and container."
>>>> Then it strikes me: These are the words one addresses to a moron or
>>>> a lazy lout. These words do not appear on records intended for the
>>>> use of sighted library borrowers. They are intended for the blind.
>>>> To be sure, they are not an overwhelming or unbearable insult. They
>>>> are only one more small evidence of the new custodialism, the
>>>> additional input of contempt for the blind recipient of services
>>>> which is in the air these days.
>>>>
>>>> I have heard that the words were added at the request of some of the
>>>> regional librarians because certain blind borrowers were careless
>>>> with the records. Are sighted people never careless with books or
> records?
>>>> Are such words at the end of the record really likely to make the
>>>> slob less slobby? The ordinary, normal human being (blind or
>>>> sighted) will, as a matter of course, put the record back into the
>>>> envelope and container. What else, one wonders, would he do with it?
>>>>
>>>> Regardless of all this, one thing is fairly certain: My remarks on
>>>> the subject will undoubtedly bring forth angry comments from library
>>>> officials and others that I am quibbling and grasping at straws,
>>>> that I am reading meanings that aren't there into innocent words. To
>>>> which I
>>>> reply: I am sure that no harm was meant and that the author of the
>>>> words did not sit down to reason out their significance, but all of
>>>> this is beside the point. We have reasoned out the significance, and
>>>> we are no longer willing for our road to hell to be paved with other
>>>> people's good intentions, their failure to comprehend, or their
>>>> insistence that we not quibble.
>>>>
>>>> Here is another illustration-again, a slight and almost trivial affair.
>>>> I had occasion recently to visit a public school where there was a
>>>> resource class for blind and partially seeing children. The teacher
>>>> moved about with me among the students. "This little girl can read
>>>> print," she said. "This little girl has to read Braille." Now, that
>>>> language is not oppressively bad. Its prejudice is a subtle thing.
>>>> But just imagine, if you will, a teacher saying of a pair of
>>>> children: "This little girl can read Braille; this little girl has
>>>> to read print." The supposition is that the child possessing some
>>>> sight, no matter how little, is closer to being a normal and
>>>> full-fledged human being; the one without sight can't cut it and has
>>>> to make do with inferior substitutes.
>>>>
>>>> Confront that teacher with her words, and she will be hurt. She will
>>>> say, "But that is not how I meant it. It was simply the way I said it."
>>>> It is true that she was not consciously aware of the significance of
>>>> her statement and that she did not mean to say what she said; but
>>>> she said exactly what she meant, and how she felt. And her students,
>>>> as well as visitors to her classroom, will be conditioned
>>>> accordingly. I don't wish to make too much of the teacher's
>>>> terminology, or the words on the talking-book record. Neither
> exemplifies any great cruelty or tragedy.
>>>> They are, however, straws in the wind; and either of them could be
>>>> the final straw-the straw that breaks the blind man's back, or
>>>> spirit. Far too many backs and spirits have been broken in that way,
>>>> and the breaking must stop.
>>>>
>>>> As I have said, some of the recent incidents in our field are small,
>>>> and some are big; but they fit together to make a pattern, and the
>>>> pattern is conclusive. During the past decade, for instance, the
>>>> vocational employment objective of rehabilitation has steadily
>>>> receded before the advancing tide of "social services" and "research
>>>> and development," and the Division for the Blind in the Federal
>>>> Rehabilitation Service has diminished accordingly in prominence and
>>>> importance. By 1967 rehabilitation had taken such a back seat that
>>>> it became submerged in a comprehensive pot of Mulligan stew set up
>>>> by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare called "Social
>>>> and Rehabilitation Service," with the emphasis clearly on the
>>>> "social." A new public-information brochure turned out by HEW,
>>>> listing all the department's branches and programs, placed
> rehabilitation-where do you suppose?-dead last.
>>>>
>>>> As far as the blind were concerned, the ultimate blow fell late last
>>>> year. Federal Register document 70-17447, dated December 28, 1970,
>>>> announced the abolition of the Division for the Blind altogether,
>>>> and its inclusion in the new Division of Special Populations! And
>>>> who are these "special populations"? They include, and I quote,
>>>> "alcoholics, drug addicts, arthritics, epileptics, the blind, heart,
>>>> cancer, and stroke victims, those suffering communication disorders,
>>>> et cetera." (I leave the specifics of the "et cetera: to your
>>>> imagination.) Therefore, half a century after the establishment of
>>>> the Federal vocational rehabilitation program, and almost as long
>>>> after the development of a special division of services for the
>>>> blind (and still longer since the creation of separate agencies or
>>>> commissions for the blind in most of the States) the blind of
>>>> America were to lose their identity and return to the almshouse for the
> sick and indigent.
>>>>
>>>> This was too much, and every major national organization and agency
>>>> (both of and for the blind) combined to resist it. By February of
>>>> 1971 the HEW officials had made a strategic withdrawal. They
>>>> announced that they had never intended to downgrade or de-emphasize
>>>> services to the blind; but that in order to clear up any possible
>>>> misunderstanding they were establishing a new "Office for the
>>>> Blind," to be on a par with the "Division of Special Populations,"
>>>> and in no way connected with it. Thus (for the moment) the tide was
>>>> reversed and the power of united action demonstrated; but the tide
>>>> is still the tide, and the trend is still the trend.
>>>>
>>>> It is not difficult to find the evidence. For example, under date of
>>>> February 4, 1971, the Federal Rehabilitation Services Administration
>>>> issued an information memorandum entitled "Subminimum Wage
>>>> Certificates for Handicapped Workers." The document is
>>>> self-explanatory; it is damning; and it is all too indicative of
>>>> what is happening to the blind in America today. "A recent revision to
> the wage and hour regulations,"
>>>> the memorandum begins, "broadens State vocational rehabilitation
>>>> agencies' certification responsibility with respect to employment of
>>>> handicapped workers at subminimum wages. The responsibility was
>>>> previously limited by regulation to certain categories of
>>>> handicapped persons employed by sheltered workshops.
>>>>
>>>> "The revision to the wage and hour regulations, effective February
>>>> 4, 1971," the memorandum continues, "authorizes State rehabilitation
>>>> agencies to certify certain disabled persons for work in competitive
>>>> employment at less than fifty percent of the statutory minimum wage
>>>> but not less than twenty-five percent."
>>>>
>>>> So said HEW in February of this year! No longer must the pay be even
>>>> fifty percent of the minimum wage! No longer is it limited to the
>>>> sheltered shop! It may now be extended to private industry, to
>>>> so-called "competitive" employment! And this, we are told, is
>>>> rehabilitation. We are not to quibble. We are not to read meanings
>>>> into things which are not there. We are not to find patterns or trends
> or hidden significance.
>>>> No! We are to take our twenty-five percent "competitive" employment,
>>>> and be grateful for it. That is what we are expected to do, but I
>>>> doubt that we will do it.
>>>>
>>>> I have already spoken about R and D-the so-called "research and
>>>> demonstration"-financed ever more heavily and lovingly by the
>>>> Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. I have at hand a
>>>> typical product of "R and D"-a comprehensive 239-page publication of
>>>> the American Foundation for the Blind, entitled A Step-by-Step Guide
>>>> to Personal Management for Blind Persons.1 I invite you now to
>>>> accompany me on a step-by-step guided tour through its pages and
>>>> mazes. But let me warn
>>>> you: It may be a bad trip.
>>>>
>>>> "One of the areas," we are told at the outset of this guidebook,
>>>> "where independence is valued most highly by a broad spectrum of
>>>> blind persons ... is personal management." I myself would put that a
>>>> little differently. I would say that the blind person should, and
>>>> commonly does, take for granted that independence begins at
>>>> home-that self-care comes before self-support-but that what he
>>>> values most highly in life is not his ability to master the simple
>>>> rituals of daily living, such as are detailed in this manual. It is
>>>> not his ability to wash his face, take a shower, clean his nails,
>>>> brush his hair, sit down on a chair, rise from a chair, stand
>>>> upright, wash his socks, light a cigarette, shake hands, nod his
>>>> head "yes," shake his head "no," and so on and so on through two
>>>> hundred-plus pages of instruction. No, these are not the supreme
>>>> attainments and values in the life of the blind person, or of any
>>>> other civilized person. They are merely the elementary motor and
>>>> mechanical skills which represent the foundation on which more
>>>> meaningful and significant achievements rest. The skills of personal
> management are rudimentary, not remarkable.
>>>>
>>>> However, the American Foundation's Guide to Personal Management for
>>>> Blind Persons does not put the matter in such modest perspective.
>>>> Rather, it is blown up to majestic proportions, as if it were not
>>>> the beginning but the end of self-realization and independence. Most
>>>> of all, it is presented as a very difficult and complicated
>>>> subject-this business of grooming and shaving, bathing and
>>>> dressing-virtually as the source of a new science. Much is made of
>>>> the "need for an organized body of realistic and practical personal
>>>> management techniques." The American Foundation, out of a deep sense
>>>> of professional obligation and the excitement of pioneering on new
>>>> scientific horizons, agreed as long ago as 1965 (in its own words)
>>>> "to undertake the responsibility for developing, over a period of
>>>> years, workable personal management techniques for blind persons."
>>>> To begin with, an AFB staff specialist was assigned to coordinate
>>>> the project, and he proceeded immediately to carry out a massive
>>>> survey of agencies throughout this country and Canada-on such
>>>> life-and-death questions and critical issues as how to teach blind
>>>> persons to shake hands correctly and put the right sock on the right
> foot.
>>>>
>>>> But surveys at a distance, no matter how thorough and scientific,
>>>> were not good enough for such profound subject matter. No. What was
>>>> needed was (to quote the report) "the pooled thinking and experience
>>>> of a fairly large number of persons from diverse backgrounds and
> programs."
>>>> In short, what was needed was a conference, or better yet, a series
>>>> of conferences-in big hotels in major cities, complete with
>>>> workshops, round-tables, lunches, dinners, social hours, and 
>>>> sensitivity
> sessions.
>>>> In the words of the report: "For three years, 1967, 1968, and 1969,
>>>> national meetings were held in New York, Chicago, and New Orleans at
>>>> which key personnel from representative agencies met both to develop
>>>> techniques and methods and to refine and improve already existing 
>>>> ones."
>>>>
>>>> Here, to illustrate, is a typical technique-developed and refined
>>>> over the years in New York, Chicago, and New Orleans, representing
>>>> the distilled wisdom (if that is the proper expression) of key
>>>> personnel from diverse backgrounds and specialized programs. Here,
>>>> under the broad classification "Bathing," is the sixteen-step
>>>> procedure for the "Sponge Bath." I quote in full:
>>>>
>>>> Orientation: Discuss how equipment can be most efficiently used when
>>>> taking a sponge bath.
>>>>
>>>> Equipment: Water, two containers, soap, cloth, towel, bath mat.
>>>>
>>>> Technique:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Disrobe.
>>>>
>>>> 2. Put water of desired temperature in sink or container.
>>>>
>>>> 3. Thoroughly wet washcloth and gently squeeze cloth together.
>>>>
>>>> 4. Take one corner in right hand, the other in left hand, bring
>>>> corners together and grasp in whole hand.
>>>>
>>>> 5. With other hand grasp remaining cloth. Hold washcloth in closed 
>>>> fist.
>>>>
>>>> 6. Hold one hand stationary while turning other hand to squeeze
>>>> excess water.
>>>>
>>>> 7. Unfold cloth and drape over palm of one hand. With other hand
>>>> pick up soap and dip into water, then rub back and forth from wrist
>>>> to tips of fingers on cloth.
>>>>
>>>> 8. Place soap back in dish.
>>>>
>>>> 9. Place soaped cloth in dominant hand.
>>>>
>>>> 10. Starting with face and neck, rub soaped cloth over skin portion.
>>>>
>>>> 11. Place soaped cloth in water and wring as described above several
>>>> times until soap has been removed.
>>>>
>>>> 12. Use same motion as step 10 to rinse soap from face and neck.
>>>>
>>>> 13. Unfold towel. Using either or both hands, dry using a vigorous
>>>> rubbing motion.
>>>>
>>>> 14. Continue to each section of body-washing, rinsing, and drying.
>>>>
>>>> 15. As towel gets damp, shift to a dry section.
>>>>
>>>> 16. For drying back, put bath towel over right shoulder, grasp lower
>>>> end hanging in back with left hand and grasp end hanging in front
>>>> with right hand. While holding towel pull up and down alternately
>>>> changing position of towel until entire area of back is dry.
>>>>
>>>> Immediately following this highly developed and refined
>>>> technique-the product of five years of national conferences and
>>>> international surveys-is the step-by-step guide to taking a "tub
>>>> bath." I feel that you will want to know that this affair of the tub
>>>> represents a more advanced and elaborate enterprise in personal
>>>> management. The greater complexity is evident at the outset. You
>>>> will recall that the first step in the sponge bath technique was:
>>>>
>>>> "Disrobe." But the first step in the tub bath exercise is: "Disrobe
>>>> and place clothing where it will not get wet." That is, of course, a
>>>> substantial increase in subtlety over the sponge bath.
>>>>
>>>> Let us pause here for a moment and contemplate the significance of
>>>> that
>>>> instruction:
>>>>
>>>> "Disrobe and place clothing where it will not get wet." What does it
>>>> tell us about the intelligence-the presumed intelligence-of the
>>>> blind person under instruction? It tells us that he has not the
>>>> sense to come in out of the rain; or, more exactly, that he has not
>>>> the sense to bring his clothes in out of the shower. He is presumed
>>>> to be either a mental case or a recent immigrant from the jungle,
>>>> who has never taken a bath before. This latter possibility is given
>>>> additional credence by instruction number fifteen: "As towel gets
>>>> damp, shift to a dry section." If the trainee has ever bathed
>>>> before, he will know about that. Only if he is a babbling idiot or
>>>> Bomba, the Jungle Boy, does he need to be given that extraordinary
>>>> advice. This presumption of incompetence or newborn innocence on the
>>>> part of the blind person is, indeed, pervasive of the entire 239-page
> guidebook.
>>>>
>>>> What else can it mean to say, with regard to the technique for
>>>> shaking
>>>> hands: "If desired, the hands may be moved in an up and down motion?"
>>>> What else can it mean to say, with regard to the technique for
>>>> nodding the head: "The head is held facing the person to whom you
>>>> wish to communicate ... With the head held in this position, move
>>>> the chin down towards the floor about two inches then raise it again
>>>> to the original position. Make this movement twice in quick 
>>>> succession."
>>>>
>>>> One last quotation, before we leave this magisterial work of applied
>>>> domestic science. Under the general heading of "Hand Gestures," we
>>>> find, the technique for "Applauding." It goes like this:
>>>>
>>>> a. With elbows close to the body, raise both hands until the
>>>> forearms are approximately parallel to the floor.
>>>>
>>>> b. Move each hand towards the other so that they come in contact
>>>> with one another towards the center of the body.
>>>>
>>>> c. The thumb of both hands is held slightly apart from the other
>>>> four fingers which are held straight and close together.
>>>>
>>>> d. The fingers of the right hand point slightly toward the ceiling
>>>> and the fingers of the left hand slightly toward the floor so that
>>>> when the hands come in contact with each other the palms touch but
>>>> the fingers do not.
>>>>
>>>> e. The thumb of the right hand rests on the knuckle of the left
>>>> thumb, the fingers of the right hand being above the fingers of the 
>>>> left
> hand.
>>>>
>>>> f. The hands are brought back to a position about eight to twelve
>>>> inches apart then brought together in a quick slapping motion.
>>>>
>>>> g. Polite applause would require slapping the hands together about
>>>> twice each second. More feeling would be expressed by the rapidity,
>>>> rather than the volume or loudness of the individual's applause.
>>>>
>>>> 2. Hands Inactive: When the hands are not being used for some
>>>> specific purpose, the most common position is resting the hands in
>>>> the lap. For example, the back of the left hand might rest on the
>>>> left or right leg, or in between, with the palm turned up; the right
>>>> hand with the palm turned down over the left hand and the fingers of
>>>> each hand slightly curled around each other.
>>>>
>>>> I cannot leave this great book and its truly vital subject without
>>>> reading to you the "Foreward" as written by Mr. M. Robert Barnett,
>>>> executive director of the American Foundation for the Blind: "We
>>>> would like to take this opportunity," he writes, "to express our
>>>> appreciation to the many persons professionally involved in work for
>>>> the blind across the country whose five years of hard work,
>>>> creativity, and experience have made A Step-by-Step Guide to
>>>> Personal Management for Blind Persons a reality. For many years,
>>>> countless persons have expressed a need for such a manual and we
>>>> hope that this publication will help to fill that need."
>>>>
>>>> I would like to know who those "countless persons" are who have
>>>> expressed a need for such a manual, wouldn't you? Are they blind
>>>> persons-and if so have they been waiting all these years without
>>>> being able to test the water, clap the hands, lift the bale, tote
>>>> the barge, nod, shake, shimmy, rattle and roll? How have they
>>>> managed their lives all these years without this personal guide from
>>>> the American Foundation and its cohorts?
>>>>
>>>> But maybe they are not the ones who have expressed a need for such a
>>>> manual. Perhaps it is not the blind at all but-as the Foundation
>>>> puts it-those "professionally involved in work for the blind" to
>>>> whom this definitive guidebook is addressed. Not our blind brothers,
>>>> but our blind brothers' keepers. Presumably they are the ones who
>>>> are to conduct the "orientation" sessions which precede each of the
>>>> various procedures and techniques-such as:
>>>>
>>>> "Discuss types of ties and materials from which ties are made (silk,
>>>> linen, leather, knit, synthetic, and wool)." And: "Discuss reasons
>>>> for brushing hair regularly and the suitability of different types
>>>> of brushes" (scrub brushes, toothbrushes, horse brushes,
>>>> sagebrushes, brushes with the law, etcetera). Well, admittedly, I
>>>> added the last part of that sentence myself; but I maintain that it
>>>> is no different in character, and no more foolish, than the trivial
>>>> and vacuous material set forth in most of the 239 pages.
>>>>
>>>> Indeed, the very triviality and vacuity of this misguided guidebook
>>>> may deceive some readers into dismissing it as an unfortunate
>>>> exception, not characteristic of the main body of work turned out
>>>> today by serious scholars and professionals in the field of work
>>>> with the blind. Let me emphasize, therefore, as strongly as I can,
>>>> the typical and conventional character of this manual. It is not the
>>>> exception. Its name is legion; its approach, its philosophy, and its
>>>> superficial contents have been duplicated many times over in the
>>>> research and demonstration projects of the American Foundation for
>>>> the Blind, the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, the
>>>> college institutes, and the State agencies caught up in the
>>>> profitable cycle of grants, surveys, tests, and questionnaires.
>>>>
>>>> There is another potential objection to dispose of. That is the
>>>> supposition that this set of instructions, simple-minded as it is,
>>>> is not really intended for the ordinary, capable blind person but
>>>> only for a minority. Moreover, it is true that the book itself makes
>>>> a verbal nod in this direction, admitting modestly that its
>>>> techniques are not the only ones possible and that there may be
>>>> other ways to approach the same goals. But the book also contains an
>>>> opposite disclaimer, to the effect that the proposed techniques may
>>>> be too complicated and advanced for some blind persons to handle
>>>> without preliminary instruction. However that may be, it is clear
>>>> that this lengthy five-year report is meant to be circulated
>>>> generally to agencies and schools, to parents and counselors, to
>>>> guides and custodians, without reservation or qualification.
>>>>
>>>> The best evidence of how this book is intended to be read is to be
>>>> found in its title. It does not say that it is a step-by-step guide
>>>> to personal management for mentally retarded or extremely backward
>>>> blind persons. It does not say it is a guide for tiny children. It
>>>> says what it means, and means what it says- namely, that it is A
>>>> Step-by-Step Guide to Personal Management for Blind Persons.
>>>>
>>>> And we can do no less than that ourselves; we must also say what we
>>>> mean. As long as such insulting drivel about us continues to be
>>>> issued in the name of science by agencies doing work with the
>>>> blind-as long as Federal money continues to be available to support
>>>> it-as long as the climate of general public opinion continues to
>>>> tolerate it-as long as blind persons continue to be found who can be
>>>> coaxed or hoodwinked into participating in it-then, for just so long
>>>> must we of the National Federation of the Blind raise our voices to
>>>> resist it, denounce it, and expose it for the pseudoscience and the
> fraud which it is.
>>>>
>>>> The Federal research and demonstration projects, the wording on the
>>>> talking-book records, the attempt to abolish the Division for the
>>>> Blind in Federal rehabilitation, the payment of subminimum wages in
>>>> sheltered shops and private industry, and the guidebooks to tell us
>>>> how to run our daily lives are all straws in the wind, signs of the
>>>> times. But there are other, more hopeful signs. Though the Library
>>>> of Congress tells us to replace our records in the envelopes and
>>>> containers, its book selection policies have been refreshingly
>>>> updated. More and better books are now available to the blind than
>>>> ever before, including best-sellers and popular magazines. Likewise,
>>>> though the Division for the Blind was abolished at the Federal
>>>> level, the move was successfully resisted and reversed. And although
>>>> teachers still talk of blind people who have to read Braille and
>>>> can't read print, although subminimum wages are still allowed in
>>>> sheltered shops and private industry, and although the Foundation's
>>>> guidebook is still distributed by the hundreds and thousands to slow
>>>> our progress, we (the organized blind) are abroad in the land in 
>>>> growing
> numbers-aware of the peril and prepared to fight it.
>>>> It is just that simple: We are prepared to fight, and we will fight.
>>>> We don't want conflict or trouble with anyone; we don't want to
>>>> quibble or be aggressive or militant; we don't want strife or
>>>> dissension; but the time is absolutely at an end when we will
>>>> passively tolerate second-class citizenship and custodial treatment.
>>>> We are free men, and we intend to act like it. We are free men, and
>>>> we intend to stay that way. We are free men, and we intend to defend
>>>> ourselves. Let those who truly have the best interests of the blind
>>>> at heart join with us as we move into the new era of equality and
>>>> integration. Let those who call our conduct negative or destructive 
>>>> make
> the most of it!
>>>>
>>>> I want to say a few words now to those agencies doing work with the
>>>> blind who march with us in the cause of freedom, who are glad to see
>>>> the blind emancipated, and who work with us as human beings-not as
>>>> statistics or case histories or inferior wards. To such agencies I
>>>> say
>>>> this: You have nothing to fear from the organized blind movement.
>>>> Your battles are our battles. Your cause is our cause. Your friends
>>>> are our friends. Your enemies are our enemies. We will go with you
>>>> to the legislatures and the Federal Government to secure funds for
>>>> your operation. We will urge the public to contribute to your
>>>> support. We will defend you from attack and work with you in a
>>>> partnership of progress.
>>>>
>>>> Now, let me say something to those agencies who still look back to
>>>> yesterday, who condescend to the blind, who custodialize and patronize.
>>>> To them I say this: Your days are numbered. Once men have tasted
>>>> freedom, they will not willingly or easily return to bondage. You
>>>> have told us as blind people and you have told the community at
>>>> large that we are not capable of managing our own affairs, that you
>>>> are responsible for our lives and our destinies, that we as blind
>>>> people must be sheltered and segregated-and that even then, we are
>>>> not capable of earning our own keep. You have told us that we as
>>>> blind people do not really have anything in common and that we,
>>>> therefore do not need an organization-that there is no such thing as
>>>> an "organized blind movement." But you have not spoken the truth.
>>>>
>>>> If you tell us that you are important and necessary to our lives, we
>>>> reply: It is true. But tear down every agency for the blind in the
>>>> Nation, destroy every workshop, and burn every professional journal;
>>>> and we can build them all back if they are needed. But take away the
>>>> blind, and your journals will go dusty on the shelves. Your
>>>> counselors will walk the streets for work, and your broom corn will
>>>> mold and rot in your sheltered shops. Yes, we need you; but you need
>>>> us, too. We intend to have a voice in your operation and your
>>>> decisions since what you do affects our lives. We intend to have
>>>> representation on your boards, and we intend for you to recognize our
> organizations and treat us as equals.
>>>> We are not your wards, and there is no way for you to make us your
>>>> wards. The only question left to be settled is whether you will
>>>> accept the new conditions and work with us in peace and partnership
>>>> or whether we must drag you kicking and screaming into the new era.
>>>> But enter the new era you will, like it or not.
>>>>
>>>> Next, I want to say something to those blind persons who are aware
>>>> of our movement and who have had an opportunity to join it but who
>>>> have not seen fit to do so. In this category I also place those
>>>> blind persons who are among us but not really of us, who
>>>> (technically speaking) hold membership in the Federation but are not
> really part of the movement.
>>>> The non-Federation and the noncommitted blind are a strange phenomenon.
>>>> Some of them are successful in business or the professions. I have
>>>> heard them say, "I really don't need the Federation. Of course, if I
>>>> could do anything to help you people, I would be glad to do it, but
>>>> I am independent. I have made it on my own." I have heard them say:
>>>>
>>>> "You really can't expect me to go down to that local meeting of the
>>>> blind. Nobody goes there except a few old people, who sit around and
>>>> drink coffee and plan Christmas parties. I am a successful lawyer,
>>>> or businessman, or judge; and I am busy. Besides, they never get
>>>> anything done. They just talk and argue." I have heard them say: "I
>>>> don't know that I necessarily have anything in common with other
>>>> blind people just because I'm blind. Almost all my friends are
>>>> sighted. My life is busy with bowling, hiking, reading, or my
>>>> business or profession." I have heard them say: "You people in the
>>>> Federation are too aggressive. You are always in a fight with
>>>> somebody, or bickering among yourselves. I am an individualist and 
>>>> never
> was much of a joiner."
>>>>
>>>> I have heard some of them say: "I am an employee of a governmental
>>>> or private agency doing work with the blind, and I think it would
>>>> destroy my professional relationship with my clients if I were to
>>>> work actively in the Federation. Anyway, we all have a common
>>>> concern, the betterment of blind people; so I'll make my
>>>> contribution by working as a 'professional' in the field. Besides,
>>>> not all blind people agree with you or want to join your
>>>> organization, and as a 'professional' I have to represent and work with
> all blind people."
>>>>
>>>> I have heard them say all of these things, and to such blind persons
>>>> I say this: You are patsies! Not only that but you are also
>>>> deceiving yourselves and failing to act in your own best interest.
>>>> Further, you are profiting from the labor and sacrifice, and are
>>>> riding on the backs, of the blind who have joined the movement and
>>>> worked to make it possible for you to have what you have. Some of
>>>> you feel superior to many of the blind who belong to the Federation
>>>> (especially those who work in the sheltered shops or draw welfare),
>>>> but your feelings of superiority are misplaced; for collectively these
> people have clothed you and fed you.
>>>> They have made it possible for you to have such equality in society
>>>> and such opportunity as you now enjoy. Resent what I say if you
>>>> will, but it is the truth, whether you like it or not and whether
>>>> you admit it or not. It is true for those of you who work in the
>>>> agencies as well as for those of you who work in private endeavor.
>>>>
>>>> If you think this movement should be better or that it should be of
>>>> higher caliber, then join us and help make it that way. If you think
>>>> the local meetings or the State conventions are dull or uninspiring,
>>>> then do your part to make them different. Even animals in the jungle
>>>> have sense enough to hunt in packs. The blind ought to be at least as
> intelligent.
>>>>
>>>> We need you, and we want you as active participants in the movement;
>>>> but until you will join, we must do the best we can without you. We
>>>> must carry you on our backs and do your work for you, and we will do
>>>> it. The fact that we say you are patsies does not mean that we
>>>> resent you. Far from it. You are our brothers, and we will continue
>>>> to look upon you as such, regardless of how irresponsibly you
>>>> behave. We are trying to get you to think about the implications of
>>>> your actions. We are trying to get you to join with us to help make
>>>> things better for other blind people and for yourselves. We are
>>>> trying to get you to stop being patsies.
>>>>
>>>> Finally, I want to address myself to the active members of the
>>>> NFB-to the blind, and to our sighted brothers who have made our
>>>> cause their cause. To the active Federationists I say this: We are
>>>> not helpless, and we are not children. We know our problems, and we
>>>> know how to solve them. The challenge which faces us is clear, and
>>>> the means of meeting that challenge are equally clear. If we fail in
>>>> courage or nerve or dedication, we have only ourselves to blame.
>>>>
>>>> But, of course, we will not fail. The stakes are too high and the
>>>> need too great to permit it. To paraphrase the Biblical statement:
>>>> Upon the rock of Federationism we have built our movement, and the
>>>> gates of hell shall not prevail against it! Since 1969 we have
>>>> talked a great deal about joining each other on the barricades. If
>>>> there was ever a time, that time is now. What we in the Federation
>>>> do during the next decade may well determine the fate of the blind
>>>> for a hundred years to come. To win through to success will require
>>>> all that we have in the way of purpose, dedication, loyalty, good
>>>> sense, and guts. Above all, we need front-line soldiers, who are
>>>> willing to make sacrifices and work for the cause. Therefore, I ask
>>>> you again today (as I did last year and the year
>>>> before): Will you join me on the barricades?
>>>>
>>>> FOOTNOTE
>>>> 1. American Foundation for the Blind, A Step-by-Step Guide to
>>>> Personal Management for Blind Persons, New York, New York, 1970.
>>>>
>>>> Back to top
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> nfbmi-talk mailing list
>>>> nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org
>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
>>>> for
>>>> nfbmi-talk:
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org/lizmohnke%40
>>>> hotmail.com
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nfbmi-talk mailing list
>>> nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> nfbmi-talk:
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org/jordyn2493%40
>>> gmail.com
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nfbmi-talk mailing list
>> nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> nfbmi-talk:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org/lizmohnke%40ho
>> tmail.com
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfbmi-talk mailing list
> nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> nfbmi-talk:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org/f.wurtzel%40att.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfbmi-talk mailing list
> nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> nfbmi-talk:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org/lizmohnke%40hotmail.com
> 




More information about the NFBMI-Talk mailing list