[Ohio-talk] : Sight Center versus Blind in the name

[Cheryl Fields]

Hello, all of you have valid points. It took me a while to catch on. I am
totally blind and therefore have no problems making that clear. Even when
people don't quite believe me, smiles. I did not understand Colleen's point
about using the term "sight." Recently there are conversations buzzing
around about re-branding the Cleveland agency, it may include adding Blind
to the name. However this name has never bothered me, but I do understand if
it is bothersome to others. What is most important to me is that
rehabilitation is provided at the best level from the best people possible.
When I was in elementary school, in the 60's, the blind and partially blind
students had a special school they attended. My cousin was in classes there
and they were labeled Sight Savers classes. Now, that was really a drag and
she suffered lots of ridicule from sighted students about this.  Fortunately
she did not allow this to affect her successes in life! Blessings, Cheryl 

-----Original Message-----
From: Ohio-talk [mailto:ohio-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Kaiti
Shelton via Ohio-talk
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2014 9:26 AM
To: COLLEEN ROTH; NFB of Ohio Announcement and DiscussioSubject: Re:
[Ohio-talk] Sight Center versus Blind in the name

Colleen,

You bring up a very interesting point.  I had a really interesting
discussion with someone over the summer.  He's totally blind now, but had
some vision for most of his life, so we were discussing terminology for
people who have some vision.  He had a hard time understanding why, even
though with the vision in my good eye I can identify shapes, colors,
movement, people, and other things at close distances minus the details
about them, I identify myself as blind.
He asked me what I would say if I didn't say blind, and I said visually
impaired.  He was surprised by this, since for him "partially sighted" seems
to carry a more positive connotation.  I am not in favor of the term partial
because it creates confusion for people who are trying to understand from a
sighted person's perspective, and it is sort of a denial of the blindness
because it leans toward sighted.
"Partially sighted" implies more sight than blindness, whereas "visually
impaired" to me, at least, is more straightforward.  I feel that if I tell
people that I'm partially sighted it wouldn't be as easy for them to
understand what I may need.  If I say visually impaired at a hotel, movie
theatre, etc, people are more likely to be helpful in the way I need them to
be.  He asked if I'd rather look at something as being partially there, or
to have the same thing an impaired whole.  Call me a pessimist, but I'll
keep visually impaired over describing myself as a "low partial."  Plus, you
never see things like, "The Cincinnati Association for the Blind and
Partially Sighted."  It just sounds dumb.

I agree that organizations, and people in general, need to be picky about
the terms they use.  I think it is important for people with some usable
vision to gain familiarity and comfort with identifying themselves as blind
as well.  It can be really tough to not quite fit in with the sighted, but
to also feel like you don't fit in with the blind.  More people are visually
impaired than totally blind as well, so this is something that a lot of
people have to deal with.

I remember when I was a young teenager, around 13 or 14, I was riding the
bus for an O&M lesson.  I was reading a book on my BrailleNote, and had my
cane tucked under my seet with my foot on it to keep it from rolling.  This
guy got on the bus and immediately tells the driver that he is partially
sighted and only has vision out of his right eye.  I chuckled a bit, because
it seemed really awkward.  When I got on the bus the driver saw my cane and
immediately knew what to do.  He asked me if I would like him to tell me
where my stop was, whereas this other guy had to ask.  When he sat down he
walked passed me, and did not sit in the front section like I was taught to
do.
I've remembered this, and wondered whether that decision was whether to put
himself with everyone else who was not disabled on the bus, or to deny the
blindness.

Sorry for the tangent, but what Colleen is saying is right.  I really do
think it is important that organizations use specific words, so that people
who are less comfortable with saying that they are blind become more
comfortable with it.

On 11/12/14, COLLEEN ROTH via Ohio-talk <ohio-talk at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> Hello Everyone,
> Well I am all for using one's remaining vision if it works for someone 
> and alternative techniques are not necessary.
> When the Toledo Society for the Blind changed xs' name it began to do 
> less and less for those who are totally blind or have very limited vision.
> Blind should be in the title of organizations who serve the blind.
> Even if Pisually Impaired was in the title the word blind should still 
> be there.
> Colleen Roth
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ohio-talk mailing list
> Ohio-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/ohio-talk_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> Ohio-talk:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/ohio-talk_nfbnet.org/kaiti.shelton%4
> 0gmail.com
>


--
Kaiti Shelton
University of Dayton 2016.
Music Therapy, Psychology, Philosophy
President, Ohio Association of Blind Students Sigma Alpha Iota-Delta Sigma

_______________________________________________
Ohio-talk mailing list
Ohio-talk at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/ohio-talk_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
Ohio-talk:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/ohio-talk_nfbnet.org/cherylelaine1957%40gm
ail.com