[stylist] A New Member
David Andrews
dandrews at visi.com
Tue Dec 30 02:25:36 UTC 2008
John:
You raise some interesting, and thought-provoking points. When I
talk about full inclusion, I don't mean in terms of assimilation,
that is us becoming little sighted persons. I mean that we have
access to information and devices always, in all places and at all
times. Our means of access isn't special and granted at the whims of
others. Hopefully with such access, and a change in attitudes,
blindness merely is a characteristic like anything else you can name.
You are right that there is little that separates us from persons who
see, physically, however one main difference, is there are lights
everywhere. It is taken granted that their means of access will be
provided we must work much harder for ours and even then it is only partial.
Dave
At 02:37 PM 12/29/2008, you wrote:
>Dave:
>
>Well, there is certainly a difference there. Many culturally deaf people
>truly do not want to hear. They are an oppressed minority, but in more in
>the way blacks and other ethnic groupsare oppressed. You'll find very few
>black people who would want to be white.
>
>Why is that? Because blacks recognize that their blackness in and of itself
>has nothing to do with why they are poorer, in a lower social class, etc.
>It's all because society has decided to exclude and oppress people of color.
>It is in the white establishment's greedy and all too natural interest to
>protect its wealth and power.
>
>The deaf, too, recognize that the reasons they are sometimes in a lesser
>position has nothing to do with deafness. It all has to do with the long
>tradition of Social Darwinism, whereby the elite in mainstream society
>persuades itself that it is superior.
>
>While you and others seem to believe in "accepting" your blindness, deafness
>is not something that needs to be "accepted" for those in the signing
>community. They just are.
>
>I don't think that blindness is ever the problem in any situation. It is
>never the source of any obstacle or barrier. It is only other people, or
>the way things are designed or labeled, and notions that may cause problems.
>
>You know, "coping" is not a word culturally deaf people use at all. For
>"coping" to make sense as a concept, you need a "problem" to go along with
>it. Black people don't cope with being black. They only need to deal with
>racism. Women don't need to cope with being female; it's sexism that they
>sometimes encounter and have to fight against. The deaf is the same. What
>they sometimes deal with is called audism. But deafness itself is a
>non-issue, and in fact it doesn't even really exist.
>
>I suspect there are two factors that helped make the deaf community more
>like an ethnic one than a disability community. One is that they use a
>different language. This means the subliminal messages society sends to
>everyone about what "normal" is and about what is "beautiful" and what is
>not, much of it goes to deaf ears in the case of the deaf. So they don't
>internalize as much of the messages. Society can simply be ignored. When
>deaf people do engage with society, and if they encounter some problems, it
>is usually obvious to them who's at fault. If they're rejected for a job,
>they don't feel sorry they're deaf and wish they weren't deaf so they could
>get the job. What they see quite plainly is that the interviewer was a big
>fat hearing bigot. Just the same way the black person would see it. It
>doesn't mean there are no frustrations--there are, but it doesn't get to you
>in such a way that you blame your difference.
>
>The second factor is that deafness is hereditary in many cases. There are
>many deaf families with multiple generations of mostly deaf people. Deaf
>parents are sad and disappointed if they beget hearing children. Some have
>taken measures to make sure their offspring is going to be deaf.
>
>But the blind, I suspect most don'['t have blind parents or siblings or
>anything. I understand that most disabled people are the only ones in their
>families to be the way they are. This along with the society and them
>sharing the same language may add up to make a most formidable mechanism in
>which they are indoctrinated in why their disability is not normal.
>
>If there is a problem, it's just the problem of being human. ALL human
>beings, even the most developed and strongest, are extremely weak. No one
>can fly like a bird. All human eyesight is quite limited and weak--nobody
>can see like an eagle or see in the dark. How much a strong man can lift is
>incredibly paltry compared with what most species can exert. Humans can
>stay underwater only for three measly minutes. We also can't run very fast
>at all.
>
>With this in mind, the differences between those who hear and don't, and
>those who see and those who don't--the difference is so tiny it's a joke.
>But trust society to find ways to make a big deal out tiny specks like that.
>Society has used mere differences in the color of mere skin to devastate the
>lives of millions. Society has used the mere difference in gender to put
>women completely at the mercy of men. Society has used silly differences in
>religion and language to promote self-serving interests, as the British have
>done to French Canadians or the Nazis have done to the Jews and so on.
>Society is using such tiny differences in human organs to make a big deal
>out of deafness, blindness, whatever.
>
>If you think about it, the only things that DO help hearing or sighted
>people have it better has everything to do with how society is designed and
>not designed. When it gets dark, the sighted person turns on a lamp to
>read. Without the lamp, there is a huge difference in his ability to
>continue reading. That's because his sight is not that great to begin with.
>Yet the sighted person doesn't feel disabled at all. There's that lamp, and
>he doesn't even think about it and doesn't even realize he is using a
>special accommodation to help him because he is so weak. The things people
>do, all of it has to do with the sophisticated technology and structures and
>tools that make human beings the masters of the world: airplanes, cars, tall
>buildings, submarines, guns, computers, whatever.
>
>The physical differences are slight, but society is hugely discriminatory
>with all manner of apparatus. They tell you that you use accommodations,
>that you use assistive technology, that you need special services. But ALL
>human beings need accommodations, ALL technology is assistive, and everyone
>uses services. Yet you are made to feel that you are using special stuff
>because there's something wrong with you.
>
>If there's a problem, it's just that we all are human. The solution to that
>problem is the human mind and soul. It is all through the resourcefulness
>of the human intellect that all cultures all over the world overcome this
>universal problem.
>
>I share this perspective so that you can understand that the deaf who are
>part of the signing community truly and from the heart of their hearts do
>not consider deafness as a disability at all. It is just purely a social
>construction.
>
>Now, as for NFB, I am glad that its mission is far more appealing to me than
>the missions of some other organizations. I am sorry that some would
>consider it a nuisance, instead of bigotry and discrimination being the real
>nuisances, but I am all for empowering blind people. Their merely
>"accepting" their blindness is certainly better than denying it or fighting
>it, though I would love it if some actually would embrace it as I do my
>deafblindness.
>
>But I remain resistant to the goal of full inclusion. Mainstream society is
>quite flawed and it's not like it's the Promised Land. I am all for being
>mobile in it, taking advantage of its resources, possessing part of its
>wealth, having all the rights and privileges that it offers, but I fail to
>reconcile full inclusion with still being blind, still being different. The
>key word here is "full"--I'm all for inclusion in employment and stuff like
>that, and zero tolerance for discrimination, but "'full inclusion" to me
>smacks of assimilation. Why? Because assimilation would likely mean
>rejecting blindness. If by full inclusion you mean making sure that the
>range of "accepted" diversity in mainstream society extends to blind people
>without requiring them to be any less blind, that's what I would be all for.
>
>John
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: stylist-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:stylist-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
>Behalf Of David Andrews
>Sent: Monday, December 29, 2008 12:42 PM
>To: NFBnet Writer's Division Mailing List
>Subject: Re: [stylist] A New Member
>
>John:
>
>First, I need to say that how blind persons feel is not just one
>way. Our feelings, desires, reactions etc. range across the full
>spectrum, so there isn't just one point of view.
>
>I must also say that many of us here, on this list, but not all, are
>going to reflect versions of what NFB philosophy states -- as this
>list, and its Mother division are a part of the NFB.
>
>In the NFB we believe that it is "respectable" to be blind. we say
>that given proper training, and opportunity, blindness can be reduced
>to a nuisance. Our goal is to have blind people fully included into
>society.
>
>Not all blind people feel as we do, but we are the largest organized
>group within the blind community, and have the most articulated
>positions on a variety of subjects.
>
>So, to your question, do we want to be sighted. Possibly, but I am
>not sure that is the proper question. Most of us believe that you
>need to accept your blindness and get on with your life. While in
>your heart of hearts, you may want to be sighted you know it isn't
>going to happen, and you must do the best you can as a blind person.
>
>I suspect that the deaf say that they want to remain deaf and defend
>everything about it as a way to establish pride and personal
>identity. Being an oppressed minority this is a valid way of moving
>forward. I further suspect that if you could get past all of these
>trappings and you asked most deaf people if they wanted to hear, they
>would say yes. All things being equal, I would love to see again,
>but know it isn't going to happen, so I get on with my life.
>
>Dave
>
>At 06:50 PM 12/28/2008, you wrote:
> >Dave:
> >
> >You're right. Braille is merely a code for English, whereas ASL is a
> >language unto itself, with its own grammar and structure.
> >
> >As for numbers in populations: There are twenty eight million people with
> >hearing loss. However, the deaf community is much smaller than that, with
> >perhaps two to three million.
> >
> >I imagine that blind people who are "involved" in the blind community is a
> >smaller number than the total of people with vision loss.
> >
> >Anyway, the deaf identify themselves with other cultural and linguistic
> >minorities. They don't identify with the disabled communities. While
> >disability studies occasionally discuss the deaf community, there's a whole
> >academic category called Deaf Studies and its findings and narratives
> >resemble African American Studies, Women's Studies, Hispanic Studies, etc.
> >much more than Disability Studies.
> >
> >When I first started to meet hearing blind people, I was shocked to learn
> >that many of them thought there were something "wrong" and "not normal"
> >about being blind. Some would even try for a cure if there was one. This
> >was totally different from deaf cultural beliefs which hold that there's
> >nothing wrong about being deaf.
> >
> >So I am wondering, if full inclusion in the mainstream is indeed the goal,
> >what it would mean for how you perceieve your own blindness. The deaf's
> >goals are similar to other ethnic minorities--sure, they want to get in
> >movies, they want to get all the equal rights, they want respect and
> >recognition, but NO WAY do they want to be white! They want to remain
> >black, Latino, etc. The Deaf is the same.
> >
> >So my question is: Are you saying that blind people want the respect,
> >rights, etc. but they also want to be sighted?
> >
> >John
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Writers Division web site:
>http://www.nfb-writers-division.org <http://www.nfb-writers-division.org/>
>
>stylist mailing list
>stylist at nfbnet.org
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/stylist_nfbnet.org
>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>stylist:
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/stylist_nfbnet.org/johnlee%40clarktouc
>h.com
>
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG.
>Version: 7.5.552 / Virus Database: 270.10.1/1868 - Release Date: 12/29/2008
>10:48 AM
>
>
>No virus found in this outgoing message.
>Checked by AVG.
>Version: 7.5.552 / Virus Database: 270.10.1/1868 - Release Date: 12/29/2008
>10:48 AM
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Writers Division web site:
>http://www.nfb-writers-division.org <http://www.nfb-writers-division.org/>
>
>stylist mailing list
>stylist at nfbnet.org
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/stylist_nfbnet.org
>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for stylist:
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/stylist_nfbnet.org/dandrews%40visi.com
>
>
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
>Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.1/1868 - Release Date:
>12/29/2008 10:48 AM
More information about the Stylist
mailing list