[stylist] question

[Judith Bron]

One of my kids is left handed.  She uses left handed scissors, holds a pen 
in her left hand and I was never able to teach her how to crochet.  She just 
does things differently. She is an accomplished woman with a beautiful 
family.  So she does things differently.  Bottom line is that she does what 
she has to or wants to.  Is she part off an "ism"?  Should extra funds be 
made avaiolable to her because she is not right handed?  If she baked a 
cookie would you refuse to eat it because someone left handed made it?  Or 
would you feel benevolent because you ate the cookie in spite of 
"disabilities"?  There are some societies where if they see a child favoring 
their left hand they tie the hand behind the child's back so they will be 
forced to use the right hand.  In some countries if a person is caught 
stealing they cut off the right hand.  Society has enslaved our mores.  Just 
be human, John.  What more can anyone expect from you?  Judith
----- Original Message ----- 
From: <LoriStay at aol.com>
To: <stylist at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2009 10:19 AM
Subject: Re: [stylist] question


I have to admit I've done some thinking on this matter.   Being 
blind--rather
than sighted--means managing life a tad differently.   One may take the 
train
instead of driving, and read braille instead of print, but one is still
traveling, still reading.   Reading a thermostat may involve hearing 
(presuming we
are not talking about deaf blind), but one still gets the information. 
It's
silly to pretend to be something one isn't.   Part of the problem is that
society has long held the thought that it is shameful to be blind (or 
disabled?),
stemming from the idea that blindness is a punishment for someone's sin.
Absurd as this is, it still persists.   That's why NFB says, there's no 
shame in
being blind.   It's just a physical characteristic.   One might as well be
ashamed of being tall, or short, or blue eyed.

Political correctness can be a bit of a problem, though.   NFB prefers the
word "Blind," because that's the situation.   Sight impaired seems to be the
latest, or person who is blind, rather than blind person.   I fail to see 
the
difference between the last two.   And as David would say, he isn't sight
impaired.   He has no sight to be impaired.
Lori

In a message dated 3/24/09 5:08:47 AM, johnlee at clarktouch.com writes:


> Talking like a white is certainly a choice, since anyone who speaks can
> choose to talk like that. It is within easy control. However, one cannot
> control blindness except the choice to become more blind, if you happen to
> be a blind wannabe. Being blind but wanting to be sighted and trying to be
> sighted is a failure to cope with what is beyond one's control.
>
>




**************
Feeling the pinch at the grocery store?  Make dinner for $10 or
less. (http://food.aol.com/frugal-feasts?ncid=emlcntusfood00000001)
_______________________________________________
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/jbron%40optonline.net