[stylist] question

Wed Mar 25 12:47:19 UTC 2009

The labeling of groups according to some falsely researched sociologists is 
for the sake of those who aren't a part of the group being labelled.  When 
New York State labeled the blind visually impaired I'm sure the State 
Assembly felt fuzzy and warm.  After all, they just lifted a labeling burden 
from those who were blind.  However, no blind person saw better with their 
eyes, got a higher grade at school or got a job faster because some 
bureaucrat had to feel that they had done something very benevolent towards 
a charitable group that was waiting for them to be benevolent so that the 
targetted group could have a better life.  Bureaucracies have done this with 
a lot of minorities.  But they are too stupid, or self centered to notice 
that their actions are as useful as spitting in the ocean.  Judith

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "James Canaday M.A. N6YR" <n6yr at sunflower.com>
To: "NFBnet Writer's Division Mailing List" <stylist at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 1:31 AM
Subject: Re: [stylist] question

> sadly,
> many of the terms, particularly "visually impaired"  have been promoted by 
> paternalistic researchers/professors.  I knew one at kansas university. 
> had all kinds of publications, teaching that circumlocution actually 
> helped us blind, and when we disagreed she dismissed our protests.
>
> if white professors published and insisted upon how blacks should be 
> labeled, how long would that last?
>
> unfortunately I had to take a class as a grad student from that crone. 
> crone is a technical term.
> she never accepted that we blind people accepted the term and chose it for 
> ourselves.
> jc
>
> Jim Canaday M.A.
> Lawrence, KS
>
> At 01:45 PM 3/24/2009, you wrote:
>>John, The reality, as much as you disagree, is that being sighted is 
>>better than being blind.  Terms like "visually impaired", "Visually 
>>challenged" or any of the like are legislated terms.  I can't see any 
>>better or worse when a bureaucrat describes my visual limitations.  I am 
>>what I am.  Like I said before, I have to take those limitations, do the 
>>best I can to do what I am capable of and continue striving to be the best 
>>me I can be.  I don't care how society looks at my limitations.  And, yes, 
>>they are limitations.  I have to be the one to deal with them.  Almost 
>>every person in this world has limitations.  Some can create beautiful 
>>artwork, some can't.  Some can write beautifully, some can't put together 
>>a cognizant statement either verbally or in writing.  Some have athletic 
>>prowess while others are happy being couch potatoes.  Some love to eat 
>>while others are skinny and physically fit their entire life.  All 
>>"problems", all "limitations" when put in the perspective of the optimum 
>>and people all over the world live with them every day.  When was the last 
>>time you heard of the "art impaired" person? Or the person who can't sing 
>>one note without causing distress to the other person's eardrums?  Are 
>>there cultures for the tone deaf?  The person who can't draw a straight 
>>line?  John, deal with John.  Society has enough problems.  As a society 
>>we have a lot to deal with, but making John socially comfortable isn't one 
>>of them.
>>----- Original Message ----- From: "John Lee Clark" 
>><johnlee at clarktouch.com>
>>To: "'NFBnet Writer's Division Mailing List'" <stylist at nfbnet.org>
>>Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2009 1:56 PM
>>Subject: Re: [stylist] question
>>
>>
>>>Lori:
>>>
>>>I love the words blind and deaf.  I abhor anything with impaired in it.
>>>
>>>Although the definition of blind may say one who cannot see, and that's a
>>>negative description, we still have the opportunity to neutralize the 
>>>word
>>>itself and have it convey something else entirely, into something that's
>>>cool.  Same with deaf.  We can take it and turn it around, and associate 
>>>it
>>>with culture, pride, ASL, all sorts of great and positive things.
>>>
>>>But you can't neutralize and turn around a term like sight impaired. 
>>>Tthat
>>>term does two very bad, bad, bad things.  First, it implies that sight is
>>>the ideal, that it's right, and what we SHOULD have, and that if we don't
>>>have it, we SHOULD want it.  This is society talking, "Sight is better."
>>>
>>>Second, the term implies that we're broken or we're short of the ideal, 
>>>or
>>>we've fallen from the grace of what society says is normal.  This is very
>>>bad, bad, bad.
>>>
>>>Does NFB merely "prefer" the word blind?  It shouldn't.  it should 
>>>embrace
>>>it absolutely.
>>>
>>>John
>>>
>>>No virus found in this outgoing message.
>>>Checked by AVG.
>>>Version: 7.5.557 / Virus Database: 270.11.26/2020 - Release Date: 
>>>3/24/2009
>>>9:19 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/jbron%40optonline.net
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>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/n6yr%40sunflower.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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 