Friday, April 4, 2014

A Really Big Problem

Journalists don’t handle disability-themed stories well. It isn’t just the words they use ... like "wheelchair bound” and “handicapped” ... it's that they rarely report what disabled people, themselves say. Disabled people are always in the third person. We don’t do things. We have things done to or for us.

"Acme widgets hired 10 disabled people", not, "10 disabled people got jobs at Acme widgets".

We hear how mothers and fathers, brothers and sisters, teachers and care workers feel about "their" disabled people. Reporters almost never ask disabled people how they feel about their family, friends, and service providers. Or, if they ask, we don't know about it because the disabled person's voice is usually missing or severely minimized in the story that is reputed to be about them.

"Marybeth loves going to the Murgatroy Center!” A reporter hears this from Dad, and it is relevant to report because Dad is part of the story. But does the reporter ask Marybeth how she feels about going to the Murgatroy Center? Most often non. Yet, reporters are supposed to be skeptical. They’re supposed to get direct quotes and double-check the validity of claims.

This problem is what set me off about how Alex and Frederic Bilodeau were covered … for the second time … during this year’s Winter Olympics. We heard all about Frederic from everyone imaginable, except for Frederic. It seems like an especially acute problem with stories about intellectually disabled people. Are there perceived issues of consent? Do families and agencies shield intellectually disabled people? Or, are reporters just too lazy or scared to make the slightly greater effort to do a meaningful interview with someone who talks strangely, or who may take a bit longer to assemble her thoughts?

It is a widespread, remarkably consistent failure in journalism today. I suspect it has a huge and mostly unexamined effect on how we are viewed. Maybe there ought to be some new journalistic ethics rules for disability stories.

3 Ableisms: Part 3 - Asshole Ableism

Ideas topic icon
There is a strain of conventional wisdom that disability prejudice, though annoying and sometimes limiting, is otherwise benign. I think this is because we tend to compare it with other kinds of prejudice that are more notorious. Rightly or not, when we hear “Racism”, we think about lynchings, firehoses, and police dogs attacking peaceful African-American protesters. When we hear “Homophobia”, we think about gay high school students being bullied, nasty, hostile epithets, and gays and lesbians being beaten up and subjected to a seemingly inexplicable hostility. Sexism has a wide range of manifestations, and we can easily conjure up images of the casual degradation of women in the workplace, (if you can’t picture it, just watch “Mad Men”), and sexism’s ultimate expression, rape, is clearly an act of hostility.

But nobody “hates” disabled people. Do they?

I’m not sure “hate” is the right word, but people do dehumanize us. People are often disgusted by the sight of us. Increasingly I fear, as we asset our rights more directly and personally, some people respond with contempt and resentment. And history of the not to distant past reveals a literal “freak show” of accepted practices and ideas that makes the blood run cold.

So why do I call this brand of Ableism, that is so full of malice something as trivial-sounding as “Asshole Ableism”?

It is because few people consciously espouse the worst Ableist ideas. Rather, I think they are more often convictions that people have and hold onto out of sheer bull-headedness. On some level, they know these views are “unpopular”, but almost for that reason they hold tighter to them, thinking that it’s brave and truth-telling to do so. They think that they are more insightful and honest than everyone else, because they are willing to say the hard things others aren’t. This, to me, is the epitome of an Asshole … the proud waving of the flag of ignorance … selfishness disguised as a working philosophy.

What are we talking about here? On to some examples of Asshole Ableism:

- Feeling as though having to deal with disabled people in everyday life is mainly an inconvenience designed to make your day harder. “Oh, great, this is going to take forever!”, “I wish she'd get out of my way!”, “Kids like that should be kept at home!"

- Discredited stereotypes that people still cling to, even if in secret … that intellectually disabled people are sexually depraved, mentally disabled are violent, and physically disabled are bitter.

- The suspicion that a lot of “so-called” disabled people are either faking it, are deluded, or just claim disability to get attention.

- Complaining that disabled people have too many benefits and special privileges already, or that too much money and resources are expended on supporting severely disabled people, who can never amount to anything anyway.

Picture of Nazi German propaganda poster in favor of euthanasia
- Belief that disabled people should not have children, a leftover from just a few decades ago when a little bit of new knowledge about genetics led to the mainstream respectability of eugenics, the idea of controlling the reproduction of whole populations so as to “improve” the human species. This, in turn, led to arguably the most terrifying episode of Ableism in recorded history, the Nazi Action T4 program. Even on the individual level, of course, there have always been people who assume that disabled people are, by definition, unfit parents.

- Drawing a sharp distinction between physical disabled people (basically okay, capable of independence, and not scary once you get to know them), and mentally and intellectually disabled people (who are mysterious, unknowable, and in need of constant supervision). This allows a person to claim they are open minded towards one group of disabled people, but “realistic” about another.

- Parents who objectify, shelter, and overprotect their disabled children, and continue to treat them as dependent children into adulthood. This usually starts as "Well-Meaning Ableism", but when taken too far, it curdles into a twisted mix of parental duty, guilt, and martyrdom that basically wastes the lives of the disabled people involved.

- Supporting legalization of assisted suicide, with severely disabled people in mind. This is a hot button issue with a lot of considerations that have nothing to do with disability. The fact remains that there is a fairly broad acceptance of the idea that choosing death is a reasonable response to being significantly disabled. That is chilling, and suggests that our ideas about disability are not as evolved as they sometimes seem to be.

Looking back at these examples, I think there are two requirements for Asshole Ableism. One is that they are truly damaging, not just irritating. Some of these ideas threaten our very existence. The other kind is what I laid out originally … where it’s the obnoxious attitude of the people that make the difference.

So, that’s an awful lot of Ableism. So what? The main thing I take away from this exercise in definition is that different varieties of Ableism are quite different, but that it’s hard to place specific examples in the right categories.

Systemic Ableism probably does the most real damage, even though it is almost never intentional.

Asshole Ableism is the most offensive and frightening kind of Ableism, but it is generally an outlier … something relatively few people espouse and rarely gets put into practice. At the same time, it is shocking to realize how many people are entirely unaware of it, even some people with disabilities.

Well-Meaning Ableism undergirds or cynically justifies almost all other forms of Ableism, so it may be “well-meaning”, but we can’t entirely treat it is harmless.

I am interested in other peoples’ views and definitions of Ableism. What is your experience?

Related blog posts:

Thursday, April 3, 2014

Photo Of The Day

Woman with long blonde hair, in a manual wheelchair, wearing an ornately patterned dress with purples and blues, and a blue top with a light yellow shawl

3 Ableisms: Part 2 - Systemic Ableism

Ideas topic icon
There are two sides to the “Systemic Ableism” coin. First, there are the physical barriers, policies, and practices that get in our way and exclude us from full participation and equal opportunity. Second, there is the ongoing failure of people to fix these things. Systemic Ableism is aspects of “the way things are” that passively keep us out or hold us back, not because anyone actively wants to exclude us, but because they either don’t realize we are excluded, or they don’t care about it enough to make fixing the barriers a priority.

Let’s get specific, because like all “systemic” forms of prejudice … like Systemic Racism or Systemic Sexism … Systemic Ableism is often too abstract to understand without examples:

- Buildings that are not wheelchair accessible, including steps at the entrance, narrow doorways, high counters, and inaccessible bathrooms. These barriers literally exclude people with physical disabilities.

- The persistence of segregated education of kids with disabilities throughout public and private education. This is an example of how policies and practices create Systemic Ableism. In this case it perpetuates an “unequal” education, which triggers even more barriers and problems when disabled kids become disabled adults.

- Long term care systems that make it administratively easier to find everyday care for disabled people in nursing homes and institutional settings than to assemble the services needed to live independently in the community. This is a very potent example of Systemic Ableism, in that it literally dumps people into more restricted, hemmed-in lives, not by necessity, but by habit and bureaucratic inertia.

- Benefits and support systems that create disincentives and limits on disabled people who want to move towards work and financial independence. “Work Disincentives” hold disabled people back from pursuing careers and economic independence. Disincentives are also rooted in an essentially “Well Meaning Ableist” idea … that that by definition, disabled people can’t work, and if we are working, then obviously we aren’t disabled and don’t need support anymore.

- Continuing out-of-date, discredited programs like Sheltered Workshops and nursing homes. These, too, are policies and program models rooted partly in a “Well Meaning Ableism” idea … the that disabled people are better “cared for” in group settings, constantly supervised, and removed from the jumble of everyday society.

- The combination of inaccessible pedestrian pathways throughout communities, a patchwork availability of accessible transportation, and the great expense of obtaining privately-owned accessible vehicles, that create serious barriers to mobility.

It occurs to me that another thing that all these examples have in common is that virtually nobody wants things to be quite this way. There is wide agreement even by decision makers in these systems that they aren't ideal. It’s just that they are apparently not bothered enough to change them. We essentially know how to fix all of these problems. If some of them would require a lot of work and a lot of money, that simply underscores that the issue is priority, not ability. If we really cared to make this society barrier-free, it would be done. The issue is that people do care, just not enough.

Finally, like other types of systemic prejudice, Systemic Ableism tends to be hidden in plain sight. Most people don't even notice, much less question the basic, familiar structures of everyday life. "Systemic Ableism" is probably the easiest form of ableism to change, and yet the least likely to be changed, just because the only people who tend to notice Systemic Ableism are those of us who experience it directly.

Tomorrow, we turn to the Dark Side, with a look at “Asshole Ableism."

Wednesday, April 2, 2014

Music For A Sunny Afternoon


One of those ‘90s performers I tend to forget, but always enjoy when I rediscover them.

Day Off

It’s a beautiful day here in Northeastern New York, sunny, and almost warm. So, this right here is the only blogging I’m going to do today. I need some fresh, spring air.

Tomorrow, I promise … “3 Ableisms: Systemic Ableism”.

Tuesday, April 1, 2014

Still Curious About Britain ...

Flag of the United Kingdom
Frances Ryan, The Guardian - April 1, 2014

This is a fine and full-throated editorial against a set of policy changes and budget cuts that have been instituted in the United Kingdom by a coalition government led by the Conservative Party (a.k.a. “Tories”) and it’s coalition partner, the Liberal Democratic Party. Depending on who you ask, the drastic changes in disability-related support programs were intended to save money, nothing more … encourage more disabled people to work and be self-sufficient … or identify people who are intentionally or not “wasting” scarce government resources.

Appropriately, this Guardian piece doesn’t discuss motives, but rather focuses on effects one year later, and the effects are, by all accounts terrible.

What I still haven’t seen and would very much like to see is some point by point reckoning with how the results stack up against the stated purposes of these changes. My guess is that the real motive behind them is simply saving money, since austerity seems to be the coalition government’s ideological fixation. However, it should have been possible, at least in theory, to identify any real and unnecessary disincentives to gainful employment. Likewise, any benefit system is going to have some waste, and some people who probably shouldn’t be getting help … that is, unless you decide to go for something like a Minimum Basic Income idea that doesn’t depend on eligibility.

So, have the UK government’s “reforms” fixed work disincentives? Are more disabled people now working, happily, in jobs, with more wealth and financial security?

And how many total fraudsters did they find? By that I mean, how many people were receiving disability assistance of some kind who simply were not disabled?

As long as I’m asking questions, how about one more. What is happening to people who, rightly or not, have had benefits cut or eliminated? Are they pulling themselves up by their bootstraps? Or, are they leaning more heavily than before on other parts of the British social service system, including the National Health Service?

I appreciate The Guardian’s moral indignation, but it’s kind of a shame they’re not contending directly with what the UK government says it set out to do. It isn’t always wise or right to fight an enemy on the enemy’s terms, but now and then it can be instructive to at least give it a try … if only to apply an objective test to the enemy’s honesty.

Photo Of The Day

Young woman with red, medium-lenght hair sitting in a dark grey manual wheelchair, taking a selfie. Has boots and bright blue pants and a dark blue sweater
From the Beautifuloddity Tumblr blog, via The Disability Fashion Project.

3 Ableisms: Part 1 - Well-Meaning Ableism

Ideas topic icon
Yesterday, I proposed that there are 3 main categories of disability prejudice or “Ableism”: Well-Meaning Ableism, Systemic Ableism, and Asshole Ableism. Today I’ll try to describe the first category, Well-Meaning Ableism.

“Well-Meaning Ableism” is the idea that the ableist thoughts or actions in question are motivated not by hostility, but by misguided good will. I would also include unexamined assumptions; it has never occurred to the Well-Meaning Ableist that their beliefs or practices might be off-base or offensive. They often think that their beliefs about disability are progressive, when in fact they may be two or three decades out of date. Also, while they are well meant, they are based on faulty assumptions about living with disabilities and what people with disabilities actually care about most.

Examples:

- Referring to us as “differently abled” or “hand-capable” because “disability sounds too negative”.

- Using the word “retarded” to describe anyone or anything weak, boring, or uncool. (Might be “Asshole Ableism” … I’m not sure).

- Describing disabled people as “wheelchair-bound,”  “victims” of disabling conditions, or intellectually disabled adults as “at a mental age of 8 years old”.

- Giving a disabled friend the ultimate compliment: “I don’t think of you as disabled”.

- Unquestioning, incurious support for sheltered workshops, nursing homes, “special schools”, and any disability charity, no matter what their philosophy or rhetoric.

- Angrily confronting a driver parked in a handicapped space because he walks away from his car, without thinking that he may have a hidden disability.

- Collecting and sharing “Inspiration Porn” … photos and videos about disabled people, with “inspiring” messages or captions.

This is the one kind of ableism that most people agree exists. Even some disabled people operate on the assumption that all of the real-life disability prejudice or “ableism” they experience is due to misinformation, honest mistakes, or lack of proper “disability awareness”, not hostility. Well-Meaning Ableism is also often thought to be more annoying than harmful. That said, the persistence of these erroneous ideas and habits can itself be debilitating when experienced over a whole lifetime. They also indirectly help preserve "Systemic Ableism", and leave room for more the  more covert and sinister notions I have decided to call “Asshole Ableism”.

Tomorrow, I’ll look at Systemic Ableism … which, though also largely unintentional, maintains literal barriers to mobility, independence, and self-sufficiency.

Let me know if I’ve got any of these wrong, or you can think of better examples.

Monday, March 31, 2014

Photo Of The Day

Blonde woman in a manual wheelchair, viewed from the side. She is dressed in a aqua and blue patterned dress that matches decorative patterns on her chair

3 Kinds Of Ableism

Ideas topic icon
This week I am going to do something different at Disability Thinking.

I have been thinking a lot about disability prejudice, also known as “ableism”. Mainly, I’ve been trying to think more precisely about it, partly because I feel like it is awfully easy to throw the term around, and use it to give a name to everything bad that happens to us when we have disabilities. I also think there is some confusion about the questions of motive or intention. Is ableism all about actions and behavior? Can a person be “ableist” in their character? Can institutions or even a whole society be “ableist?”

Well, yes, yes, and yes. The way I figure it, there are three kinds of ableism:

1. Well-Meaning Ableism

2. Institutional Ableism

3. Asshole Ableism

These aren't official terms, of course. The point is, ableism is a concept in flux, so I think my words are as good as any.

I will explain what I mean over the next three days, starting tomorrow, with the variety of ableism that a lot of people … including a lot of disabled people … think is the only kind of ableism that actually exists. They are wrong, but I can see why the think it, because Well-Meaning Ableism is as common as dirt. More on that tomorrow.

"Shared Abilities" Video Commentary

Shared Abilities logo
I contributed some comments to a TED Talk video posted at Shared Abilities. It is a video I had seen before, but I got more out of it the second time viewing it.

Sunday, March 30, 2014

"Vox" Explains: Obamacare and The Debt

The new Vox news website finally has some content other than its introduction. It has also already sparked some controversy due to some of its new hires … plus the inevitable buzz suggesting that these youngish, nerdy, progressive-ish journalists have sold out in some way. I still think the project is worth following, and that the idea of journalism doing more to “explain” the news is a good one.

Here are a couple if videos that seem to represent what their work will look like. They are also on topics of some interest to people with disabilities. The Obamacare / health insurance connection is obvious. As for “The Debt”, well it’s not really a disability issue per se, but I think it’s important to keep in mind the actual nature of the dreaded federal budget deficit when politicians insist that “there’s just no more money” for anything we want to do.

How Obamacare’s individual mandate works … in two minutes



Stop freaking out about the debt