Tuesday, October 14, 2014

Is Looking Normal The Only Thing That Matters?

CNN / KETV - October 6, 2014

(Click the link to watch the video ...)

Oh, dear. I know this is supposed to be lovely, but I found it upsetting.

First of all, I find it sad that the bride is so fixated on “walking” down the aisle rather than wheeling. She is going to enormous effort and expense for one moment. There is no indication here that this is part of a more long-term, practical improvement in her mobility. It’s just for the wedding. It’s as if she thinks that walking is the only “right” way to do it, and so she’s determined.

On the other hand, brides and grooms often go a bit overboard and obsess about making a splash at their weddings. Maybe that’s all she’s doing here, though that is not how CNN seems to interpret the story.

So, why did this video actually make me angry?

For some reason, it tapped into a well of anxiety deep inside me, and this immediately produced a very vivid picture for me. I have somehow fixed one major aspect of my disabilities … my spine is now totally normal, no longer deeply curved. Everyone I know is more excited and overjoyed about this than they have ever been for any of my past accomplishments. It’s a bigger deal than graduating from high school or college. I get more congratulations than when I got my first job. I am more admired than I ever was after any of my countless surgeries that had less visible results. The message is clear. All of my past accomplishments pale in comparison to this one, because NOW I AM NORMAL.

This scenario could never happen. There is nothing that can be done at this point to straighten my spine … or make me taller or more muscular for that matter. It’s all in my imagination. But the reaction I imagined seemed very real and very plausible, and it felt horrible. Imagining fixing one of my disabilities felt horrible. And this wasn’t an idea I thought up intellectually after hours of deep thought. It’s an emotion that hit me without warning less than ten seconds after watching this video.

Let me be clear. I have very supportive friends and family who have given me the extremely valuable gift of self-confidence and acceptance. I am not suggesting that they would react this way. I am saying that they might. That’s probably why this vision was so chilling. Seeing this woman with so much going for her yet seeming to value a moment of normalcy above everything else, made me wonder, for a moment, if everything good I’ve done in my life is really just a consolation prize. Maybe the most meaningful “miracle” I could pull off would be to be normal. Maybe my disabilities are a permanent asterisk in other peoples’ eyes.

I think that's one reason why so many disabled people don’t embrace the goal of a cure, why we don’t necessarily always shed a tear when a paraplegic walks or a deaf kid hears for the first time. I have no problem with this woman deciding to go all out for an essentially cosmetic moment at her wedding. She can do what she likes, and more power to her. What bothers me is how CNN and others turn her into some kind of a hero. To me, it degrades all of the other things in her life she has to be proud of. A job in her chosen field? Yeah. Nice husband? That’s nice. BUT LOOK … SHE’S WALKING!

On the bright side, there’s a moment at the start of the video when her father says, in effect, that it doesn’t matter to him how his daughter gets down the aisle, on foot or in a wheelchair. He supports her wish to walk, but it seemed to me like he was trying to tell her something important, something she may not really believe yet … that disabled or not, he accepts his daughter and loves her as she is. That message got drowned out though by the rest of the clip, which made it even more upsetting.

Anyway, I feel better, now that I’ve got this out of my system.

Monday, October 13, 2014

Glee Re-Watch

Glee tv show poster
I’m re-watching key episodes of Glee’s first season, in preparation for a Skype talk with Cheryl Green, for Friday’s Disability.TV Podcast. It wants so much to do good, but fails over and over again.

Quote:

“Handicapped ramps are expensive. But inspiration is free!” - Principal Figgins

Holy shit. That is both grossly offensive and inadvertently perceptive. We want full accessibility. What we get in abundance is inspirational videos on YouTube.

The Davis / Abbott Ad Kerfuffle

Photo of a stack of newspapers with big headlines reading Breaking News!
Associated Press / CBS DFW - October 10, 2014

Ben Dryfuss, Mother Jones - October 10, 2014

My reaction to this ad wasn’t, “Wow, that’s offensive!” It was, “Huh. That’s a bad idea."

The point of the ad isn’t that Greg Abbott is disabled, which would be no surprise to anyone in Texas anyway. The Davis campaign is saying that Abbott is a hypocrite who will deny rights and benefits to others that he has used himself.

The ad also makes a more subtle policy point that Abbott takes a very narrow approach to disability rights cases. The specific case cited in the ad is typical of how disability rights laws have been weakened over the last two decades … by gradually narrowing the definition of who is disabled. By ruling that an amputee wasn’t disabled, he denied her the right to even try her discrimination case. He shut the courtroom door on her. Abbott isn’t unique in this. It’s a pretty standard conservative approach to civil rights laws, and Greg Abbot is a conservative. It’s just a bit surprising that his own disability experience wouldn’t give him a slightly better understanding of how disability can take many forms, and that disability discrimination doesn't happen only to wheelchair users.

The problem is that this is a point better made by disability groups and people familiar with disability issues. It is a risky argument for a non-disabled politician to attempt. Plus, the Davis campaign could have made these points without using the wheelchair picture. That seems to be the sticking point. It makes the ad seem like an attempt to “use” Abbott’s disability without actually saying anything negative about it. The result is that they look like they're saying something nasty about his disability when really, they're not. That's not despicable; that's sloppy and stupid.

Disability images are powerful, and sometimes they “say” things to people that you can’t control. They should be used with great care. And liberal Democrats should never assume that their social progressivism on other matters means they understand disability issues, or that they are immune from criticism if they screw up with disability themes. Whether on not they are actually offended, Republicans will happily use the idea of offense against you. Being right and having a valid point isn’t enough.

Maybe it should be a rule of thumb for non-disabled politicians … don’t use disability imagery in political ads unless you really, really know what you are doing. And given how few people do know what they are doing, it may be best not to use disability imagery at all.

Sunday, October 12, 2014

Weekly Wrap-Up

Disability Thinking Weekly Wrap Up in white letters superimposed over sepia-tone photo of handicapped parking spaces
Disability Thinking, Weekly Wrap-Up. What this blog's about ...

Sunday, October 5, 2014
Monday, October 6, 2014
Tuesday, October 7, 2014
Wednesday, October 8, 2014
Thursday, October 9, 2014
Friday, October 10, 2014
Saturday, October 11, 2014

Saturday, October 11, 2014

Disability.TV Podcast - Mini-Cast

Left: Disability.TV logo, Middle: AHS Freak Show poster. Right: Red Band Society poster
Just a few notes this week on two new disability-themed shows: Red Band Society and American Horror Story: Freak Show. Help support the Disability.TV Podcast by making a Paypal donation, or shopping at the Amazon Affiliate links on the Disability Thinking Blog. You can also leave comments there, or email them to: apulrang@icloud.com. Plus, take a moment to post an iTunes review or Tweet what you liked about the episode. Subscribe at iTunes or Stitcher.

Friday, October 10, 2014

Music For A Friday Afternoon

I’m working on this week’s podcast episode, so I don’t have anything disability-related to blog. Anyway, it’s been awhile since we had a musical interlude.

Thursday, October 9, 2014

Season 1, Episode 4 of “Red Band Society”

Four episodes in, and this is the first time I have been completely absorbed in ‘Red Band Society,’ my mind and emotions fully engaged in something other than nit-picking. The show finally began to fulfill it’s promise when Leo got up to give that impromptu roast of Kara, at what was supposed to be a treacly tribute at her high school prom.

Wednesday, October 8, 2014

Problem Solving


I keep posting these AmputeeOT videos because they are so well done, entertaining, and watching them really de-mystifies this particular type of disability.

Tuesday, October 7, 2014

Buy It: I, Claudius (the book)

From the Amazon.com listing:

"Considered an idiot because of his physical infirmities, Claudius survived the intrigues and poisonings of the reigns of Augustus, Tiberius, and the Mad Caligula to become emperor in 41 A.D. A masterpiece.”

This book and it’s sequel, Claudius The God: And His Wife Messalina and the BBC miniseries take ample artistic license, but Emperor Claudius really did have disabilities, most likely polio and epilepsy. Claudius is one of my historical heroes, and should be for everyone born with disabilities.

AHS: Freak Show ... It Could Go Either Way

Picture of an old style television set with the wheelchair symbol on the screen
I see that promotions for American Horror Story: Freak Show now include interviews with some of the actors who will portray the “freaks” … two of whom are actors who have the disabilities they portray. This is an interesting strategy. It suggests that at minimum, Ryan Murphy and company are aware that their subject is potentially offensive, and they want to reassure potential viewers that it won’t be, or that watching it won’t be morally questionable. If they care enough to address this, it might mean they care enough to at least try to be provocative without being offensive.

Hiring disabled actors does put AHS: Freak Show on the “right” side of a debate going on almost entirely within the disability community … how much it matters whether or not disabled characters are played by disabled actors. There are issues of representation of course, but even if you’re not tuned in to the philosophical questions, there’s the more concrete fact that there are thousands of disabled people trying to make it in the entertainment industry who not only face barriers playing “normal” parts, but they don’t even get cast for important disability roles. In this respect, AHS: Freak Show might be more progressive and admirable than, say, the short-lived Ironside remake, a much more obviously “respectable” show, which could have easily hired a disabled actor and didn’t.

On the other hand …

Actual Freak Shows of the late 19th and early 20th century advertised themselves as scientific and educational, and to a lesser extent as employment opportunities for physically disabled people who would otherwise be destitute. They pushed these arguments deliberately so that audiences could give themselves permission to enjoy essentially “low” entertainment (laughing or gasping at “freaks”), without guilt. Is that what the AHS: Freak Show producers are doing here? Are they telling us that it’s okay to watch whatever awfulness they are about to present, because hey, these actors are happy and employed?

The other potential problem I get from the interviews is a possible confusion over what freak shows were and what we today realize they could have been or maybe would be today. The actors talk about the freak show being a family, of giving them a sense of control and power with their bodies. While that may occasionally have been true in actual freak shows, I suspect it was very rare. Viewing freak shows of the past through today’s disability and diversity paradigms is interesting, but it may be very misleading. I’d hate to see some kind of freak show revival because people get the wrong idea about what they really were. Empowerment and exploitation can happen simultaneously, but the exploitation doesn’t go away just because you manage to perceive some empowerment there.

Just to be clear, for those who may be completely oblivious as to why this show might be disturbing. "Lookin' at freaks" is equivalent to staring at disabled people you encounter in real life. Even in the olden days, people knew there was something distasteful and ugly about gawping at disabled people as objects of morbid curiosity. It is not the same thing as healthy curiosity, or appreciation of difference, especially when it is in a TV show where "horror story" is in the title. Plus, even though the actor interviews are legitimately interesting, it doesn't mean everyone with a disability has a fascinating life story they're just dying to share with you while in line at Starbucks. That's what this controversy is about.

Of course, it’s all going to depend on the actual content, what the show itself says. Any subject can be done well and can express human decency. My concern is that American Horror Story’s brand is sensationalism, and only occasionally includes actual ideas. That’s worrisome. However, I will watch tomorrow night, and I will do my best to keep an open mind. It could be terrible. It could be wonderful.

I am also planning to watch Carnivale, a series from several years ago set within a traveling carnival, and including, I believe, at least a few disabled characters who are in that carnival’s freak show.

Monday, October 6, 2014

Disabled Veterans Memorial


Obama honors veterans at new memorial
New York Times - October 5, 2014

Thomas Gibbons-Neff, Washington Post - September 30, 2014

Nolan Feeney, Time Magazine - October 5, 2014

http://avdlm.org

This is a great thing. I’m almost positive it is. As steeped as I am in the world of disability, that is how ignorant and detached I am from the military and veterans culture. So I can only half make my own assessment of the new memorial … how it looks, what it says, and what other people say about it. From the just the disability perspective, I have a few thoughts.

- Why did they call it the American Veterans Disabled For Life Memorial. It sounds one of those situations where a committee of people debated long and in great detail how to say something delicate so as not to offend anyone … and came up with something bureaucratic and offensive. What’s wrong with something simple like Disabled Veterans Memorial?

- They chose 18 quotations to display, out of hundreds of possibilities. I wish the official website would print all of the selected quotes, because I don’t much like the George Washington quote that appears in all the publicity. There’s nothing wrong with it, particularly considering how people spoke back then. But just showing us that quote suggests that the Memorial is all about sadness and pity. I really hope that isn’t true, and I suspect it really isn’t. But I’d like to know.

- There’s a line in one of the articles about disabled veterans “reclaiming their lives”. That is actually a really good concept to replace the idea of a cure, recovery, or even rehabilitation for all disabled people. Ultimately what we all want is to claim or re-claim our own lives. It works just as well for a child born with a disability. What we really want is for them to “claim a life” for themselves, just as we hope disabled veterans are able to “re-claim” their lives. “Getting better”, or “fitting in” may or may not be part of that, but we don’t have to be 100% fixed to claim or reclaim a life.

"Cliff Notes"

One of my favorite (non-disability) bloggers recently did a post consisting of a list of one-line statements he called the Cliff Notes of his blog archives … a very abbreviated summary of what his blog has been about over time. It got me thinking about how I would summarize the Disability Thinking blog so far.

Disabled people are people … not symbols, angels, or tests of other peoples’ character.

Ableism is an actual thing, not just a collection of irritating habits and social misunderstandings.

A whole lot of people who should know better, based on their other political and social views, are still way behind the curve on disability issues.

Disability-related services and supports should be simpler and more direct (fewer middlemen). More plentiful would be good too, but simpler and more direct is probably more important.

Disability issues involve questions of fundamental human rights, not just minor policy tweaks and infrastructure improvements.

It matters what words we use to talk about disability, but sometimes we spend too much time worrying about it ... maybe.

I don’t like “inspiration porn”, but I do like disabled people who go out of their way to make bold visual statements projecting disability pride and confidence.

My life as a disabled person has been pretty good, and very lucky.

There are a lot more amazing disability bloggers, vloggers, and podcasters than I thought when I started this blog.

Sunday, October 5, 2014

Disabled TV Character Face-Off: First Round

The votes are in ... or rather I have decided there are enough votes to call it. Here are the 16 contestants for Best Disabled TV Character:

So, now it's time to vote in the first round, pitting two disabled characters in the same show!

Photo of actress Lauren Potter as character Becky Jackson
Becky Jackson
Disability: Down Syndrome.
Role on the show: Secondary character in an ensemble cast. Member of the “Cheerios” high school cheerleading team.

Photo of actor Kevin McHale as character Artie Abrams
Artie Abrams
Actor: Kevin McHale
Disability: Paraplegic due to an accident. Uses a manual wheelchair.
Role on the show: Main character in an ensemble cast. One of the original members of the “New Directions” high school glee club.

Voting in this round will be closed Sunday, October 19, 2014.

Create your free online surveys with SurveyMonkey , the world's leading questionnaire tool.