Inspiration Without Inspiration Porn

First read this …

Young Woman's Treatment Of Disabled Vet At Walmart Goes Viral (Photos)

Charles Roberts, America News - November 11, 2015

… and marvel at the stunning insensitivity it took for this woman to congratulate herself for doing a good deed, after “stubbornly” overruling a disabled veteran who said several times he didn’t need or want her help, and forcibly helping him anyway. It takes a lot for a news item to stun and offend me personally, but this one had me swearing aloud to my iPhone.

Now read Dominick Evans’ terrific blog post about the story:

Inspiration Porn Is Out Of Control

Dominick Evans - December 16, 2015

Yes, it’s “Inspiration Porn” again. Why are we so bothered by people who are just trying to be kind? Why won’t we leave it alone?

Because it keeps happening, it’s genuinely disturbing, and people keep finding ways to make it even worse.

Still, I hate being a sourpuss. Just because I loathe sentimentality, doesn’t mean that all sentiment is wrong. Just because I don’t exist for your inspiration, doesn’t mean it’s wrong to feel inspired by whatever happens to inspire you. The alternative to Inspiration Porn isn’t gross negligence, like stepping over a disabled man choking to death in a McDonalds. There are decent, acceptable ways to be decent, kind, and helpful to disabled people.

Can you do a "good deed" for a disabled person without offending them?

Is it possible to do inspirational stories about disabled people without being smarmy and condescending?

Yes and yes!

First ask, "Can I help you?", and then respect the answer. And if the answer is "No thank you," or even just plain "NO!", don't take it personally. How each disabled person answers depends on many factors. I’m not often asked if I need help. When I am, I usually say, “No thank you, I’ve got it” because I’ve got it. Sometimes I say, “No thanks,” then pause a moment, survey my situation, and say, “Actually, yeah, that would be great, could you …?” and then I tell the person exactly how they can help. Sometimes, I say, “Yup!” right away, and hand them the whatever that I’m trying to carry while inching my way down some stairs. The point is, it’s fine to ask, I call the play, and the only really offensive thing is if you don’t listen to my answer.

What about pictorial depictions of bravery, kindness, perseverance, inspiration, like Facebook memes or YouTube videos?

Never snap a photo, never shoot a video about a disabled person without the disabled person's consent. It doesn’t matter that you admire the thing you are depicting. It doesn’t matter that you do it to make people happy or uplift them, or teach them a lesson about gratitude. What matters is the result, and if the disabled person isn't on board with the situation or being used in your little morality play, any good you think you’re doing will be undone.

Above all, make sure the disabled person has a voice in the story or scenario or whatever it is you’re focused on. If you write about an actual, named, identifiable disabled person, ask the disabled person to comment and include what they say. You’ll discover pretty quickly whether they think the situation is amazing and remarkable, or pretty standard and nothing to crow about. And that should be your guide on how to think about it, too. Follow the disability rights movement motto: "Nothing about us without us."

If you focus on a disabled person overcoming adversity, ask questions about that adversity and why it is there. Stories of individual courage and character are uplifting, but disability discrimination and hardships don't happen in a vacuum. The problems disabled people face usually come from or are made worse by the bad choices and neglect of actual people and institutions that should be challenged. Battling institutional ableism doesn’t translate so easily to cute Facebook posts that make people go, “Awww!” but that’s part of the point. And anyway, fighting discrimination IS inspiring!

Finally, remember that not every disabled person craves "going viral." Most disabled people just want to get on with life. Believe it or not, many of us strongly prefer anonymity! Most importantly, we all want to be treated as people, with three full dimensions, unique points of view, and complex feelings, not cardboard cutouts employed to symbolize abstract values, or tools to make you feel swell and become Internet-famous.

But what if I can’t follow all these conditions and still tell my story?

Simple … just don’t tell the story! Sometimes, a little restraint is the best, most uplifting gift of all.

----------

[Facebook] [Twitter] [Podcast] [Support]

Return Of The "Pool Noodle?"

School bans blind girl from using her walking cane – for fear of tripping up teachers
Emma Lazenby, BT.com - November 17, 201

Just short of a year ago, we read a similar story, about an American school district taking away a young blind boy's white cane because they said he used it to threaten harm to someone. They gave him a semi-flexible foam "pool noodle" instead, and shortly afterwards, gave the cane back to him and apologized for confiscating it. Compared to this British girl, that case seemed like more of a real dilemma. One way or another, safety was at least a bit of a reasonable factor. The disability rights consensus was 1. Don't confiscate a disabled person's main tool for adaptation, and 2. Do make sure that young disabled children are trained in how to use these tools safely and appropriately.

The same formula probably should apply for Lily-Grace, or any kid just starting to use a white cane, crutches, or a wheelchair. Nobody is saying she's reckless with the cane, but she's seven years old, and there's a method to using a while cane. You don't automatically know what to do with a cane just because your blind and they had you one.

Both situations underscore how small disability-related problems get out of hand when one or two people with some sort of veto authority get antsy about anything unfamiliar going on in their professional territories. It gets worse when they happen to have a personal preoccupation with certain aspects of disability life. It may sound strange, but there are people who have very firm opinions about the use and abuse of white canes, crutches, ramps and elevators, and wheelchairs ... not to mention service animals. And they absolutely do not see it as ableism in its purest, simplest form. I suspect the officials responsible for both of these crises felt that they were the only ones with the good sense to raise concerns and put the brakes on well-meaning but carelessly permissive policies. Couple that with administrative procedures that handle contentious issues too slowly and deliberately, and you get, I think, maybe 75% of the news stories about ableism that make it into the mainstream press.

It's so galling when it is happening, that it's easy to froget that most of these situations are resolved more or less properly in the end. Blind kids get to use their white canes in school. Customers can, usually, enter coffee shops with service animals without it making the local news. Most people don't regard ramps and elevators as expensive luxuries, at least once they are fully installed. But in the meantime, massive time is wasted futzing around with pointless deliberations when the eventual outcome is rarely ever in real doubt. This is where a bit of autocracy can actually be a good thing. We need more school principals and headmasters who are willing to say, "I appreciate your concern, but unless there's an actual problem, blind students will be able to use white canes ... or whatever they need ... in our school. That's the way it's going to be."

----------

[Facebook] [Twitter] [Podcast] [Support]

We Alone Are Not Enough

I caught a glimpse yesterday of something going on with well-known disability activist and scholar Mia Mingus, something about having to do with air travel. I didn’t dig into it though until this afternoon.

It takes a lot really of nasty ableism to truly piss me off. This is partly because I’ve had disabilities all of my life, partly because of 20+ years in the Independent Living Movement, and partly from my more recent blogging on the subject.

It takes something really outrageous to shock me, and that sort of blunts my outrage.

But this kind of thing cuts through all the world-weary cynicism. It’s so stupid, so humiliating, and so unnecessary. Read all about what happened in this collection of Tweets, assembled by Alice Wong of the Disability Visibility Project. I’ll have a bit more to say at the bottom.

There’s a lot in these Tweets that goes beyond disability issues into even more fundamental issues of racism and state power. I feel a little less qualified to comment on those aspects, thought they are definitely there, and the incident itself carries all of the key hallmarks of ableism.

First there's the institutionalized stupidity of a system that probably has safeguards to prevent this kind of discriminatory targeting, but either can’t or won’t actually implement them. I suspect the individuals involved have far too much power and discretion to act on their personal views of disability, (or whatever else bugs them in the moment), and not enough oversight.

Second, there is the fact that people who must meet far more disabled people than most people do in their jobs still think a gel seat cushion in a wheelchair is some kind of weird, mysterious, unknown thing. This is an airport in Oakland, California, associated with one of the most disability-aware metropolitan areas in the United States. You’d think they would have met travelers in wheelchairs with gel cushions before. They are pretty standard components of wheelchairs for people who use them long-term.

Third, I really think a big part of this is what Mia mentioned about experiencing much less hassle when she travels with others. People in wheelchairs especially, are informally required to have someone else there to sort of “vouch” for them, in any situation where authorities are involved or observing. This is a fundamental part of ableism … we alone are not sufficient. We can be admirable, inspiring, plucky, resourceful … but someone’s always wondering where our keeper is, you know?

Now, I have never experienced anything like this, and I travel almost exclusively alone. However, I only fly about once a year, maybe. And for the last ten years or so, I have packed my ventilator … a medium-sized box of of indeterminate purpose with electronics involved … in a suitcase. I check it as luggage. I usually find one of those TSA slips in the case that says someone has opened it and snooped around, but it's never caused a problem. But a gel cushion seems pretty harmless to me, too. Why did they pick on that?

And why didn’t they just accept Mia’s explanation? Again, we go back to the fundamental issue … we alone are not enough.

Who is with you? Is there someone here who can help you? If you're this dependent on your equipment, wouldn't it be smarter to travel with someone? It's not our job to solve your problems you know!

I hope the TSA is forced to give a public explanation for how they treated Mia and what they did to her property. I hope they reimbursed her very quickly for her substantial financial loss. An unequivocal directive that wheelchair cushions are fine would be good, too. And, sad to say, a firing or two may be in order. Institutional ableism aside, sometimes it really does come down to an individual with too much power, who just won't budge in their thinking.

----------

[Facebook] [Twitter] [Podcast] [Support]

Throwback Thursday

Two years ago in Disability Thinking: Remembering The Pakleds.

I recently re-watched "Samaritan Snare.”

Ooof, it’s pretty awful. I think the writers meant well. I think they were trying to make some kind of bland point about underestimating people you assume are weak or incapable. But the portrayal is so insulting that any good is undone. Ultimately, you have a fictional alien species transparently crafted to display stereotypes of cognitive impairment. You have lines clearly intended to be mildly comical. You have our good Starfleet officers responding with a veneer of patience, just barely hiding irritation at having to deal with these obviously stupid humanoids. Hardee har, har! You have to work awfully hard to pull a positive message out of all that. Just check out the comments to the video below.

The episode is worth watching though, if only to be reminded that good intentions don’t guarantee good disability depictions.

----------

[Facebook] [Twitter] [Podcast]

We Are The Enemy

Anesthesiologist trashes sedated patient — and it ends up costing her

Tom Jackman, Washington Post - June 23, 2015

(Via Eschaton)

I feel like this is another example of something disabled people encounter a lot from the medical profession … an underlying, mostly unstated belief that patients are the enemy.

We are stupid. We delude ourselves. We just want drugs. We crave attention. We whine and whimper and we should learn to suck it up. There’s always a “real story” we’re not telling. We lie.

I think this is part of medical culture, and it affects everyone. But disabled people experience it more often, because by definition we are harder to treat and figure out. It takes more effort to treat us, and almost nobody really likes having to work harder on the job. Plus, if our symptoms and complaints don’t match up with familiar patterns, it must be because we’re not telling things right, or maybe it’s all in our heads.

"The doctors then discussed “misleading and avoiding” the man after he awoke, and Shah reportedly told an assistant to convince the man that he had spoken with Shah and “you just don’t remember it.” Ingham suggested Shah receive an urgent “fake page” and said, “I’ve done the fake page before,” the complaint states. “Round and round we go. Wheel of annoying patients we go. Where it’ll land, nobody knows,” Ingham reportedly said."

I’m not saying that everyone in the medical profession thinks or acts the way the people in the article did. Most doctors and nurses are better than this, most of the time. But I think everyone in the profession recognizes the attitude. Other than outright greed, it is the medical profession’s principal dark side … seeing patients as obstacles or enemies to be overcome or outwitted.

----------

[Facebook] [Twitter] [Podcast]

“Inspiration” Without The “Porn"

There was quite a lot of discussion last week among disability bloggers and Facebookers about a viral video showing a restaurant employee “feeding” a physically disabled customer.

While newspapers and TV stations all over North America reported it as an unambiguous “good news” story, most of the comments from disabled people ranged from head-shaking to outrage. On one level, it was a simple reaction to standard “Inspiration Porn.” Inspiration Porn is that thing where someone writes a news story or posts an “inspiring” photo or video involving a disabled person, something clearly meant to make us go, “Awwww,” and appreciate bravery, persistence, or kindness, preferably without asking awkward questions about context.

On another level, this particular video raised very specific questions about privacy and objectification. Who is this disabled woman? What is her name? Did she know she was being filmed? If she had known, would she have been okay with the video being publicly posted and then going viral? Was she happy with how the employee was helping her, or did she have some other solution in mind? And, who is the customer filming the scene? Did he or she think for a moment about how the disabled woman might feel? Did they introduce themselves to her and ask her permission to film her and present this bit of her life in order to “inspire” millions of strangers? Is it possible a severely disabled person might have mixed feelings about being looked at in this way?

Of course, these questions provoked their own perplexed, angry responses from people who apparently felt cranky disability activists were raining on a parade they had been enjoying immensely. Why do people have to put a sinister spin on a rare “good news” story? Why are disabled people so angry about stuff like this? Aren’t they always asking retail staff to help them? The world is such a nasty place, and this is a nice story. Lighten up!

I have been thinking for awhile that we need to come up with a way to allow some cultural space for people who really love and crave “inspiration”, while keeping it from becoming “Inspiration Porn” that insults disabled people and sends ableist messages about disability.

Maybe we should make a checklist for would-be filmers, meme-makers, and reporters thinking about using disabled people as their subjects:

- Is the disabled person a willing participant in the story, video, or photo?

- Does the disabled person have a voice in the finished product … something relevant to say, in their own words?

- Is the disabled person credited by name? Does the piece include include any contact and background information about the disabled person, if they want it included?

- Does the finished product include enough accurate information on the situation and disability to put the scene or incident in context?

- Who is the “hero” of the scene? Are they doing something truly remarkable, or interesting only compared to very low, possibly insulting expectations?

- If you were the disabled person in the finished product, how would you feel about it?

- Consider how the disabled person might actually feel, not how you think they should feel.

If you look at this list and think, “Who’s going to be comfortable with all that?”, then that should tell you something about Inspiration Porn. If what you’re doing can’t pass these simple tests, then maybe the world doesn’t need your inspiring creation right now.

On the other hand, I think this list might be reasonable enough to allow a few disability-related photo memes, videos, and news stories of the “inspirational” variety to satisfy peoples’ apparent craving for such things. I think it’s worth noting, too, that some disabled people feel good about inspiring others, and actually spend time and creativity doing so through videos, photo memes, blog posts, and the like.

The key difference is that those are messages from disabled people, in which disabled people are active participants with human voices and points of view, not nameless objects on which others project their feelings.

----------

[Facebook] [Twitter] [Podcast]

What's The Takeaway?

5,000 disabled adults sexually abused in past two years

The Guardian - May 18, 2015

These kinds of stories are horrifying, but I also wonder what  causal readers and news-watchers think about them. It makes a difference how you interpret the problem:

- Do disabled people need more protection, oversight, and supervision?

- Is there something about care services and institutions that encourages abuse?

- Should families of disabled children be terrified by the “mainstream” world?

- Is it that people don’t really see disabled people as human beings?

- How many disabled people lack the capacity to stop or avoid abuse, and how many mainly lack the training and socialization to do so?

There might be some truth to all of these, but some conclusions are helpful, while others tend to lead to more problems, not fewer.

----------

Addendum:

I’m very glad to see that The Guardian’s Frances Ryan has followed up the news story with an editorial that provides a framework for thinking about this. Note in particular her reluctance to dwell too much on the idea of disabled people being inherently “vulnerable.” What still seems to be missing is a broader discussion of abuse that includes non-sexual abuse. Sexual abuse is particularly heinous, but many of the same interpersonal dynamics and lack of basic supports feed into other kinds of physical and emotional abuse, too.

----------

[Facebook] [Twitter] [Podcast]

Why (Wheelchair Users) Can't Have Nice Things

Complaint: Commuter buses yanked disabled access for bar seating

Kristen V. Brown, San Francisco Chronicle - April 18, 2015

There are probably people who understand the value of accessibility, but don't realize just how galling this particular story is for wheelchair users. It’s annoying enough when a new business “forgets" to factor in accessibility, then begs forgiveness because they’re new, just starting out, struggling, whatever. But this is an intentionally high-end company that actually bought some wheelchair accessible buses, then intentionally removed the accessibility features. I don’t think they did so because they didn’t want wheelchair users to ride their buses. I suspect it really was all about space. Where else were they supposed to put those juice bars?

I think there’s also some unconscious ableism at work here. Underneath whatever legal calculations the company might have made, gambling on their interpretation of the ADA, I’ll bet there were at least a few thoughts along the lines of: “How many wheelchair users are going to want to take an expensive, luxury bus to work anyway?” Because disabled people don't get cool, high-salary jobs, and we don’t really care about nice things, even if they do reek a bit of embarrassing hipsterism.

Of course, it’s also entirely possible that at least one person at the company thought, maybe for a few seconds: “Wheelchairs take up too much space anyway …” Seriously, don’t you think that thought went through somebody’s mind, even if they never put it into words?

I usually don’t wish failure on startup businesses. However, I hope for the sake of precedent that what the company did is found to be an ADA violation, and that this sets off a chain reaction leading the whole enterprise to go bust. I’m sure the resulting damage to the Bay Area economy will be quite … limited.

----------

[Facebook] [Twitter] [Podcast]

Another Case Of Neglect ... What's The Story?

Police ID Mom of Quadriplegic Son With Cerebral Palsy Left in Philly Park

Alison Burdo and David Chang, 4 NBC Washington - April 12, 2015

Confronting another attempted murder of disabled man

Elena Rose Levy, Angelic Eve: Where Snakes Are Not Scary, Neither Am I - April 12, 2015

What to do with another disability neglect story?

Let’s start by noting that the way this story is covered, “this young man” has no name, and no thoughts or information about what has happened to him. I understand that his CP is on the “severe” end of the scale. He’s apparently unable to speak, though with CP, people could easily be mistaken about his ability to communicate. As for his name, it’s possible his aunts have asked for the moment that it not be released, as a way to protect his anonymity. But in this case, it seems like a weird choice, since his mother’s name is now public knowledge.

Let’s also note how “suffers” is used in the story, not to describe what happened to “him”, but as a simple, habitual modifier to Cerebral Palsy … as in “suffers from Cerebral Palsy”. It seems very likely that “he” has suffered a lot, but more from his mother’s neglect and bad choices, not necessarily from his CP.

All that is technically a meta-conversation about journalism, and not precisely what the big story is here. But as I have said before, these journalistic habits subtly reinforce the kind of thinking about disabilities that contribute to these kinds of terrible incidents. When you assume people who have certain kinds and combinations of disabilities as little more than inert teddy bears or giant Tamagochis, it’s actually not that long a walk from, “How dare you neglect him?” to, “What’s the point anyway?” Put another way, whether motivated by kindness and pity, or by selfishness and ignorance, removing a disabled person’s agency and personhood is harmful, sometimes deadly.

To me, this story is also another in a long, depressing line of stories about the all-or-nothing mindset many families have about “caring for” disabled “children”. They think they only have two socially accepted choices. They can either devote the rest of their lives to caring for the “child”, or they can “put” the child in an institution. They see no middle ground, and certainly don’t seem to ever imagine their son or daughter having some agency for themselves, and living at least somewhat independently with their own support services, and not dependent on family.

Finding both institutionalization and life tied to an adult child unacceptable, some of these parents get weird and self-deluded, and abandon them, or kill them, telling themselves that it’s a mercy for the disabled person, or leaving a blanket and a Bible, equally useless and pathetic gestures. Of course, it’s also possible that in some cases, perhaps this one, the parent involved is just massively selfish or stunningly ignorant. We are angry at them for shirking their responsibility, but then we think maybe it wouldn’t have been any better for them to keep providing what was probably terrible care in the first place.

What pricked my emotions more than the news story itself was Elena Rose Levy’s blog post, where she notes that being physically abandoned is a common nightmare of so many young disabled kids and teens. I don’t remember having that specific fear. I do remember often feeling physically vulnerable and dependent in a way most of my peers did not. There was a long stretch of time when I think I saw my world as narrower, my life choices limited, because of a vague feeling that I would always need “care”, which meant that I had to be careful to be a certain way in order to secure that care.

Which brings me back to the issue of this nameless 21 year old “child’s" point of view. I kind of appreciated the blunt comments from the neighbor lady in the news story, but I want to know what the the disabled guy actually thinks. I guarantee, he thinks something worth hearing about.

----------

[Facebook] [Twitter] [Podcast]

Throwback Thursday

A year ago in Disability thinking … Vigil Followup.

Thoughts after last year’s Day Of Mourning. I’d still like to know more about the legal outcomes of these situations.

----------

Facebook

Twitter
Disability.TV Podcast

Followup: 2015 Day Of Mourning

BAY AREA DAY OF MOURNING: ALICE WONG

Alice Wong, Disability Visibility Project - March 3, 2015

This address by Alice Wong, at one of Sunday’s Day Of Mourning 2015 events, is heartbreaking and empowering all at the same time. It’s always tricky to imply, “My life is pretty great so yours can be, too,” but we’re talking about life and death here. Those three kids weren’t allowed to even try.

I still don’t have much appetite for punishment. But the contrast between what life with even the most “severe” disabilities can be, and how hopeless these killers and the news media just assume it is, shows just how far apart and confused we still are about the nature of disability. It’s a vital reminder to the disability community that “disability awareness”, so easily trivialized, really is important. Somehow, we’ve got to penetrate the brick wall between people with disabilities who are happy and glad to be here, and the parents, professionals, and news media who think disability equals suffering and hopelessness.

Lives literally depend on it.

----------

Facebook

Twitter
Disability.TV Podcast

2015 Day Of Mourning

I can't speak for the organizers, but it seems to me that what this event isn't about is as important as what it is:

It isn't about saying that caregivers who kill are monsters.

It isn't about demonizing "special needs parents".

It isn't primarily about punishing the killers more harshly.

It is about accountability for crimes.

It is about ending a double standard ... acquittals and lighter sentences when the victims are disabled.

It is about changing the media narrative that reverses the roles of victim and victimizer.

It is about fighting the popular perception that caring for disabled people is some kind of hell.

It is about remembering the people we've lost, who are too often forgotten.

Please take part however you can, and we’ll all remember together.

2015 Day of Mourning Vigil Sites

Autistic Self-Advocacy Network

Day Of Mourning Virtual Vigil on Facebook

Savannah Nicole Logsdon-Breakstone

Virtual Vigil Website

Autistic Self-Advocacy Network

Day of Mourning - 3/1/2015

David Perry, How Did We Get Into This Mess? - February 28, 2015

----------

Facebook

Twitter
Disability.TV Podcast

Don't Be Distracted

‘Retard, animals!’ New York principal caught on tape screaming abuse at special needs students

David Ferguson, Raw Story - February 10, 2015

The thing to remember about these incidents where people in caregiving positions lose their shit and spew vile ableism, is that it’s all too easy to focus on the awfulness of the individual.

I’d bet real money that behind this principal’s rant is what she considers a coherent, probably brave and rational philosophy of disability and education. It seems like she believes that most of her students are horrible monsters … probably not truly “disabled” in her eyes … who are far too coddled and indulged. She seems to think that the kids are deluded, too, and need to be told in the harshest terms that they are regarded by others as inferior, and will continue to be so unless they shape up. She’s there to whip them into shape and tell it like it is. If this is anything like her thinking, she is not alone.

It’s also important to note that this kind of ideology and behavior flourishes much more easily in segregated, disability-only “special needs schools” and classrooms. Fewer people see what happens there every day, and the “special needs” moniker is like a protective halo, shielding everyday practice from scrutiny and criticism.

The terrible irony, of course, is that there are probably quite a few families who chose to place their kids in this school because they feared they would be ground down and bullied in a “mainstream” environment. Separate and special often sound “safe”, when in fact, they are just as often the exact opposite.

It's about more than a terrible person. It's a terrible system.

----------

Facebook

Twitter
Disability.TV Podcast

Don't Look Away

In a little over a week, I will post an episode of the Disability.TV Podcast in which I will discuss American Horror Story: Freak Show with Jane Hash, of the Hash It Out With Jane Podcast.

Sneak preview:

If you are disabled and you care about disability issues, social stigma, ableism and the like, you should at the very least watch the first episode, “Monsters Among Us”. I’m not going to say whether the show is good or bad, offensive or heroic, sensational or thoughtful. Just don’t ignore it because it seems on the surface like it must be nasty and exploitative, by definition. There is more there than meets the eye, and more there, too, than the writers probably know.

Class Photo Time Again!

Disabled Arlington student excluded from group photos

Lauren Zakalik, ABC / WFAA Channel 8 - December 9, 2014

Didn’t something like this happen just last year? Why yes. Yes, it did.

There is one bright spot in this story, compared to the one from last year. Here, the student is extensively quoted in the article, and seems to have at least tried to be involved in the picture setup and negotiations. On the other hand, it bugs me that even in its apology, the school district officials refer to Tyson’s mother, not Tyson, himself … as if the offense was to “Mom”, and not Tyson.

It seems like between schools and the professional photography business, there ought to be pre-vetted procedures for these kinds of stupid dilemmas. Some disability accommodations are genuinely difficult. Taking inclusive class photos should be dead easy.

Blogging Note ...

I am working on some kind of blog post about that recent case in the United Kingdom where a judge ruled that a mother had the right to order a stop to care and feeding for her disabled daughter in a hospital, leading to the girl's death. She wasn't "brain dead", and she wasn't on mechanical life support. She died because the hospital, at her mother's request, backed up by a judge, stopped giving her food and water.

As I say, I am working on a blog post about this, but right now I'm having trouble being coherent about it. So, it will just have to wait. Maybe tomorrow.

Bullying

Obama Administration Clarifies Anti-Bullying Protections For Students With Disabilities

Joy Resmovits, Huffington Post - October 22, 2014

I have often wondered why I was never bullied in school.

Conventional wisdom would suggest that I should have been picked on mercilessly. I was very short and weak. I looked weird. I wore glasses. I was brainy and nerdy. I went to high school in a semi-rural, semi-suburban community in the early 1980s … decades before diversity and tolerance became prominent concerns in public schools.

Yet, I can’t recall a single incident of bullying, based on my disabilities or anything else. Not everyone liked me, but that’s normal. To my knowledge, I was never picked on because of my differences, and my relations with classmates never caused more than occasional anxiety or stress. It’s possible that people talked about me in bullying ways behind my back. But if I never became aware of it, then who cares?

If I escaped bullying because of things that I did right, I have no idea what they were.

If it was because of things my school did right, I don’t know what they were or whether their practices would be applicable today.

Was it because my disabilities were only physical, not mental or cognitive?

Were kids in the ‘80s nicer than they are today?

Was I just lucky to attend an especially harmonious, well-adjusted high school?

I know that to people who have directly or indirectly experienced bullying, this is an enviable mystery. But it feels like a mystery well worth trying to solve, since stopping or curtailing bullying seems to be such a puzzle. Most articles on the subject focus on simply recognizing bullying and deciding to fight it. Few offer any hints about how to do it … for schools, parents, or even disabled students themselves.

P.S.: This is the 1,000th post at Disability Thinking.

Ken Jennings' Tweet

KenJennings Nothing sadder than a hot person in a wheelchair. 9/22/14, 2:52 PM

A few thoughts:

- A great many “ableist” comments are sort of true if viewed from the twisted perspective of an especially ignorant or shallow non-disabled person. This Tweet, however, is not only insulting, it is transparently wrong. The conclusion is the direct opposite of the experience of just about every person who has seen a "hot" person in a wheelchair “Hot" people in wheelchairs usually make people feel happy, optimistic, even (ugh) inspired.

- There are hilarious comedians who have disabilities who make truthful, self-depracating jokes about disability, but I cannot imagine any of them riffing on how sad it is when disabled people are also really attractive.

- I find it fascinating that Jennings took the trouble to make his joke gender neutral. 

- Based on a perusal of Ken Jennings’ Twitter feed, he seems to be a nerd who desperately wants to be a duedbro. I saw several other jokes there about sexy ladies, none of them worth more than a chuckle, and only mildly, generically offensive. A real, live misogynist would find them pretty tame. I suspect he hit on this one because he’s literally brainstorming every oddball, vaguely sexy “observation” he can think of, and then rotating them directly into his feed.

- There are at least three commenters who are offended that people are offended. Because of course there are.

- Most of these jokey kinds of things don't offend me personally. They don't wound me. What bothers me is a larger question. Why is it still mostly “okay” to make jokes about disabled people?

- As of this moment, there were 180 Retweets and 367 Favorites for this Tweet, and about 70 negative comments. So, I guess Jeopardy's Ken Jennings must be right.

"Gaslighting"

Gaslighting - Wikipedia

Yesterday, I finally looked up the precise meaning of a term I’d heard dozens of times before, but never really understood. The term was “gaslighting”, as in, “to gaslight someone”. It describes a type of psychological abuse, and according to Wikipedia, it is named after a film that depicts the practice.

As I understand it, “gaslighting” is when one person deliberately makes another person question his or her own perceptions and sanity, by repeatedly telling the person he or she is crazy, stupid, or irrational, or by engineering situations so that they actually seem so bizarre to the person, that it reinforces the idea that they have lost their minds or can’t trust their own thoughts. Reading about it in exact terms, I realize that I have seen it happen to disabled people, though I don’t think it has ever happened to me personally, and I desperately hope that I’ve never done anything like it to anyone else.

I was prompted to look up “gaslighting” by a Tweet from Heather Ure, @heatherurehere, who frequently writes about how people with various forms of autism are often victimized in this way. If you stop and think a moment, it makes a terrible kind of sense that people who actually have cognitive impairments or differences, who have already internalized doubts about their own mental reliability, would be vulnerable to someone deliberately encouraging them to doubt themselves.

The main thing I wonder now is whether we should use the same term, “gaslighting”, for both deliberate and unconscious forms of this phenomenon. The effects are awful and corrosive either way, but I can imagine people doing this to others, not out of malice or desire to deceive, but maybe out of an over-active sense of responsibility to govern other peoples’ rationality and self-awareness.

I think we all need to be alert to this risk ... not just of being the victim, but of being the perpetrator. There is a difference between giving someone we perceive to be struggling a “reality check”, and destructively undermining their self-confidence. It’s even worse if the person really does have difficulty understanding things as they are. If it's hard to keep your head together, more self-doubt doesn't help, and reminding someone for the umpteenth time that there's something "wrong" with them isn't truth-telling. Usually, it's just thinly veiled cruelty.