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
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.
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
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:
Becky Jackson
Artie Abrams
So, now it's time to vote in the first round, pitting two disabled characters in the same show!
Actor: Lauren Potter
Disability: Down Syndrome.
Role on the show: Secondary character in an ensemble cast. Member of the “Cheerios” high school cheerleading team.
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.
Voting in this round will be closed Sunday, October 19, 2014.
Weekly Wrap-Up
Disability Thinking, Weekly Wrap-Up. Thinking a lot about work ...
Sunday, September 28, 2014
Monday, September 29, 2014
Tuesday, September 30, 2014
Wednesday, October 1, 2014
Thursday, October 2, 2014
Friday, October 3, 2014
Saturday, October 4, 2014
Saturday, October 4, 2014
For "Special Needs" Parents
Before watching this scene from the first season of “Game Of Thrones”, be warned … violence and blood ahead.
While thinking about my two Disability.TV conversations with Alice Wong, on disabled characters in "Game Of Thrones," I remembered a scene we forgot to talk about.
Bran Stark, who has recently been paralyzed by being pushed out of a tall tower, is the target of an assassin sneaking into his room. His mother, Catelyn Stark fights the man off just long enough for Bran’s pet direwolf to leap to his defense in spectacular fashion.
The scene isn’t about disability, but the emotions in it make me think of all the parents out there with disabled kids. I sometimes have issues with how some parents talk about disability issues, but I never doubt for a moment their dedication and fierceness … not unlike Catelyn, and the direwolf.
Friday, October 3, 2014
Employment Awareness
Six By ’15 - October 3, 2014
October is National Disability Employment Awareness Month, and related articles are starting to appear. The graphic above is the best thing I have seen so far. It clearly and simply communicates the issue we are dealing with … a huge employment gap for people with disabilities in the United States.
Why the gap? That's a much bigger question, with many answers. But it helps to know the size and shape of the problem before trying to understand and solve it.
Why the gap? That's a much bigger question, with many answers. But it helps to know the size and shape of the problem before trying to understand and solve it.
By the way, the “Six By ’15” coalition looks pretty interesting. It’s the first I have seen of it, but I like the list of sponsors and endorsements, and the six goals all seem pretty well chosen.
(Graphic from the University of New Hampshire Institute on Disability).
Disability.TV Podcast - Game Of Thrones, Part 2
In case you missed it, here is the first part of our "Game Of Thrones" discussion:
Upcoming Episodes
October 10
Mini-Cast
October 17
Guest Co-Host Cheryl Green
October 31
Guest Co-Host Kamilah Proctor
November 7
Mini-Cast
November 14
Guest Co-Host Sarah Levis
Thursday, October 2, 2014
China Protests And Disability Policy
I read an article today at Vox.com on why the Chinese government suppresses movements for democracy. The article asserts that they view China as fundamentally weak, threatened, and unstable. This leads them to value order above all and fear that even small increases in individual freedom will lead to society-wide chaos. This is based on a real history of devastating chaos and a rapid fall from unquestioned superiority to being carved up by outside powers.
Meanwhile, we in the United States tend to see China as a strong, vibrant, up-and-coming country, held back only by it’s own government’s outdated, repressive policies.
I think there is a lesson here for understanding people who oppose disability service reforms like phasing out sheltered workshops.
Many families' experiences of disability are suffused with fear, disappointment, betrayal, neglect, and a profound sense of the vulnerability of their disabled loved ones. Many disabled people also share this view about themselves.
Others in the disability community look at the overall situation and see it quite differently. They see that developmentally disabled people are demonstrably capable of more than they have historically been given credit for. Likewise, they see a society that, for all its faults and leftover prejudices, has largely gotten used to developmentally disabled people being visible and active in “mainstream" society.
Some view disability from a position of weakness and vulnerability. Others from a place of strength and possibility. Nether side is completely right or wrong. Both have ample reasons to justify their points of view, if not their preferred policies. It all comes down to how one chooses to look ahead … with pessimism or optimism.
Red Band Society, Season 1, Episode 3 Review
My review of the 3rd episode of “Red Band Society” is up at Gotta Wach It!
This is a troubled show though the seeds of a good show are still there, buried, with a few more weeks left to sprout before I get tired of waiting. It’s more of a teen soap than a disability show, and that’s okay. It can be a better disability show if it fills in some of its more glaring credibility gaps, including, but not limited to it’s incomplete depictions of chronic illness and disability.
Wednesday, October 1, 2014
Ending Sheltered Workshops: It Can Work
Halle Stockton, Publicsource / Disability Scoop - September 30, 2014
This is a tremendously encoraging article on how Vermont transitioned from sheltered workshops (and closing them), to community employment, while raising the rate of employment for people with developmental disabilities. Cheers to my neighboring state across the lake!
As with all reforms, the keys to success are good followthrough and reforming for the right reasons. One reason why significant numbers of people still oppose phasing out sheltered workshops is that they have seen poor followthrough on disability policy before, and they don’t trust the legislators and bureaucrats who actually have to carry out disability policy reforms.
For one thing, state Developmental Disability service systems have spotty track records, sometimes championing progressive change, but just as often presiding over outdated, neglectful, even barbaric programs and institutions.
Meanwhile even some of the best reforms end up looking a lot like plain old budget cuts. In fact, disability advocates often “sell” progressive change to lawmakers by telling them the changes will save taxpayer’s money. And it’s true! However, many families fought very hard for what little they get, and they view with suspicion anything that looks like economizing.
Finally, similar reforms of other systems show mixed results. Special Education still splits meagre resources between self-contained and inclusive classrooms, and it often seems like schools only embrace inclusion when it suits their need to save money. The widespread closure of mental institutions in the 1980s is a horror story social work professors tell their students … about how the Reagan Administration capitalized on desires for a more humane, liberating mental health system, by shutting places down and then forgetting to reinvest the money saved into community services.
Well-meaning advocates have a noble idea, politicians and policy wonks get ahold if it, ram it through, and vulnerable people suffer. That’s the story I hear starting to be told about the move away from sheltered workshops. It is a potent story that has got to be countered with facts, and with a genuinely careful implementation as seems to have been done in Vermont.
Change is scary, but so is the status quo.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)