I have recently been subjected to a number of highly personal attacks
- by Anne Rae, by a few DAN activists, by Shelley Tremain - which
have all been in public fora (the pages of a major disability movement
publication, or through internet lists). Each of these attacks has been
factually inaccurate. I have sought to correct these inaccuracies, and to
make my views clear in defence of myself and my reputation. I do not
apologise for using (disability) public forums to do this, because I
want my peers and colleagues and friends to know the truth.
In response to Shelley Tremain
The account given of her paper at the San Francisco conference is not
accurate. I sat quietly throughout her talk, leaving only at the end to
notify Dominic who wanted to know when the next talk was about to start.
Neither of us heckled or behaved unprofessionally.
You don't need to take my word for it - a video made at the time proves
this.
After the paper, I went up to Tremain to express my appreciation of her
clear and cogent summary of Judith Butler's views,
and my regret at the rather unfortunate scheduling and reception of her
talk.
In response to Richard Light
1. I have always made my position clear (read my articles, listen to
what I have said in the media). I do not have an argument with Disability
Action North East - an organisation of which I was one of the two founders
- although three of its erstwhile activists have attacked me personally. I
have always been happy to explain my views and my work.
Despite the views of some activists, I do not think the Centre for Life is
the 'Great Satan', which is why I do not believe it was wrong of me to take
a job with Newcastle University which involves working with and at
the Centre. I am grateful to Richard and others for supporting me on this.
2. I do not make personal attacks. I do find the current atmosphere of the
disability movement to be destructive and anti-pluralist.
My reponses to criticism have mainly been to correct matters of fact.
I am sure people will understand how hurt I was by Rae's attack.
3. I am not longer accepting invitations to appear in the media, because I
am no longer to prepared to be attacked by the disability community, or to
experience 'tall poppy syndrome'. I have never claimed to be representative
of the disability movement.
I have usually drawn on research experience and data to substantiate my
arguments. As anyone who has worked in the media knows, it is totally
individualistic, and doesn't give a monkey's as to whether anyone is
representative, only whether they are cogent and able to express their
views.
I believe both activists and academics have got a duty to use careful
language, and not to make defamatory or inaccurate statements.
We have to be self-critical, and reflexive. We have to be aware
of the complexity of the issues under discussion, and to give adequate
analyses, not rhetoric and hyperbole. Politics does not justify censorship,
personal insults, inaccuracy, or shallowness of analysis.
In my experience, some people would rather not hear 'difficult' or
'challenging' arguments. Three times in recent years, editors of disability
publications have decided that my articles were 'unsuitable' for
publication, for what
appeared to me to be political reasons, not intellectual ones.
My interventions are made to contribute to strengthening the disability
rights analysis, to try and help make it more adequate. If the social model
(or the position on genetics, or whatever) has flaws or limitations, then we
should analyse these, and make better arguments. If we don't, the enemies
of disabled people will certainly do so.
Activists say they want academics to be accessible and engaged, but my
recent experience would suggest that academics should think carefully before
taking a public role. If what you have to say is congenial to activists,
then no problem.
But if you follow your conscience, raise difficult issues, or do not conform
to the politically
correct line, then you will be denounced, albeit by a small and vociferous
minority, or censored.
Thanks again for those who have been so supportive, and apologies for
wasting your time putting the record straight.
Tom
as usual, I can be contacted offlist at
[log in to unmask]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|