Re: Laurence's Dec. 20 post, and Pam & Joseph's in this month:
Laurence, when are your collected writings coming out? Great Dec. 20
post.
Pam brings some class reality into the discussion. "....why many
disabled people in high social positions do not speak out more...." We
can look at the individual, or the situation, but the answers aren't
just there. The status quo situation is that -- not speaking out, is
part of HOW they got to their positions. They've probably been labelled
as "good ones".
Of course -- what a person of "high social position" has said or done,
isn't easy to research. Even just "what they've said." I have seen
different pictures presented in different media, of the same person.
For example, the famous painter Chuck Close gave an interview to the New
York Times Magazine. (Close suddenly acquired a severe mobility
disability, after he was established as a successful artist.) Of course
the article's edit is not in the hands of the interviewee, but what made
it to the page comes across as in the direction of denial and Uncle
Tom-ism. Shortly thereafter, he was interviewed in a disability
focussed magazine, and he came across as a self-respecting person who is
not in any denial, and is socially aware of how PWD's as a class face
barriers and discrimination. (Success may bind him as much as free him:
As a relatively successful working artist, he's on an economic
tightrope. The art critic crowd is very small and fickle, and if they
were to declare him last month's flavor, he could lose that money for
various adaptations that he uses, overnight.) Same person, different
impression on the page. Some of which may be just how his words were
edited, but one wonders also if some of it was -- what he felt safe
enough to say, and to whom. I have seen the identical phenomenon with
famous gay people interviewed by both mainstream and gay presses, and
appearing (key word) in print, to tell each what they want to hear.
"The good one, above the others" in the mainstream mag., vs. "I'm with
you" in the niche publication. For all I know, perhaps they said the
exact same things to both, and the difference was manufactured totally
in the editing.
Who speaks up and where and how, NEEDS to be analysed in the context of
other factors, like class, job security (tenured?), how much they need
that paycheck, who high is their social status in terms of other facets
of their identity, etc. "Making trouble" or deviating in any way, is
nearly always stigmatized, so if your status (perhaps in other ways) is
so high that you have "status to burn", you may feel quite free to go
ahead and burn a bit of it.
When Mohammed Ali shows up at Harvard in the early 70's to give a
speech, wearing a salmon pink suit with matching pants, he was a
certified world class macho man, and thus wearing that suit was like
lighting a cigar with a burning dollar bill. If a man of average "male"
physical status or below-average status, wore that suit, it would be
perceived very differently, and would take on a different meaning. A
plus could turn to a minus.
When Gloria Steinem said in press conferences (excerpts shown on TV)
"This is what forty (years of age) looks like", and a decade later,
"This is what fifty looks like" (referring to her own face).... the
meaning of those statements and how they're perceived, cannot be
understood unless you know how her status in that regard is quite high.
The meaning & perception of the same words, coming out of the mouth of
Betty Freidan or Eleanor Roosevelt at those ages, would have been
different.
Elite people quoted in the media, cannot be used by non-elite people in
the same "suspect category", as role or action models for change-making
behavior,
If you have a high status and you say some liberationist thing, that may
be regarded as "noble" and thus, play in public as the final touch that
makes you "perfect". If the exact same words come out of another more
average person's mouth, they may be perceived as proof that you're a
troublemaker, pushy, bitter, "going about it the wrong way", etc.
The highest social status PWD's may behave selfishly, because that's
what the culture demands to LET them attain or keep that status. (Why
are pro basketball players tall & taller? Focus just on the individual
answer, and you miss the point. The nature of the game tends to demand
it.) It's situational.
--
A MORE interesting question might be "What's holding back PWD's who do
not have those "quite high social positions", who have average or
struggling positions, from being more assertive, and from developing a
larger critical mass of rights assertiveness, which would then make it
easier for more to join in it, and make the DR movement more powerful?
Possible answers:
People need role models (more specifically, speech & action models) that
relate more specifically to their own more limited circumstances. (For
example, not how did that famous tenured person get that school to do x,
but how did an untenured temp worker do the same and not lose his/her
job?)
And speaking up beyond the personal situation, the next step, aka
"activism", can be perceived from the outside as having a high level of
work required to enter, without being perceived as having any less
strenuous "entry level" opportunities. Talking perceptions, not
realities. ("Entry level" opportunities are most obvious, in a huge
activist org. that's going strong; you can volunteer to assist a project
already being done. Whereas, in the small org., you may be simply told
"That's a good idea, why don't YOU do it?") If the entry threshold is
perceived as too high (a perception that mainstream media & society
create, by stereotyping activism as fanaticism), "not joining in" can
lead to guilt, which can lead to worse -- highly developed
rationalizations for not doing so; and even a petulant resentment of
activism, which then lock that person into that unengaged, passive /
selfish position, long term.
And if "new" people with disabilities DO show up in disability studies
and it's organizations., or in the disabled civil rights orgs.,,
newcomers eager to join in the work.... a question people don't want to
discuss: Does the earlier generation of leaders "in power" really let
them in, really let them fully participate? Or does the "inner circle"
cling to what little power they have, discouraging the group's
expansion? Almost by definition, the answers to these questions cannot
be found in print, because those "at the top" are in denial (if not
"control") mode, and those "at the bottom" are afraid to speak up.
--
I care less about why a "high status" person like Stephen Hawking is
quoted in the mainstream press as seeming to be insensitive to the
barriers & ableism others live with.... than I do, about - Why would a
pro-rights statement from such a person, constitute - sticking your neck
way out? The context: What's keeping larger numbers of mouths shut?
How do we get to many more speaking up, from here? Questions like:
"Why can't this DR org. of ten people seem to build up to twenty? "
(How did they get stuck at 10? What's the barrier?)
Or why can't this org. of 50 people who show up, seem build up to 100?"
Or, "Of those "showing up" in the org's meetings, what's preventing the
percent who are really active and "connected", from being be doubled?"
(How did it get stuck at 15%? What's the barrier?)
Or "What's preventing this academic specialty org. of 200, from building
up to 400?" Or what's preventing it's more active "inner circle" of
15% from doubling to 30%?
The fears and situational factors that keep Hawking's mouth or Close's
mouth shut, aren't the same fears that are keeping larger numbers of
mouths shut. And even if high-status-person-X told the truth, it
wouldn't neccessarily work for me, to use the same words.
--
Thanks again, Laurence, for that powerful piece of honest, contemporary
history writing.
Somewhere back in last year or so, I wrote on this list, that the
biggest contribution that DS may be able to make to the DR movement, is
not in developing high theory, but in recording people with
disabilities' often-lost history.
LB's Dec. 20th post is a perfect example of that.
Jim
________________End of message______________________
Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List
are now located at:
www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page.
|
