I agree with Colette. I stopped contributing to this list because my own
area of work does not "toe the line" in disability studies and I got
completely demoralised with discussion on particular topics being closed
down, and by personalised abuse on- and off-line. I get enough disablement
in my everyday academic and social life without spaces that are potentially
enabling and supportive being invaded by trolls who claim to be concerned
about disabled people's "material reality", whilst reinforcing their
personal belief hierarchies.
But it is for exactly this reason that I agree with Larry too. Maybe we
don't all read his remarks in the same way, but the danger is that by
singling his comments out in this way, we don't find out how others read
them. What I get very strongly from Larry's contributions about
neurodiversity is a voice that is struggling to be heard and rarely listened
to in the overall scheme of things. I don't think he was homogenising
academics - certainly not in the same way that someone on another list did
recently - and even if he was, I recall that members of this list often shut
down the points he tries to make. My interpretation of what he is saying is
that all too often, research - including so-called emancipatory research -
is aimed at producing "reality", "truth" and definitive, totalising answers.
If that is happening, and I tend to agree with him on that issue, then it
worries me. I see research in other areas making a real attempt to address
things like complexity theory, because researchers in these fields
acknowledge the extent to which social life is changing. I hope that Larry's
point can be discussed further.
Best wishes, Mairian
> From: Colette Conroy <[log in to unmask]>
> Reply-To: Colette Conroy <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2001 10:47:15 +0100
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Information request re hierarchy of impairments
>
> Dear List Members,
>
> I have been observing this list for more than two years. I am a disabled
> person, and I do academic research and teaching. Although this is a
> response to Larry Arnold's recent email, it is based on many other examples.
> I'm not at all happy that list members feel that they can dismiss the
> projects of others without a proper engagement with the subject. If you feel
> that something is a waste of time, delete the email.
>
> There are a great many subjects that I'd love to discuss with others here,
> but I have become increasingly aware that this is often not a forum for
> free, creative discussion. In theory, one can feel strongly and argue a
> convincing point without being rude or dismissive. How can we discuss
> difficult and controversial ideas unless people try to engage with them? How
> can we encourage people to share their ideas unless there is a chance that
> they and their ideas will be treated with respect? There are many problems
> "out there". The people on this list are all in search of solutions. Yes,
> even those involved in the demonised academic work.
>
> Should we talk to each other, or should we give up now?
>
> Colette Conroy.
> [log in to unmask]
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Larry Arnold" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 12:23 AM
> Subject: Re: Information request re hierarchy of impairments
>
>
>> And what then of neuro divergency
>>
>> Without the visible appearance of a stereotypical impairment, ones
> divergent
>> behaviour is seen as arising out of ones own charachter flaws in much the
>> same way as the medieval world viewed Richard thrids charachter flaws
>> arising out of physical divergence.
>>
>> Life is too complicated to put into categories and give comparisons
> between
>> them.
>>
>> What is a degree? how can yu measure degrees of impairment anymore than
> you
>> can multiply apples by pears.
>>
>> You imply a stratified heirarchy, well it is not a two dimensional world I
>> am afraid, and not everything can be put into a table beloved of academics
>> with various lines leading between them. We don't live in a powerpoint
>> presentation or an academic seminar.
>>
>> Save the strata for the geologists thank you.
>>
>> Larry
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: The Disability-Research Discussion List
>>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of [log in to unmask]
>>> Sent: 22 August 2001 09:45
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> Subject: Information request re hierarchy of impairments
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> I wondered if any one was aware of literature exploring how degrees of
>>> impairment impact on disabled women's (or even men's) experiences of
>>> disability (socially constructed). During interviews, I have found that
>>> levels of impairment seriously impact on disabled women's
>>> experiences of dv,
>>> with regard to intensified vulnerability to abuse in relation to
>>> difficulties
>>> in protection, negative social reaction to certain degrees of impairment
>>> (Carole Thomas' work will be useful here), and how levels of spatial
>>> communication impact on power differences (e.g. power differences
> between
>>> wheelchair users and non-wheelchair users, between those who
>>> stand and those
>>> who sit/lie).
>>>
>>> This issue has been raised by many of my participants - warning me to
> stay
>>> out of a wheelchair - I walk (stumble) with two sticks. I do realise
> that
>>> many participants may have internalised the ideology of the
>>> able-bodied ideal
>>> and the notion that the further a person deviates from the
>>> able-bodied ideal,
>>> the less 'attractive' and valid they may be perceived. However,
>>> one cannot
>>> dismiss participants' definitions of situations - particularly as
>>> these have
>>> influenced their experiences of disability and gender - Many of these
>>> participants' conditions have changed over time, and have encountered
>>> increased hostility as their impairment become more apparent to
>>> both disabled
>>> and non-disabled society.
>>>
>>> I'm aware that Shakespeare has talked about the existence of a
>>> hierarchy of
>>> impairments within institutions - however, is there any one else who has
>>> explored this? I'm also aware of French and Crow's standpoint
>>> work. I realise
>>> this is a difficult issue for us as disabled people to engage in, but
> I'd
>>> rather we explored it than non-disabled academics. Moreover, as
> Abberley
>>> has pointed out in the past - impairment is the substratum upon which
> our
>>> disability is erected - surely it is important, therefore, to
> acknowledge
>>> that there are differences in impairment as these will influence
>>> our general
>>> disability experiences (with regard to social reaction to, and
>>> experience of
>>> varying degrees of impairment).
>>>
>>> If any one has any ideas I would be grateful ...
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Pauline Magowan
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ________________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.
>>
>
> ________________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.
________________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.
|