Hi all
Interesting thinking about what constitutes a disbility - where is the line
drawn? I know somehow its got to do with what people value and whose values
matter to whom. It occurs to me that in youth subcultures if you can still
call them that, difference is what people strive for. However, it seems that
the difference must have some tacit approval from peers. Piercing,
scarification, brandings and all sorts of fashions from ripped clothing,
shaved heads, tatoos, gothic looks and stuff like that are cool,
particularly if it makes you "different" to the wider community and earns
their scorn. It seems that peer acceptance along with egocentricity allows
one to look and act as one likes. I feel it is the attitude that is
considered to be cool moreso than any sort of physical aesthetic quality of
the scars, tattoos, piercings etc. I feel sure that if someone aquired
similar facial scarring in a car accident, the value of that scarring would
be quite different as it signifies something quite different. I am not sure
what sort of inference or analogy I am trying to draw here, its just
something that occurs to me in considering the valuing of "difference" and
that some differences are valued more highly than others. Maybe there is
something similar to be said for eccentricism versus mental illness? One
arouses a non-threatening curiosity and "eccentric" people have a place in a
social schema unlike someone with a mental illness. Again, why is one valued
and the other not?
Best regards
Laurence Bathurst
School of Occupation and Leisure Sciences
Faculty of Health Sciences
University of Sydney
PO Box 170
Lidcombe NSW 1825
Australia
Ph: 61 2 9351 9509
Fax: 61 2 9351 9509
Email: [log in to unmask]
See School Website www.ot.cchs.usyd.edu.au
Home Ph: 61 2 9818 2050
Mobile Ph: 0407 069 441
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sarah Supple" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2002 6:45 PM
Subject: Re: devision.
| HI, when I was referring to us and them , I think what I was getting at
was
| that I believe the division of able and disabled does not exist, such
| categories are a product of discourse. I see there is a diversity of
| physical states across the world and someone somewhere drew an arbitrary
| line and said those on that side are able and those on that side are
| disabled. I recognise that part of changing the stigma attached to
| disability is to redefine it, which in part comes from identifying with
each
| other and wiht disability in order to find new perspectives. However my
| concern is that in doing so we may perpetuate this random categorisation.
I
| think this dichotomous thinking runs wider than disability but may be a
core
| issue in defining the 'other' as bad. Thanks, Sarah.
| ----- Original Message -----
| From: "Lillie,Timothy H" <[log in to unmask]>
| To: <[log in to unmask]>
| Sent: Sunday, July 21, 2002 3:32 PM
| Subject: Re: devision.
|
|
| Simon:
|
| I don't think Sarah said what you seem to think she said. You seem to be
| justifying a doctrinaire approach to disability because "other
| professional[s]" do it!!!!
|
| Timothy Lillie, PhD
| Dept. of Curricular & Instructional Studies
| The University of Akron
| Akron OH 44325-4205
|
| > -----Original Message-----
| > From: Simon Stevens [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
| > Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2002 9:01 AM
| > To: [log in to unmask]
| > Subject: Re: devision.
| >
| >
| > Hmm yes, and name any other professional which doesn't have the same
| > unwritten rules.
| >
| > Like normal, disabled people must be perfect and deny their
| > culture and
| > identity because we MUST be inclusive while everyone else can do
| > whatever they like and abuse us all the time!
| >
| > Please split professional language with personal language.
| > You can think
| > what you want but the disability field (not necessary the movement if
| > one exists) has norms of its rules which are in direct
| > competition with
| > the warehousing and death making industries. Too many non-disabled
| > people pretend to be allies therefore it does make me certainly
| > suspusious.
| >
| > Many Thanks, Simon
| >
| > --
| >
| > Simon Stevens
| > [log in to unmask]
| >
| > Tel: +44(0)24 7644 8130
| > Fax: +44(0)870 133 2447
| >
| >
| > -----Original Message-----
| > From: The Disability-Research Discussion List
| > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Sarah Supple
| > Sent: 20 July 2002 12:14
| > To: [log in to unmask]
| > Subject: devision.
| >
| > Hi, it concerns me that increasingly I am feeling there is a
| > sense from
| > some that if you don't play by certain rules or use certain terms then
| > you become one of 'them' rather than one of 'us' (i.e. the disabled
| > movement). Isn't the us and them mentality exactly what the disability
| > movement is trying to get away from? Sarah.
| >
| > ________________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.
|
| ________________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.
|