I cannot be sure to whom you refer but for now don the mantle of paranoia
and suppose you are refering to the posters here who identify as neuro
diverse.
I say that the concept of childishness or child likeness is not something
you will find in ICD 10 or any other academicly rigoros dictionary and
entirely subjective employing a derogation of ones opponent not through
reason but through ones own supposed difference from the derogatory status
one wishes to impute to the opponent.
As has maybe been stated before, or am I thinking of another list I am
engaged in at the moment, that the status of eternal child is one often
imposed upon disabled people by the patronising hegemony of non disabled
society in order to invalidate there opinions, emotions, and rights to
choice. A part of the whole disenfranchising mechanism which you surely as a
disability scholar should realise.
For me the inflections of my language may well be conditioned by autism, and
my spelling by dyslexia. My own street fighting instincts maybe from the
fact that I cannot afford to pursue my studies to the extent my cognitive
faculties would allow me too.
I have been engaged for many years in practical reserch of one kind or
another, goal oriented within organisations with a largely grass roots and
working class perspective.
Class, Race and Gender all cross the lines of any pan disability
understanding or solidarity as does disability cross the lines of those
other cleavages and social stratifications
Larry
> -----Original Message-----
> From: The Disability-Research Discussion List
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Richard Meldrum
> Sent: 24 August 2004 15:11
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Why are some disability studies scholar so childish?
>
>
> Hello All,
>
> I am relatively new to the area of disability studies, but I am
> amazed at how
> childish some scholars are in this area. Whether in my home
> institution or in
> the international community, I've never seen such behavior from
> professors,
> post-docs, and students. To be clear, I am not referring to the entire
> disability studies community, though an argument can be made that the
> childishness of this small group reflects poorly on the whole. I
> realize that
> there are childish scholars in most (all?) academic fields, yet
> it seems more
> pronounced in this one.
>
> The question occurs to me, why is this behavior so pronounced in
> disability
> studies? Perhaps this same level of behavior exists in other "identity
> fields" (e.g., women's studies, black studies, queer studies,
> etc.). If that
> is the case, then perhaps I am pointing out something about the
> genus and not
> the species. One plausible explanation I've heard is that
> disability studies
> attracts a number of people who are angry at the treatment they
> haave received
> in society. Some scholars (e.g., Patricia Wolfe, Rose Galvin,
> Stephen French
> Gilson, Elizabeth Depoy, etc.) have written on the hazards of
> locating anger
> and pain at the center of an identity group. So is anger and
> pain to blame
> for childish behavior among some disability studies scholars?
>
> Richard
>
> Richard Meldrum, LCSW
> Ph.D. Candidate in Disability Studies
> Graduate Research Assistant with Advocacy and Empowerment
> For Minorities with Disabilities
> Department of Disability and Human Development
> College of Applied Health Sciences
> 1640 West Roosevelt Road
> Chicago, IL 60608-6904
> [log in to unmask]
>
> ________________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.
|