Durkheim I can forgive as a pioneer for inexactitude, but Talcott Parsons
what did he ever do to deserve any kind of reputation at all, I would guess
that Lord Haw Haw made more accurate and better reserched observations than
he did.
Oh well 49 and no PHD yet, I guess I'll get my (metaphorical) gold watch
before I can bask in the self inflated glories of the international lecture
circuit, wintering in warm climes and fighting off the hordes of nubile
conference gruopies. Tell you what Shakespeare has got, a memeroble name
with literary connotations. Now what was the book now, Uncle Toms cabin ?
Oh Larry you can do better than that surely ............ Invectas Invecto
Invectat Invectamus ....
Larry
> -----Original Message-----
> From: The Disability-Research Discussion List
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Shelley Tremain
> Sent: 07 November 2004 21:37
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: More about the Cure
>
>
> Ron,
>
> thank you very much for clearing away some of the smoke screens
> and mirrors
> that have been erected in this discussion, most (though not all) by Tom
> himself, and couched in remarks like: "I don't say or write
> things because
> of my academic position, or to get acceptance from the mainstream
> world, or
> because anyone is paying me"; "Challenging the mainstream view
> has caused me
> nothing but stress, abuse and isolation." As you have aptly pointed out,
> Tom is not "challenging the mainstream view" at all, but rather endorsing
> and promoting it, and he is being paid to do so.
>
> Unfortunately, some of the people in this discussion have nostalgia for a
> time when Tom wrote and spoke from a disability studies
> perspective. These
> people should get abreast of what has happned with Tom in the last several
> years. For this set of historical events has little to do with freedom of
> thought, or the pursuit of understanding, insight, rigor, etc.
> This set of
> historical events has to do with an individual's opportunism, desire for
> recognition, attention, and social status, and his
> already-established class
> privilege. In university, and for some years afterward, it was
> o.k. to be a
> marginal subject; it was cool. It seemed appropriate and transgressive to
> make one's reputation and presence in the media rely upon the
> oppression of
> disabled people and the medicalization of their lives. But when one's
> upbringing has groomed one to occupy a certain social position,
> that novelty
> will likely wear off eventually. Besides, disabled people can
> be, so, well,
> poor and uneducated, lacking in the proper table manners and other social
> graces. Not the sort of folks that one could take to the Ascot gavotte.
>
> So, what does one do if: (1) he wants to take his "rightful"
> place among the
> elite (which in the last century, especially, has increasingly come to
> consist primarily of members of the medical-scientific establishment), but
> (2) has a degree in Sociology (as opposed to cell biology or orthopedic
> surgery), and (3) is no Emile Durkheim or Talcott Parsons? What
> did Tom do?
>
> Well, upon learning that bioethicists and eugenicists were
> intending to set
> up an institutional home in his backyard, and recognizing that he has some
> class privilege by virtue of the outdated class structure of his country,
> combined with the mileage he gets from his surname, Tom decided that he
> would offer himself up as the mouthpiece for members of the establishment,
> clearing a path for their acceptance. He would make their job easier
> (protests and public outcry can really get in the way of securing large
> research endowments) by presenting himself to the public as a rational and
> level-headed disabled person, one who had some credibility with
> the disabled
> people's movement. And pave the way for their acceptance he has:
> first, by
> trying to persuade the disabled community to accept prenatal testing and
> selective abortion, next, by rationalizing cures, remedial medicine, and
> stem cell research, and perhaps in the near future, recommending
> euthanasia.
>
> Tom Shakespeare is no more an ally of disabled people than is
> Peter Singer,
> John Harris, Jeff McMahan, or Dan Brock. He doesn't have the
> intellectual
> or academic influence of these monsters. But he is just as dangerous as
> them.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
> Shelley Tremain
>
>
________________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.
|