I just wantod to second Kate.
This was very close to what I was trying to say.
I appologize to everyone, and Shelley Tremain in particular, for being too
fierce in my mail on friday: Kate summed it up: We need to argue, to think
things over, and too tolerate some disagreements. Only in that way can the
underpinnings of the social movements, personal choices and disability arts,
and thereby our lives as we know them, move forward.
Halvor
>From: Kate Kaul <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: Kate Kaul <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Cure this thread
>Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 11:56:17 -0500
>
>I have been lying low so far because after a personal attack on the list,
>it's difficult to respond without at some level either continuing the
>personal attack or defending the person attacked -- when either response
>seems to prolong the attack. But I'm jumping in anyway...
>
>
>
>Surely we can disagree more productively than this. Maybe it's because I'm
>writing from Canada but I find it difficult to understand why people care
>so
>much what Tom Shakespeare says on a disability web site -- I mean, so much.
>If we have any disabled people here whose opinion carries such weight, I
>would love to find out who they are. I don't expect anyone else's writing
>to represent me and my views, and I expect to disagree with other people
>and
>their politics sometimes, in some ways, and this includes other disabled
>people. That said, I agree with Ron Amundson that people tend to hear what
>they want to hear, making it difficult to "say" anything else.
>
>
>
>But surely this, at least, should be a forum in which we can disagree and
>debate instead of just taking -- or assigning -- sides and positions. None
>of us has exactly the same idea of what a "disability studies position" or
>"disability rights position" should be on an issue, and our ideas aren't
>static -- they shift in response to debate and discussion as well as in
>response to political changes and circumstances.
>
>
>
>To return to the "cure" part of the cure thread, I think there is a wide
>range of views held by different people with disabilities and I agree with
>Tom's column that people with degenerative disabilities are more likely to
>want to be cured, or at least to want not to get any worse, than people
>with
>more consistent disabilities. In this arena, it's very difficult to
>distinguish between disability and impairment. But my experience as a
>person with a degenerative illness shouldn't in anyway contradict the
>experience of someone with a different disability -- or the same one -- who
>has a different experience or position. Again, I agree that these
>differences too easily get represented as "divisions" or "inconsistencies"
>-- or, more likely, just get misrepresented -- to people unfamiliar with
>disability politics.
>
>
>
>I'm also interested in what people think about Maria Barile's question to
>Tom about medicalization -- maybe people responded to it off list. But I
>think it's important to distinguish between medicalization and medical
>care,
>between the existing absurd over-emphasis on cure and the possibility of
>cures in general.
>
>
>
>Regards,
>
>
>
>Kate
>
>
>________________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.
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Hotmail http://www.hotmail.com Med markedets beste SPAM-filter. Gratis!
________________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.
|