Dear Glen et al
Your email has really 'hit-home' on everything I've been trying to say
within the disability movement for years, at grassroots levels, especially
within DAN etc and also within 'academic-circles' too.
I have been talking to various individuals within the last few days,
especially Adrian Whyatt, co-chair DANDA and both of us are feeling really
tired and exhausted' in trying to get the 'neurodiverse' message out within
the grassroots and academic disability movement and also within wider
society and local communities and especially within all the political
parties too within the UK.
I for one have not been fooled by all the political rhetoric withn the
'mainstream' political parties around 'inclusion' and 'independent-living'
and especially around 'nothing about us, without us'.
Nothing has changed for many individual disabled and neurodiverse people,
especially for them coming from grassroots levels. There seems to be this
illusion, that 'class' does not need to be mentioned anymore within a
political correct society.
There are no-more poor sociallly excluded disabled and neurodiverse disabled
people in the UK, is they?
In my grassroots reseach I would state very cleary and I know that Adrian
Whyatt would agree with me, just after he has attended the Liberal
Democrates Conference as a neurodiverse disabled delegate and felt totally
'excluded'. I hear this same message from the experiences of other disabled
and neurodiverse people within the Labour and Conservative Parties too.
Also , within my reserach I have also experienced this 'exclusion' to with
the Socialist and Anti-capatalist movements, especailly within the European
Social Forum and Alernative-G8 where I and other disabled/neurodiverse
individuals felt totally marginalised.
In my reserach I would state that there is no difference if you come from
the Left or Right at the moment, becausee they are both just has bad of each
other and they have no understanding of 'nothing about us, without us'. Have
the Left and Right really understood the isuues within the disability,
neurodiverse and survivors movements throughout history and
'included-our-voices'
They both endorse 'eugenics' and 'institutionalisation' of all
disabled/neurodiverse individuals.
It's all just political rhetoric about the real 'inclusiion' of disabled
people.
They refuse to give us a platform where we are in control of 'informed
decisions/choices' and none of the political parties within the UK; and I
will also state the Unions too are fully supporting disabled people's 'run
and controlled' organisations. That why now many of these disabled
organisatiosn are struggling to 'exsist' at the moment and becaoming more
dependent on the minstream charities, who are not representing our voices
and including us, especially within the Madrid Declaration. This Declaration
is a total waste of space if it's not given the full support of all
political parties here in the UK and the is a 'mandate' within legislation
to force these charities to change their (dis)abilist attitudes and
behaviour towads us and make them more accountable and representative to us,
not they other way around as is the case at the moment.
Disabled People are enslaved still to the Charity-Model' where these
Charties don't really want us to have a 'voice' and are stuck wiithin this
'paternalistic' 'does he take sugar' attitude and behaviour.
We need to be asking ourselves and I put this to Aan Holdsworth and others
within DAN, where I've been involved now for over 10 years and no one ever
answers my question of :- 'Why at a critical time within our own history
within the disabled/neurodiverse/survivors movements is DAN at grassroots
levels now totally 'dead and buried' within history? I will also state this
is true for other grasroots disabled groups too, especially within the
mental health survivors movement.
Glen, I do agree with you and I've experienced this myself, that the
disability movement is still dominated and controlled by 'wheelchair-users'
and I know that many disabled/neurodiverse individuals. especially those
with learning disabilities, mental health survivors and neurodiverse
disabled people too, who have felt totally exluded and bullied within the
disabled people's movement.
I will publically state that the disabled people's/neurodiverse movenment in
the UK is in total chaos and disfranchised at the moment and their is very
poor leadership out there too, especially at grassroots levels. There is no
motivation and direction of where we are going now in the future.
Is 'direct-action' now not needed anymore, because survivors,
disabled/neurodiverse people are fully included here in the UK?
I would like to thank all those people who have continued to offer me their
support for all the basic human and civil rights work I do within the
disability and neurodiverse movement.
I will hasten to add that like many survivors, disabled/neurodiverse people
in the UK, especially basic human and civil rights 'activists' I don't get
paid a penny for any of the work I do and sometimes, like many of my peers
within the movement , then I do ask myself of why I continue to do this
work, especially when some of my own peers, then attack me too. Yes, Glen
and others, it bllody hurts and causes me great personal pain when I receive
these personal attacks for reasons I can't uderstand and comprimise at
times. It makes me feel so sad, taht I geat attacked 'from-within', by my
own peers.
What is their hidden agenda and motives here?
Have the heard of the basic political principles within 'divide and rule?
Why are 'we' at each other throats, when we all need to be united together
if we are ever going to reach our goals to free us all from the chains, that
are still weighing heavy around our necks and keep us all oppressed and
dependant on others who continue to keep us 'marginalised' within the
mainstream, under the charity-model in all our local communities across the
breathe of the UK from 'John-O-Groates to Landsend'.
Where is the 'collective-spirit' within the
disability/neurodiverse/survivors movements to 'FREEOURPEOPLE'?
I can't understand the blacklash I get sometimes for sending a few emails I
believe that is important to the full empowerment of us all.
I don't expect all my emails will be of interest to everyone, and It's easy
to press the *delete-button', is it not?
Within a democratic process should we really be stopping all disabled/people
from sharing informartion with others? What message is that given-out
'out-there'?
How many disabled people/neurodiverse/survivors have felt so
'institutionalised' through discriminatory (dis)abilist attitudes and
behaviour that they have had to 'suffer abuse in silence' and had there
'voices' suppressed', through repressive regimes and social structures.
Do we really want this to happen here and within the wider disabilility,
neurodiverse and survivors movements?
Is this a not a basic human rights and civil liberties issue around the all
ethos of 'nothing about us, without us'.
Yours
Colin Revell
>From: "Smith, Glenn (Medsch Hampstead/Mental Health Sciences)"
><[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: "Smith, Glenn (Medsch Hampstead/Mental Health Sciences)"
> <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: [DISABILITY-RESEARCH] colin revel
>Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 08:57:26 +0100
>
>...we've had this debate before, but it is worth commenting on...
>
>Colin has a right to send e-mails to the forum as he wishes. It is a
>democratic forum and to police it by limiting respones on an individual
>basis would seem at odds with this freedom and to demonise and pathologise
>those who communicate more than most.
>
>Furthermore, if the sender finds it hard to limit themselves because of
>their impairment in a way that most people limit themselves within
>mainstream communication then that needs to be acknowledged and worked
>with.
>
>To do otherwise means that how we communicate has to be achieved in only
>one 'normal' way and that would by implication seem very undemocratic on a
>disability forum with its diversity of people and their different forms of
>communication that have been undemoraticly ignored for hundreds of years.
>
>On the other hand, there is nothing wrong in my opinion to attempt to
>discuss moderation on the forum and so that the forum as a 'neutral' space
>does not appear to be unbalanced and in some ways dominated by particular
>people or conditions like which has happened within disability politics
>where wheelchair users have dominated disability image and discourse for
>many years.
>
>Aiming for some middle ground so that all parties differences are
>acknowledged - although maybe not completely free - is neither
>discriminatory nor normalising but democratic. It is also based on the
>practical need of internet communication and its limits in incoporating the
>diversity of communication within disability, communication in general and
>its lack of 'real' time discussion.
>Yours
>Glenn
>Dr Glenn Smith.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: The Disability-Research Discussion List on behalf of Simon Stevens (
>Enable Enterprises)
> Sent: Mon 26/09/2005 07:33
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Cc:
> Subject: Re: [DISABILITY-RESEARCH] colin revel
>
>
>
> Larry,
>
> Interesting...so someone has the right to be disrespectful to others
>because
> it's a campaign? You seem to demand rights without responsibility and
>this
> is my point, disabled people have responsibilities and it is insulting for
> you to go onto your soapbox with the usual disability message of 'the
>world
> hates me'.
>
> Changing norms require diplomacy and copying every single email to
>everyone
> in your address book is not acceptable. As someone once pointed out,
>copying
> someone into a email implies agreement and implicates us all into the
> context the email. Without our agreement as a group, it shows disrespect
> that goes beyond what you regard as discriminatory norms.
>
> --
> --
> Simon Stevens
> Chief Executive, Enable Enterprises
> See us at; Independent Living London 2005
> 21-22nd September 2005 - Stand J70 - Alexandra Palace - London
> http://london.independentlivingevents.co.uk/
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: The Disability-Research Discussion List
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Larry Arnold
> Sent: 26 September 2005 06:48
> To:
> Subject: Re: [DISABILITY-RESEARCH] colin revel
>
> You are arguing for hegemonic monoculture then where there is but one set
>of
> societal norms and there are no rights to campaign and argue in reasonable
> debate for different way of doing things.
>
> Take the disability out of the arguement and then look at what you are
> saying, are you not like the French Government who decree the hejab is not
> an acceptable social norm in French Schools and cannot be excused.
>
> It will be your turn next, no matter what you say to find your norms
> unacceptable, even the norms of entrapreneurial culture are not set in
>stone
> and have changed in responsce to legislation and regulation.
>
> You lable yourself and use language to discriminate for in your very
>choice
> of the phrases you use, you are choosing how to express yourself and how
>you
> wish your words to be interpreted, and I take them as a pejorative against
> Colin
>
> Larry
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: The Disability-Research Discussion List
> > [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Simon Stevens (
> > Enable Enterprises)
> > Sent: 26 September 2005 05:06
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: [DISABILITY-RESEARCH] colin revel
> >
> >
> > I am aware I will be criticized for being honest but I feel there
> > is a great
> > deal of hypocrisy going on, I feel is the wrong for fashion, political
> > correctness and personal guilt, yes I said it, to be used to justify a
> > single member to use the group for their personal agenda.
> >
> > Having any label does not excuse a person from their responsibilities to
> > respect other people and conduct themselves appropriately within the
> > boundaries of a diverse society. Just because I use a helmet and a bib
>at
> > mealtimes, I am not excused from the social norms of society as a
> > entrepreneur
> >
> > Yet, fashion argues that people who label themselves in a specific way
>are
> > excused from social norms and as they are perceived as above being
> > challenged, are praised in a manner where others would be dealt with.
> >
> > I feel this group once again needs to decide if it is about disability
> > research which seems never to represent the every day experiences of
> > disabled people, or simply a mouthpiece for a specific viewpoint?
> >
> > --
> > --
> > Simon Stevens
> > Chief Executive, Enable Enterprises
> > See us at; Independent Living London 2005
> > 21-22nd September 2005 - Stand J70 - Alexandra Palace - London
> > http://london.independentlivingevents.co.uk/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: The Disability-Research Discussion List
> > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mark Wilson
> > Sent: 26 September 2005 00:34
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: [DISABILITY-RESEARCH] colin revel
> >
> > Dear Jeremy
> >
> > One can simply ask the list about how to block or redirect mail
> > without having to name people on the list - that in my view is where
> > the bad etiquette lies
> >
> > Sincerely
> >
> > Mark Wilson
> >
> >
> >
> > At 06:15 PM 9/25/2005, Jeremy Wickins wrote:
> > >Dear David,
> > >
> > >I think it is bad netiquette to accuse someone of bad faith on
> > insufficient
> > >evidence. The comments you make about feelings apply to all. I don't
> > >think that
> > >there is any evidence in the e-mail that Alan initially sent that he
>was
> > >attacking Colin. As I said in my earlier e-mail, the inference
> > that I drew
> > was
> > >that the quantity of e-mails that Colin sends could be perceived as
> > >overwhelming, depending on one's interests. Not everyone wants to read
> > >everything from a particular list, and certain posters can be so
> > irritating
> > to
> > >an individual that they want a way to automatically block them. I
> > >redirect some
> > >mail from this list and others to a special folder which I look
> > at when I'm
> > >feeling suitably sanguine! Also, not everyone knows how to redirect or
> > block
> > >mail - simple things are only simple if you know how to do them. I
> > >regard it as
> > >a good sign that people who use the mailing list are willing to ask for
> > advice
> > >on this sort of thing, and risking being "flamed" does us no good at
>all.
> > >
> > >Yours,
> > >
> > >Jeremy.
> > >
> > >--
> > >Jeremy Wickins,
> > >PhD Researcher, Biometrics and Social Exclusion,
> > >Sheffield Institute of Biotechnological Law and Ethics (SIBLE),
> > >Department of Law,
> > >University of Sheffield,
> > >169/171, Northumberland Road,
> > >Crookesmoor,
> > >Sheffield. S10 1DF
> > >UK.
> > >
> > >Tel: +44 (0)114 222 6881
> > >Fax: +44 (0)114 222 6886
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Quoting "David P. Dillard" <[log in to unmask]>:
> > >
> > > > I am in total agreement with Margaret Herrington in regard to the
> > > > importance and excellent quality of the email posts of Colin Revel
>to
> > this
> > > > Disabilities discussion group and consider it in very bad
>nettiquette
> > for
> > > > someone to make an ad hominem attack on an individual poster under
>the
> > > > misdirection of claiming a lack of understanding of the methodology
>of
> > > > deleting email from an inbox. This list has a public archive
> > and anyone
> > > > can join this list set at no mail and read the posts they wish on
>the
> > > > public archives for this list. I hope others on this list
> > are thankful
> > > > for the hard work and effort taken by Colin Revel in providing us
>with
> > > > such important information sources, his posts have been the
> > best part of
> > > > my membership on this list thus far. I wonder if the people who
>send
> > > > these messages attacking the work or in this case the large volume
>of
> > work
> > > > of another individual publically and for the whole internet to see
> > > > consider the fact that the person attacked has feelings and that
>these
> > > > kinds of attacks are hurtful and unkind to that person.
> > > > Many thanks from me to Margaret Herrington for her very kind
>response
> > > > regarding this matter.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Sincerely,
> > > > David Dillard
> > > > Temple University
> > > > (215) 204 - 4584
> > > > [log in to unmask]
> > > > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/net-gold>
> > > > <http://www.edu-cyberpg.com/ringleaders/davidd.html>
> > > > <http://www.kovacs.com/medref-l/medref-l.html>
> > > > <http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/net-gold.html>
> > > > <http://www.LIFEofFlorida.org>
> > > > Digital Divide Network
> > > > <http://www.digitaldivide.net/profile/jwne>
> > > >
> > > > ====================================================
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, 25 Sep 2005, Margaret Herrington wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I don't find Colin Revel 's output too dominating?...I
> > don't know him
> > at
> > > > all
> > > > > but have been grateful for a range of items which he has sent out
>to
> > the
> > > > > forum.
> > > > >
> > > > > In a message dated 25/09/05 14:07:03 GMT Daylight Time,
> > > [log in to unmask]
> > > > > writes:
> > > >
> > > > > Hello I am a member of this group and dont really want the task
>of
> > > > deleting
> > > > > colins emails. His output is too dominating for any group. I
> > > have already
> > > > > left one such group. I would like to remain a member but
> > not receive
> > > > emails but
> > > > > look at them on the groups page. How do i do this?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Ms M Herrington
> > > > > Educational Consultant
> > > >
> > > > > Visiting Professor of Education,
> > > > > University of Wolverhampton
> > > >
> > > > > Special Lecturer in Continuing Education
> > > > > University of Nottingham
> > > > > [log in to unmask]
> > > >
> > > > > Home contact details:
> > > > > The Old School
> > > > > Main Street,
> > > > > Tilton on the Hill
> > > > > Leicestershire LE7 9LF
> > > > > 0116 2597361
> > > >
> > > > ________________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.
>
> ________________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.
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
________________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.
|
