The essence of neurodiversity is difference, and in an extended sence all
humans are a diversity of neurological makeup else we would all think
identically.
I consider (content (look what happend to Marlon Brando on the
Waterfront).....) .that certain characteristics are determined by ones
neurology, the ability to speak, move, see and interpret perceptions
translating the complex reactions between them into actions. However I
cannot be a complete neuro determinist because that would imply no free will
at all, which would be as much to say I could not help writing this and what
follows is already predetermined (programmed gnosis of lack of free will is
a fascinating idea n'est pas)
Well as I have lived I have been able to lern and mitigate the worse social
effects of my negative differences between my particular neurological setups
when in conflict with society. As a seasoned campaigner I have been able to
figure what is going to do me and my cause more harm than good.
Shooting the sheriff is going to end me in jail never mind whether I should
have shot the deputy down too.
Some campaigners are prepared for the negative consequences of there
actions, a spell in jail being like a campaign medal, others want the right
to offend who they will because they believe they are uniquely in the right
and can impose a lifestyle on others (militant vegetarians)
I happen to believe in taking responsibility for my actions and looking for
the reasons for transgressions not excuses, desiring to explain them in
mitigation but not expecting the right necessarilly to swear at, abuse and
trespass in the space of anyone who offends against my principles. I have
lernt to withdraw from situations where I am likely to lose control, and it
is only when people do not let me withdraw in an acceptable manner that they
begin to bear the consequences of my actions upon them.
I suppose the ultimate protest is to set oneself afire in a public place. I
wonder if the offence is justified, I believe that it probably is in that
the maximum harm is being done to oneself not the onlookers. Suicide bombing
however is not acceptable.
Larry
> -----Original Message-----
> From: The Disability-Research Discussion List
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Paul Reynolds
> Sent: 15 February 2006 19:17
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Amended email Colin Revell:- A background history to my
> case from 1995 -present
>
>
> Hello All
>
> I know I am probably going to regret voicing two concerns, but.....
>
> First, I wonder if this sort of communication is appropriate for
> this list - on disability research. If people think it is, then
> thats fine, but I wonder. I am also - and mainly - pretty -
> actually very - unhappy and uneasy about mails that refer to
> legal disputes or conflicts that name names - institutions are
> one thing, names are another. At the least names should be
> omitted unless such people are making discriminatory comments
> that are verifiable in the public domain.
>
> If Colin wants to gain support from people on this list, thats
> fine, especially where feeling at risk is concerned. I don't
> think we should limit the site to 'pure research' because I think
> theory and practice should intertwine. If his version of events
> is taken as the truth - and of course it is one presentation of
> events - then i could imagine seeking support in, for example, an
> e-mail writing campaign to the chief executive of an
> organisation/council etc would be a good way of doing it. It
> might be more appropriate, however, for Colin to solicit people
> to submit their mails to him for a support list, and give people
> a choice - although the choice might be to delete without reading.
>
> Second, I was very interested by one aspect of Colin's recent
> mails, because it raises an important issue. I quote:
>
> "I have protested and complained and entered public building to
> assert my basic human and civil rights about the lack of my care
> and support as a neurodiverse disabled person and that my
> careplan is still not being implemented. The ERYC are stating
> that my 'neurodiverse' behaviour is causing their staff and
> officers great distress.
>
> ... Is this what happens to us neurodiverse crips when we try and
> assert ourselves in our neurodiverse ways, then our neurodiverse
> 'behaviour' is always misinterpreted. This happens to us with
> disabled neurotpicals too as I experienced with various disabled
> people at Hull and East Riding Choices and Rights CIL"
>
> Over the last 15 years, anti-opressive practice informing issues
> of harassment and bullying have stressed increasingly not the
> intent to offend or oppress in behaviour, but the need to
> acknowledge the impact on those feeling offended/oppressed. Of
> course such thresholds are subjective and the problem with this
> has always been that one persons reasoned discussion is anothers
> threat - though responses to this subjectivity in specification
> nof behaviours has improved. That said, Colin raises an interesting issue.
>
> By his representation, any distress caused to staff can be
> offset by a lack of appreciation of neurodiversity. If he replies
> to this e-mail saying I am a @@## **** or whatever for sending
> this mail, and I am offended, is it neurodiversity or
> inappropriate conduct? There is some similarity here in respect
> of gender and ethncity/racism and respectively patriarchy and
> racism/euro - ethnocentrism as a structuring agent for
> insensitivity. However if its a neurodiverse issue, i'm not sure
> you can attach the same remedy of senstivity and awareness
> traininjg, for example.
>
> If "neurodiverse crips" assert themselves in "neurodiverse ways"
> is it simply as Colin asserts, that "our neurodiverse 'behaviour'
> is always misinterpreted". It does seem to mean there cannot be
> limits to what is acceptable conduct without being accused of
> imposing 'neurotypical' behavioiur. Now clearly this is a thorny
> issue, and its one that has filled my pauses for the last two
> days because I suspect it has really interesting reflections both
> on how disability if conceived and how we understand difference
> and diversity in a community/society. At the same time I wonder
> how list members who are sympathetic to Colin's monologue would
> react if confronted by staff reporting genuine "great distress"?
>
> Paul
>
>
>
>
>
________________End of message______________________
This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the Centre for Disability Studies at the University of Leeds (www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies). Enquiries about the list administratione should be sent to [log in to unmask]
Archives and tools are located at:
www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page.
|