I was of course simplifying the issue by using wheelchairs as an example,
but if builders and architects fully complied with even the minimum
specification of the British Standard you would find [among many other
things] that taps in accessible toilets were always long lever and easy to
use.
What I was trying to say was that, leaving aside the main barrier facing
disabled people: the attitude of non-disabled people, many of the other
barriers are easily removable but we need terminology to express what those
barriers comprise and how they should be remedied and to do this we need to
be able to describe both the barrier and how it impacts upon an individual
who has to approach a particular task [whether using a toilet or driving a
car] in a different manner to the majority. The problem then is to find
terminology that describes and to some extent categorizes difference or
diversity without implying inferiority. The Medical Model of Disability
makes no attempt to describe people as different-but-equal but the Social
Model does at least try to do so
By the way gender-specific toilets do not comply with building regulations
as 'accessible' toilets because someone who needs assistance from a Personal
Assistant of different gender cannot [easily] use them - they are not
therefore accessible to those persons.
Regards,
Vin
-----Original Message-----
From: Larry Arnold
Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2011 9:36 PM
To: 'Vin' ; [log in to unmask]
Subject: RE: call for papers - learning disability studies
I am not sure of your argument exactly but there was a time when I was
categorised as "carer" but neither I nor my mum were happy with that
designation. I was more than a carer, I was an unpaid personal assistant,
and so far as care goes, our care, mum's and mine both extended beyond our
family.
Accessible toilets? You don't have to be a wheelchair user to have a need
for an "accessible" toilet. The thing that annoys me about "accessible"
toilets is that they seem to pay no regard whatever to such things as the
ability to easily turn taps on or off, and many other problems. I am afraid
that larger cubicles in gender segregated toilets don't do it for me either,
but I am sure nobody wants me to go into detail as to why.
As for the appearance of being hostile when we are not and facing
difficulties with authority. I am sure that Colin and I are very aware of
that experience.
It's this notion of turning language round backwards that gets me, because
that is the pretence, it's a false attempt by the guilty "chattering
classes" to seek absolution from there own kind of "original sin" to be seen
as being polite and correct when inwardly they are full of fear and
reticence.
Larry
> -----Original Message-----
> From: The Disability-Research Discussion List [mailto:DISABILITY-
> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Vin
> Sent: 12 February 2011 11:50
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: call for papers - learning disability studies
>
>
> Hi Craig,
> thank you for your very thoughtful and positive response. The methodology
> you describe sounds admirable but I don't think my comments were at all
> confusing: I specifically ranted at "whoever runs this journal" - and the
> text of the email used the term in question at least half a dozen times so
> the author apparently considered it appropriate terminology.
>
> In response to Larry and Colin, I absolutely agree that people should not
be
> categorized or pigeon-holed and I have always insisted that the strap line
> for the Access Group that I have run for many years reads: Equal Access
for
> All - Hygyrchedd Cyfartal i Bawb [in Welsh]. However, if you are lobbying
> for, campaigning for or demanding equal access you need at some point to
> specify that a toilet must be constructed to certain specifications to
> provide good wheelchair access or that grab rails must be tonally
contrasted
> against the background so that those with less than perfect sight can
find
> them or that fire alarms are repeated as flashing lights so that those
> without hearing can escape buildings when necessary or that police
officers
> should be aware that someone's reaction to an abrupt challenge or physical
> man-handling may present as possibly hostile but in fact be fearful or
that
> the person may not be able to tolerate a loud voice or physical contact.
>
> All of this requires reference to clusters of related states of being or
> diversity [whether physical, sensory or neurological] so that officials
can
> be advised on good practice. It is for that reason that I am categorized
as
> an unpaid Carer, even though the totality of my identity has many more
> facets, but if I don't tell people I am a Carer then it is more difficult
to
> get them to agree to a video conference instead of a face to face meeting
at
> the other end of the country which excludes me because I must be at home
> overnight due to Caring responsibilities. Yes people are people but if you
> don't self-define as French speaking [just for example] then a French
> translation is not likely to be provided.
> Therefore, if you accept that terminology is needed to explain how the
world
> should be made accessible for all then that terminology should be based on
> how people self-define but also needs to contain practical information
about
> what is required for equitable access, whatever the individual's access
> requirements may be.
>
> Regards,
>
> Vin
>
Vin West
Secretary, Arfon Access Group
Glyn Dwr
Llandwrog Uchaf
Caernarfon
LL54 7RA
01286 880761
[log in to unmask]
[log in to unmask]
________________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 list administration should be sent to [log in to unmask]
Archives and tools are located at:
www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
You can VIEW, POST, JOIN and LEAVE the list by logging in to this web page.
|