The difficulty of answering Mairian's question, with perfectly accurate
numbers -- about who controls disability studies == does not subtract
one bit from the question's validity, or political importance.
So far, the few responses, trying to swat down MC's question, seem to
all be in the zone of what I'd characterise as "Methinks the lady doth
protest too much." Obviously, the question touches a nerve, or
arguments against the question, wouldn't be the only on-line response.
/\/\/\
Perhaps it's time for me to "come out" about my location in relation to
this. I have a presently often-"invisible" but always painful mobility
disability, that will be crossing over into the always-visible realm in
a few years... and may also lose my sight from it (or from a 2nd
condition)-- in a few years.
I've had many experiences on BOTH sides of the perceived "binary" of
disabled / AB, so I've both been able to hear what AB people think of
disability when they assume I'm also AB, while at the same time having
experienced discrimination due to disability, in other contexts which
reveal it, dating back to many years prior to my principal condition's
diagnosis.
"Invisibility" can be an opportunity to hear bias stuff, which you
otherwise might not hear. But it's also not necessarily a fixed
condition, always "on" (or "off") in an individual's life... nor one
totally under the person's control, if they're trying to be invisible.
With some disabilities, sometimes the situation removes any element of
disclosure choice, and "outs" the person. So what's "invisible" in the
morning, may become "visible" in the afternoon.
But that fluidity of reality, in no way subtracts from the importance of
Mairian's question.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|