 |
 |
Around 2/7/00, [log in to unmask] was seen to say: > In essence it consists of an approach to challenging chara[c]terised by > > · Being tactful and constructive rather than personal > · Avoids cornering people > · Is appropriate in time and place > · Non-punitive, avoiding unnecessary hostility > · Acknowledges the possibility of 'bad practice' > in those presenting the challenge > · Presented in a spirit of compassion and commitment > to social justice This framework of elegant challenge seems most appropriate when the challenger and the challenged have approximately equal power, and especially when the challenger has more power than the challenged. In the disability rights context, I must admit my initial response was fury. A U.S. vulgarism sums it up nicely: 'Don't piss on my head and then tell me it's raining.' When people with disabilities advocate for human rights, we often interact with those lacking any interest in, much less commitment to, social justice. Yes indeed, we can be noisy, rude, 'uppity,' -- the embodiment of any number of 'bad practices' -- and of course the definitions of bad and good practice are not in our hands. Some thoughts.... -- Jesse the K -- Madison Wisc USA -- <mailto:[log in to unmask]> Beta Tester for Real Life "If it can go wrong, I'll show you how!" %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%