 |
 |
All right Gill- I tried very hard to point out that I was Not "assuming things of others" (and of you) on a personal basis. I never said that you *personally* used inspiration in such and such way (though yes, as with society's use of suffering, I think it's good to step back and look at your use of it, but I'll take you at your word). I was talking as to theory about use of language (which again was tied to how this line was started with people pulling apart a term like 'suffering') and merely pointing out that 'inspirational' and such 'positive' terminology deserves the same kind of theoretical scrunity by society and that includes us. But you obviously took it more personally, and assumed things of me about you personally that I didn't mean. And maybe this is all for naught as you 'have no more energy'. If so, then I'm sorry for that. --Johnson >I can't honestly summon up the energy to pursue this line. I did not use >'inspirational' as a sterotypical anything! > >I used it as I meant it...'prompting and infusing feeling into another.' >I wrote it in response to Zoe's mailing, as I thought that she was using the >word along those lines. > >I do not impose that view on my own child, because the feeling is mine, not >his. > >He certainly doesn't require a cure or change. He is fine in my eyes, >*exactly* the way he is. > >Of course you have a right to your opinions, which are as valid as anyone >elses, but it unwise to assume things of others. > >Gill. > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [log in to unmask] >> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Johnson >> Cheu >> Sent: 08 March 1999 23:14 >> To: [log in to unmask] >> Subject: RE: dismay at terminlology >> >> >> Gill-- and anyone else-- >> >> Not to be overly critical, but as I've said before, part of coming to >> disability identity for some is rejection of stereotypes and that this >> sometimes means rejection of parental influences/notions. >> >> While I cannot speak about your son and his influence on you, I >> think it is >> worth mentioning that something like 'inspirational' is a stereotype that >> is contested by some -- Anne Finger in Ragged Edge comes to mind; Nancy >> Mairs in Waist High, or the rebelling against the whole poster-child >> syndrome. >> >> I do not of course mean to critique anyone's parenting skills-- having had >> the same kind of conversation with my Dad recently, I've come to realize >> that I can't "change" him, beyond baby shifts, and that his perspective on >> what parents should do --"cure" make better"--though different from my own >> interpretation of my impairment/disability is nonetheless valid. To argue >> otherwise means for me a forry into "right/wrong" binarisms I don't desire >> to get into with him. >> >> But I mention this here because I think it's important for >> parents who take >> this view of inspiration, what-not to attempt to recognize the limits on >> that thinking and what that may impose on a child who might not view >> him/herself in terms of these labels. >> >> Best, >> >> Johnson >> >> >I so agree with Zoe, >> > >> >that particular word...suffer... really grates on my nerves, and >> offends me. >> >My son does not suffer as a result of his actual condition, but more as a >> >result of the ignorance around it. >> > >> >'Inspirational', 'remarkable', ' emotionally intelligent', >> 'forgiving' and a >> >'priveledge' are words that spring to mind when I think of him. He has >> >taught me so much. >> > >> >How much we have to learn... >> >Gill. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: [log in to unmask] >> >> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of >> >> Z.Holland >> >> Sent: 08 March 1999 13:19 >> >> To: [log in to unmask] >> >> Subject: Re: dismay at terminlology >> >> >> >> >> >> Dear Keith and all, >> >> >> >> I really do agree with what you wrote about terminology, Keith. In a >> >> similar vein, what really gets to me is when the word 'suffering' is >> >> so readily used to describe people who have a medical condition of >> >> some kind - as though by simply having such a condition, they are >> >> automatically a victim or sufferer. On the radio yesterday, >> the views of >> >> parents of children who 'suffer' from Down's syndrome were discussed >> >> (in connection with health services). Why couldn't the broadcaster >> >> be non-colourful and neutral in simply saying 'people who *have* Down's >> >> syndrome'? My sister (soon to be 16) has Down's syndrome, yet - in >> >> spite of mild related health 'problems' (hole in the heart) - she >> >> really doesn't >> >> 'suffer' at the hands of the syndrome at all. She is an >> >> inspirational, happy and fun-loving person. >> >> >> >> Why should an entire group of people - many of whom love life, >> >> and happily get on with it ... often unaware of even having a medical >> >> condition - be assumed to be 'suffering', just because they have been >> >> identified as having a medical condition? Negative terminology >> >> (like 'suffering') - freely used on national radio - widely >> >> encourages people to feel only useless and patronising pity >> >> towards people >> >> who have Down's syndrome (or dyslexia, diabetes etc. ... anything >> >> 'different'), and to perceive them as unhappy and dependent. From my >> >> experience of working with many adults and children who have Down's >> >> syndrome - and from knowing and loving my younger sister - this just >> >> isn't what it's all about! Words like 'respect', 'inspiration', >> >> 'fun', and 'love' >> >> paint a totally different - and often more accurate - picture. >> >> >> >> Words have the potential to build a bridge of mutual understanding and >> >> respect between non-disabled and disabled people ... or to >> drive a wedge >> >> of ignorance and misunderstanding between them. It is *SO* important >> >> that we choose the right ones in the right contexts. >> >> >> >> Best wishes, >> >> >> >> Zoe Holland >> >> ([log in to unmask]) >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sunday 7 March 1999, Keith Ripley wrote ... >> >> >> >> >> >> Dismay at the language surrounding children with Special >> educational needs >> >> >> >> Am I just a pedant, or are there others whose spirits sink >> when they open >> >> newly published books, from the likes of the Open University & others >> >> (e.g. Mackinnon, D et al 1997 Education in Western Europe. >> Facts & figures >> >> ) & find these terms used physically & mentally disadvantaged (page >> >> 13) severity of the child, handicap or problem mild >> mental handicap, >> >> serious mental handicap (page28). >> >> >> >> A book such as this could be published in the UK using either the >> >> terminology of the 1981 Education Act or the current >> terminology used to >> >> define schools in this country. It could include a glossary of terms >> >> highlighting the variations across European countries, & a >> statement from >> >> 1 or more organizations for disabled people, stating why they >> do not want >> >> to be known as handicapped, & the term(s) that they do prefer. >> >> >> >> The Open University & other publishing bodies have a duty to educate as >> >> well as to maintain standards. This includes challenging sloppy & >> >> inaccurate use of language, such as special needs oh for a >> world where >> >> people did not refer to themselves as oh I work with >> special needs, as >> >> though children in this country exist in 2 separate bodies & that such >> >> categorization could inform so completely .. >> >> >> >> If Im the only one who feels like this I promise I will desist from >> >> highlighting such facts in student assignments. >> >> >> >> Yours hopefully, >> >> >> >> Keith Ripley [log in to unmask] >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Johnson Cheu >> [log in to unmask] >> http://people.english.ohio-state.edu/cheu.1 >> Dept. of English*Ohio State University*421 Denney Hall*164 W. 17th. >> Ave.*Columbus, OH 43210*(614) 292-1730 (O)*292-6065(D)*292-7816(Fax) >> >> >> Johnson Cheu [log in to unmask] http://people.english.ohio-state.edu/cheu.1 The Ohio State University*English Dept.*421 Denney Hall*164 W. 17th. Ave.* Columbus, OH 43210*(614) 292-1730 (O)*(614) 292-6065 (D)*(614) 292-7816 (Fax) %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%