This request for advice is made to members of the disability-research and
disability studies in the humanities lists - apologies to those whose
membership in both lists results in their receiving two copies of this
message.
BACKGROUND: Recently, Marta Russell, author of Beyond Ramps, noticed that
the Radical Philosophy Association, a large and influential U.S. scholarly
organization formed in 1982, was including disability topics, but no
speakers with disabilities, at its biannual meeting, to be held at San
Francisco State University next week.
FAST FORWARD: After a month of discussion, certain understandings appear
to have been reached. We now are seeking advice from the scholars on
these two lists as to the best language in which to implement one of the
understandings, and as to the best content for implementing the second.
UNDERSTANDING ABOUT RPA STATEMENT OF PURPOSE: The current RPA Statement of
Purpose reads as
follows -
"RPA members struggle against capitalism, racism, sexism, homophobia,
environmental ruin and all other forms of domination."
The domination of PWDs is now to be elevated from the catch-all "other
forms of domination" category to its own place in the list of RPA targets.
The question is, What word shall be used to describe this form of
domination against which RPA members henceforth shall explicitly struggle.
My personal inclination is to use the expression "disablement". My own
philosophical position is that racism, sexism, and homophobia are
subcategories of disablement, but, of course, others emphasize the
differences rather than the similarities between disablement and racism,
sexism and homophobia. However, whether or not one is convinced by my
arguments in this regard is not critical to the issue before RPA.
What is of concernis whether "disablement" is the most felicitous
expression to use in the RPA statement of purpose, or whether there is a
better expression. I would guess that U.K./Canadian listmembers will be
more comfortable with identifying "disablement" as the target of
social struggle than U.S. listmembers will be, but that may turn out not
to be the case.
PLEASE LET US HAVE YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS IN REGARD TO THIS MATTER ASAP.
UNDERSTANDING ABOUT RPA PROGRAM: There appears to be mutual agreement that
the drawbacks to amending the 1998 RPA Program to include PWDs are
formidable. The drawbacks are:
a. The program is already printed.
b. It is unclear that hotels identified as housing recommendations for the
conference are
systemtically accessible.
c. It appears to be too late to make the program accessible to community
members
with disability - arrange for interpreters, etc.
d. San Francisco State University currently is the defendant in a lawsuit
brought by Disability Rights Advocates on behalf of students with
disabilities and the California Faculty Association (the faculty union).
Substantial elements of the conference site thus have been identified as
being out of
conformity with the ADA.
Consequently, the discussions have resolved that RPA will plan to act
affirmatively to include PWDs at its next national meeting. One part of
the plan is to do a session on Marta's very good book. List members
interested in participating in this session should contact me at the above
email.
RPA also has generously proposed to initiate a project to increase the
participation of PWDs in RPA. Joan Mason-Grant, a Canadian philosopher,
has volunteered to coordinate this project. One aspect of the project will
be to make RPA's website accessible. Another is likely to be a
foregrounding
of disability studies at the next RPA meeting. List members who have
suggestions for Joan can contact her (cc. to me) at the above email
address.
Thanks for your attention to this long email and your help with the issue
about language presented above
-Anita Silvers
Profesor of Philosophy
San Francisco State University
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|