Yes Carolyn,
but Henry's wife didn't simply smile politely and turn away, she made
people think. She took action, she objected.
Perhaps if more *ordinary* people did that the onerous process of changing
attitudes could be accelerated even slightly?
Gill.
Gill Dixon BHSc Hons, RGN
Training & Information Officer
Dyspraxia Foundation
Website: http://www.emmbrook.demon.co.uk/dysprax/homepage.htm
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [log in to unmask]
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Carolyn
> Tyjewski
> Sent: 28 March 1999 14:15
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: attitude change (fwd)
>
>
> Judy,
>
> I'm not saying that some people in the room did not feel the same
> way she did
> originally -- before she said she was offended. In other words, they were
> offended, felt uncomfortable, etc., with or without her comments. The
> difference is that she voiced her feelings and they didn't. Notice -- and
> this is all presupposing that Henry's wife, and then Henry, relayed what
> actually occurred, no one reaffirmed her attitude in front of the person
> telling the joke. They came to her afterwards, privately. And,
> of course,
> I'm fairly sure the person apologized to her because that's what
> we're taught
> to do in polite society. However, you, Henry, Henry's wife, me,
> etc., do not
> know what happened after she left the vicinity.
>
> What I do know, as someone who passes on more than one count, is
> that after
> the person leaves the area comments are made to reaffirm the norm
> by both the
> person telling the joke and those around that person -- including usually
> people who will admit, privately, that they didn't feel the behavior was
> correct. In other words (to put it in simple sentence form),
> people who have
> discriminatory beliefs are not going to change their beliefs
> simply because
> someone said they were offended or explains how "insensitive" the behavior
> was.
>
> [log in to unmask] wrote:
>
> > Carolyn wrote:
> > > > It [confronting a discriminatory joke] only means that one should>
> > > recognize that the only thing one has > done is sent the behavior
> > > underground (for lack of a better term) and it won't be >
> done in one's
> > > presence again -- at least not for a time.
> >
> > I find this an unnecessarily negative attitude. I have found that the
> > majority of people if approached properly would prefer to be
> supportive. I
> > have seem great improvements in attitude around disability issues when
> > people are given meaningful imformation in sensitive ways.
> >
> > Henry Cullihill's wife felt supported by the response to her decision to
> > speak out - she should know, she was there. Why undermine good things
> > when they happen?
> >
> > JUdy SInger
>
> --
> Carolyn
> check out, "Passing, Invisibility and Other Psychotic Stuff" at
> http://www.tell-us-your-story.com/_disc68r/00000003.htm
> Add your story
> at http://www.tell-us-your-story.com
> Finding What We Have In Common One Story At A Time*
>
>
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|