Hi Tom,
just a few comments
> that disablement is different
> from race, gender and sexuality because people's difficulties arise
> BOTH out of their bodies, and the way society treats them.
I disagree, belonging to a certain race includes a whole set of
characteristics (colour of the skin or other characteristics )which sets
apart one race from another. And most of this characteristics are imbedded
in the genes of the race not all is nurture.
The same gender is intrinsical to human kind being a women or man again
includes different sets of characteristic between these two groups which
are intrinsical to the body the person as they are genetically set not
based on the enviroment. And the same is with being
gay/lesbian/bisexual/... THere being gay/lesbian... is not basedc on the
pressure by any given society to be so but it is an intrinsic desire of
that person to be so. Whether it is based on genes or morphological
difference or chemical differences no one knows but it is not the society
who causes someone to be gay.....
therefore it is intrinsic to the person.
Like being a little person is intrinsic to that person (that
chracteristic) or I being born without legs is intrinsic to me to my body.
But whether it is intrinsic to my body or not is really irrelevant.
Relevant is what any given society is doing with these different
characteristics.
e.g. if a society exists of little people (like some native tribes in
Africa Pygmaens hope I spelled that right) are by nature shorter than the
white people of the western world. As they are all shorter as being
shorter is the norm in that society being short is accomodated as it
suits the whole society. Very likely in that society a out of line
genetic or otherwise expression of height meaning like being tall would be
viewed within that society (if they have a western culture frame of mind)
as a "defect" and the society might not be willing to accomodate that
minority characteristic. In western societies where there is a different
average of height little people are the minority and need accomodation of
the majority characteristic of thre society (the once being taller). Now
the question therefore is not whether something is intrinsic to a person
but whether a society is willing to accomodate minority occurances of
characteristics within the framework of any given society.
Like being gay. It is a minority occurance in a western culture. Even if
gay would not be oppressed and seen as equal I don't see that 50% of a
society would choose being gay/lesbian.
Or being a women and men here the treatment of one group or another who
accomodates whom depends again at the cultural history of any given
society . Both groups are different and need different things different
accomodations. The question is whether and who is willing to accomodate
whom. For the most part the cultures have favored men domoination and the
ones in the position of power where women have to demand accomodations for
themselves and their specific difference regarding men.
In India of course this is much more problematic as women are much more
oppressed based on the cultural setting of the society. But is is still an
oppression based on that one group who can decide does not want to
accomodate the other group But being men/female is still intrinsic to
them.
And the same is with like me I am a minority as I am the without leg
minority trying to get accomdatin by the leg majority. Having no legs is
intrinsic to me or my body but that doesn't change the dynamics that a
group without power (no leg) demands accomodation from the group with
power (people wit legs).
Or being gay it's intrinsic to the person but so what that doesn't
diminish the fact that the minority gay asks the majority of non gay to
accomodate them.
THe only difference between all powerless characteristics whether it is
women in India or gays in religious culture who abhorr being gay
or western countries who abhorr dis abilities is that different powerless
characteristics need different type of accomodations from different
cultures
The no leg characeristic need physical adaptations the characteristic gay
need emotional accomodations .....
THe only difference between different powerless characterisics is what
kind of adaptation they need. But the root of he problem is the reluctant
of characteristics in power to accomodate to share the power with the
characteristics not in power. THe question is NOT whether it's intrinsic
or not. That is actually quite a dangerous approach of arguments because
if the difference is that some characteristics are not intrinsic and
others are (as Ed Stein tries to say in his paper in Bioethics 1998 to
distinguish between being gay or being disabled as soon as they find the
gay gene his line of defence is lost because as soon as it's a gene it's
intrinsic to the person and he would be thrown into the same bucket than
disability (Ironically he uses this distinction intrinsic or not in a
paper where he presumes that a gay gene might be found ).
As usual I might not make myself very clear but I am not a good writer so
I apologize if this is not written in a clear fashion
Cheers
Tom
Dr. Gregor Wolbring
Research Scientist at the
Dept. of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
Faculty of Medicine
and Adjunct Assistant Professor
at the Dept. of Community Rehabilitation and Disability Studies
Faculty of Education
both University of Calgary
Phone 1-403-220-5448
Fax 1-403-283-4740
eFax 1-603-761-3704
e-mail [log in to unmask]
webpage: http://www.thalidomide.ca/gwolbring
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|