Comments on: Carnivals: Submit Now, Read Soon

By: LmjBd

LmjBd — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 07:05:11 +0000

You Can be very helpfull and see here,

By: T.

T. — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 11:47:59 +0000

EKSwitaj,
First, I didn’t say you or others were “high fuctioning” because of your writing- I said that my students were much lower functioning. My students are 15-21 years old, and are unable to use the bathroom, eat, communicate, ambulate independently, get dressed, or WRITE at all. I don’t assume that anyone is necessarily high functioning- I have known people who could write or read or do many things, but their daily functioning was still severely impacted. So, yes I guess you’re right, that would be problematic, but it isn’t wat I was saying.
Also, I never implied that there was anything inherently wrong with being autistic, using a wheelchair, communicating with pictures, having a texture/touch schedule- but I am not the one that I use person-first terms for. I use it for the people who only see a set of disabilities and not a person. I don’t think that it seperates the person from their disability. And if it does, it is not meant to suggest that the experiences and totallity of being an autistic person don’t add to or change each person- I think it says that there is an PERSON who has a disability. Because my students need support in all areas of their lives, I see how they can become dehumanized by those who do not know them or do not know any better. I see people talk about them right in front of them, refer to them by nasty terms where they can hear it because all people see is a disability and not a person. No matter how people identify in terms of their disabilty they are still PEOPLE- deserving of respect. And no, I don’t think I am more qualified to decide how to refer to my students, but I do feel like I have a duty to humanize my students with my speech to people who are so ignorant that they need to be reminded that they are not furniture.

By: EKSwitaj

EKSwitaj — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 09:06:10 +0000

T., I think it’s important to call into question where the “PC” terms are coming from before deciding that that is where we should err in referring to someone who cannot or is not yet able to express their personal preferences. Are caretakers better qualified to decide that then people who are taken to have higher functioning forms of the same disability? (Incidentally, assuming that someone is “high functioning” on the basis of their written eloquence is highly problematic.)

The examples you give are fundamentally different, too. Referring to someone metonymically by the tool they use is inherently dehumanizing. However, calling someone an autistic person is no more dehumanizing than to refer to me as a short, blonde, white, freckled person or an expatriate or a US citizen or a college graduate. And the only reason to think so is the assumption that there is something inherently wrong with being autistic. I guess what I’m trying to get at is that it’s more important to think about the attitudes that underlie language use than to create a set of rules.

By: T.

T. — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 23:26:27 +0000

EKSwitaj:
I apologize if I was wrong- I just go by what is most accepted in my field. Perhaps b/c I am working with people who have much lower functioning levels than you and the people who wrote those blogs seem to, the language is used differently. Because you can so eloquently explain how/ why you are and are not identified by your disability I respect what you wish to be called- an autistic person. The students I have- if they have autism- are non verbal- unable to comunicate effectivly using alternate methods, and spend a large portion of their days engaging in self-stim (yes, I know we all do on some level- but this is the more stereo-typical stim you see in bad movies). The students I have who use wheelchairs are typically multi-handicapped, some have dual-sensory impairment etc. I have heard my students referred to (by people who know their names no less) as “the purple wheelchair” “the autistic one who chews himself” etc. so I use person-first language to really underline that these are people- not the sum of what makes them different or the equipment they use. Maybe there are different levels of what is acceptable for different levels of disability? Maybe if a person can’t express how they would like to be referred to- we should err on the side of being “PC” and talk about the people they are? If a person can’t express how they self-identify how does one refer to them or their disability? I don’t know. I just hope to do what is most right or at least the least wrong.

By: EKSwitaj

EKSwitaj — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 03:55:43 +0000

Actually, T., a lot of us prefer the term “autistic person” to “person who has autism” or “person with autism” because we don’t look at autism as something that is somehow separable from ourselves. Here are a few links so you can see that it isn’t just me:

http://chaoticidealism.livejournal.com/31201.html
http://web.syr.edu/~jisincla/person_first.htm

By: Rebecca

Rebecca — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 03:40:37 +0000

I’m an agoraphobe (fear of crowds and open spaces technically, but in truth it’s a fear of loosing control and having panic attacks.) It impacts my life in wide and interesting ways. Back around Christmas I panicked in a restaurant and had to pay my bill while standing on the sidewalk because I could not go back inside. (Thankfully the waiter was cool about gathering up my purse and jacket.) I don’t know what set me off, because this is a restaurant I go to frequently and I’ve been back since with no problems. Just the other day I had a panic attack and had to call in sick to work. I couldn’t leave the house, but the next day I was out and about without a problem.

Between the unpredictable panic attacks and being unable to trust people to the extent needed to maintain relationships, I would say agoraphobia, along with bouts of depression, impact my life to a significant degree. I don’t consider myself disabled though…mostly because I’m a control freak and refuse to let other people label me. :)

By: GallingGalla

GallingGalla — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 01:56:58 +0000

Amandaw, yes, that’s pretty much my thought process, although, I will say that I’m pretty new at this, having been diagnosed with Asperger’s only about 4 months ago, and until recently, trying to push through the pain and not fully deal with the effect on my life. As I’ve said elsewhere, finding out that I’ve got Asperger’s does not mean that my ableism suddenly got erased.

By: amandaw

amandaw — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 01:03:18 +0000

GallingGalla — point taken — maybe “prevent” was the wrong word? I was trying to throw out examples. If a condition is cutting in to your ability to live your life as you want to, that is when it becomes a disability, would be one way to word a basic definition. Like I’ve said, I still consider fms a disability, even though I *am* able to work now (part-time, and taking unholy amounts of medication).

It was especially hard for me to start to grasp since fibro, like many other invisible conditions, is a bit squishy. It’s easy to understand if you have a broken leg that you can’t run — our society has defined the acceptable boundaries of pain such that that’s obvious. Whereas I spent years teaching myself not to continue overworking myself even though I was feeling fucking awful. It’s hard to understand because I can keep going, right this moment, but then if I do, I am going to suffer for it later. But–! my mind would protest. But I can do it right now! That means I can do it, period. Because that’s what “normal” people do, so that must be what I do, because I look normal, so nothing can really be “wrong” with me. Etc.

And I’d end up in one hell of a flare, and then the minute I started to see the light I’d throw myself back into things again, full steam…

It’s hard to break.

Anyway, tangent.

It takes a lot of consideration, to figure out how you identify yourself. Considering exactly how this condition affects your life, from the way you get up in the morning to the way you conduct yourself around other people. Considering what you think that word, disability, means, in the first place. What it means when you use it around other people, and what you think it should mean. Etc…

I’ve sort of lost my point by now, but I was riffing in the first place. Certainly I don’t subscribe to the idea that if you aren’t completely immobile, therefore you can’t be physically “disabled” (and corollary for mental). I did try to communicate that in my comment — that “disability” is simply a condition of the body/brain (as much as we can separate the two, anyway) that means that your access to society is impeded in some significant way. Does that make more sense, or am I just digging?

By: flower.power

flower.power — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 00:05:54 +0000

Speaking of carnivals that just came out today, RenegadeEvolution has an announcement that: The 2nd Carnival of Sexual Freedom & Autonomy is up... The The 1st Carnival of Sexual Freedom & Autonomy was truly amazing work.

By: Miss Nomered

Miss Nomered — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 23:40:13 +0000

Cool! Hopefully I’ll have something for both.

I’m a “self diagnosed”/”suspected” aspie (asperger syndrome), and I’m going for testing in a few weeks. I’ve always internally debated whether or not I should call myself “disabled” because it’s not “official”.