|
Post by zacc on Feb 19, 2023 0:55:59 GMT -5
It is interesting that there is sort of a chicken and egg theme coming up, where some think of a push for inclusive language/more representation in media/etc as an important piece of the puzzle in the bigger picture of increasing disability rights, and from what I'm gathering, others see it more as a bonus but not really something that contributes strongly to big changes in policy and social support. I can definitely see both sides. I've typically leaned more toward the side of, conversations around disability raise awareness and therefore contribute to greater change, but I do see also how focusing on some things can eclipse other (more critical) things and then potentially hurt the cause. One thing I'm curious about is what things were like around the time that the ADA was enacted (I was like 2 years old then). What were the things that led up to it that were most effective in making that change actually happen? Did it start with a shift in general thinking/awareness around disability (and similar conversations around language, representation, etc), or was that something that followed the ADA? Not that what happened then is what should happen now necessarily, but I think it is interesting to think about. I lean towards policy changing culture. My reasoning is we're arguably never had it better in terms of the cultural social aspect, but things are getting worse. Not only in terms of the policy I mentioned earlier, but the really scary ideologies creeping back into the mainstream: A Yale Professor Suggested Mass Suicide for Old People in Japan. I'm just not seeing the translation from representation in culture to things that need fixing a decade ago. I think the gay rights movement is pretty instructive, it didn't start with the f word, it started with the HIV crisis. Policy changes culture but something had to make a governing body make the policy change. Social movements are what cause policy change, like the pro-life movement in the U.S. recently (unfortunately). And, at least in Crip Camp, a social movement/protest helped create the ADA. When the government works correctly, it's supposed to make policy changes based on what it's constituents want. And I disagree about never having it better in the cultural social aspect. I think twitter and social media algorithms have a lot to do with the bad cultural social aspect, there is basically a radicalization pipeline built into most social media apps. i.e. Andrew Tate. And, I honestly think we should start with policy around that.
|
|
|
Post by ayla on Feb 19, 2023 1:24:35 GMT -5
I’m no political scientist, but I don’t think policy changes culture or culture changes policy. Laws and culture influence one another, along with many other factors. In a functioning democracy, laws are supposed to reflect “the will of the people.” However, in the US there has been a steady decline of majority rule (funded mainly by rich white men who don’t want to see the will of a minority group — oddly enough in this case, but numerically, rich white men — overruled by a coalition of the majority, ie everyone else). They keep us focused on bickering over identity politics so that we lose sight of any collective power we might develop. I think this is one source of these endless conversations about wording.
More food for thought: long ago, the Worst Swear Words in English were all religious in nature (god damned, hell, taking the lords name in vain). With the rise of secularism, the Worst Swear Words shifted to being about the body (shit, piss, asshole) and about sex (cocksucker, motherfucker …George Carlin anyone?) Then with the sexual revolution pushing boundaries about what was considered obscene, we now find ourselves in an era when all the Worst Words have to do with slurs against identities (n word, r word, c word for women, f word for gays, and all the ethnic slurs). What does this say about the times we are in? Why are THESE words considered The Worst nowadays?
|
|
|
Post by darthoso on Feb 19, 2023 1:24:49 GMT -5
I lean towards policy changing culture. My reasoning is we're arguably never had it better in terms of the cultural social aspect, but things are getting worse. Not only in terms of the policy I mentioned earlier, but the really scary ideologies creeping back into the mainstream: A Yale Professor Suggested Mass Suicide for Old People in Japan. I'm just not seeing the translation from representation in culture to things that need fixing a decade ago. I think the gay rights movement is pretty instructive, it didn't start with the f word, it started with the HIV crisis. Policy changes culture but something had to make a governing body make the policy change. Social movements are what cause policy change, like the pro-life movement in the U.S. recently (unfortunately). And, at least in Crip Camp, a social movement/protest helped create the ADA. When the government works correctly, it's supposed to make policy changes based on what it's constituents want. And I disagree about never having it better in the cultural social aspect. I think twitter and social media algorithms have a lot to do with the bad cultural social aspect, there is basically a radicalization pipeline built into most social media apps. i.e. Andrew Tate. And, I honestly think we should start with policy around that. I meant culturally for PWDs, things have never been better, but society's knowledge base on disability issues is still basically zero. Within SMA facebook groups with parents in them they are still fighting their school districts on things my parents fought for 30 years ago. Even among policy makers the knowledge level is really bad, including one's with direct oversight over those departments and programs. And this is at the State and Local level where money in politics is less of an issue. Representation matters in media, but only if those representatives are permitted to discuss disability issues. I agree it takes a social movement to change policy, the disability movement played a massive role in killing the ACA repeal, but if the movement is too focused on the social aspect like language, we're going to get ran over by a truck.
|
|
|
Post by darthoso on Feb 19, 2023 2:01:13 GMT -5
but I don’t think policy changes culture or culture changes policy. Special Education laws put disabled kids in mainstream classrooms and Home and Community Based Services plus the ADA reduced institutionalization, the net impact being more disabled people in open society, bringing us "out of the closet" you could say. I think that definitely impacts culture in the some ways. I went through k-12 with basically the same group of 300 kids in my graduating class. My guess they are significantly less ableist than classes without PWDs, but I'm positive that they know nothing about disability issues to help with the next wave of needed policy changes. That's the disconnect that's really hard to break and I don't think language or media representation is going to change that. The primary objective of most civil rights movements is for society to stop being assholes towards said groups, the policy asks are pretty easy and generally don't cost anything. Disability rights though is the opposite, nobody except that Yale professor is trying string us up, but our policy asks are expensive. Clearing the NC Medicaid's HCBS waiting lists requires $380m in annual state funding for 16,000 PWDs (plus another ~$500m in federal matching funds).
|
|
|
Post by devogirl on Feb 19, 2023 3:25:11 GMT -5
nobody except that Yale professor is trying string us up I don't know if that's true. I shared an article here a few months ago about wheelchair user in Canada who was told to commit suicide by the veterans association when she was trying to get her home to be more accessible. I haven't followed up on the reporting but apparently it wasn't an isolated case. During the worst of covid, I saw so many comments about how we just have to accept the mass death of immune-compromised people. Right now there is a fight going on in the FDA over labeling of sesame as a major allergen, and the comments I see in articles reporting on it are shockingly callous, like all those kids with food allergies need to hurry up and die already because it's unreasonable to expect manufacturers to clean their equipment to prevent cross-contamination.
That's wild about the Yale professor, thanks for sharing that article. You can tell he's a tool by those ridiculous glasses. He didn't even really mean it about the mandatory suicide because he walked it back after getting backlash. I'm sure he only said it to rile people up to increase his personal brand on Twitter, so gross. He's 37 now. I bet when he's over 75 he'll be advocating for organ harvesting from healthy young people to give to the elderly.
Anyway I still think scolding people on Twitter never accomplishes anything, and PWD activists shouldn't exhaust themselves fighting over a single word, but inclusive language does matter. It matters most when ABs are talking to each other, and in messaging coming from positions of authority. Gay rights may not have started with language shifts but they also didn't wait until legislation was passed to reclaim slurs.
|
|
|
Post by Armus on Feb 19, 2023 4:27:44 GMT -5
It is interesting that there is sort of a chicken and egg theme coming up, where some think of a push for inclusive language/more representation in media/etc as an important piece of the puzzle in the bigger picture of increasing disability rights, and from what I'm gathering, others see it more as a bonus but not really something that contributes strongly to big changes in policy and social support. I can definitely see both sides. I've typically leaned more toward the side of, conversations around disability raise awareness and therefore contribute to greater change, but I do see also how focusing on some things can eclipse other (more critical) things and then potentially hurt the cause. One thing I'm curious about is what things were like around the time that the ADA was enacted (I was like 2 years old then). What were the things that led up to it that were most effective in making that change actually happen? Did it start with a shift in general thinking/awareness around disability (and similar conversations around language, representation, etc), or was that something that followed the ADA? Not that what happened then is what should happen now necessarily, but I think it is interesting to think about. maybe its just me but i don't really care for the idea of "raising awareness" as a form of activism. feels like slacktivism to me, but i'm pretty cynical when it comes to the types of activism people engage in. most folks are lazy and don't want to do the actually difficult work, myself included. its far easier to just be the language police and pat yourself on the back for not being the absolute worst. but there absolutely is something to be said about how changing the way you talk about things also changes the way you think about them, and how when people are forced to confront their own biases via having their language challenged, that can cause people to think more about the obstacles people of other communities might face beyond just shitty language. for example, i never understood or gave a shit about trans people until a friend confronted me one time about me saying the t-word. that was one of the things that snapped me out of my Big Transphobia era. i genuinely didn't even understand it to be a slur at the time. made me realize "holy fuck, i don't actually know a goddamn thing about these people what the fuck am i even doing?" and now i'm trans as are most of my closest friends. language is undeniably important, but its certainly not the most important.
|
|
|
Post by Armus on Feb 19, 2023 4:39:49 GMT -5
nobody except that Yale professor is trying string us up bud you're smart and i normally agree with you, but this feels uncharacteristically naive to me. like...covid is the extremely obvious thing to point to here. it feels like the state's default stance toward disabled people on basically any issue is either "whats a disabled person never heard of her" or "why does anybody give a fuck if THEY die"
|
|
|
Post by newjess on Feb 19, 2023 12:08:52 GMT -5
maybe its just me but i don't really care for the idea of "raising awareness" as a form of activism. feels like slacktivism to me, but i'm pretty cynical when it comes to the types of activism people engage in. most folks are lazy and don't want to do the actually difficult work, myself included. its far easier to just be the language police and pat yourself on the back for not being the absolute worst. but there absolutely is something to be said about how changing the way you talk about things also changes the way you think about them, and how when people are forced to confront their own biases via having their language challenged, that can cause people to think more about the obstacles people of other communities might face beyond just shitty language. for example, i never understood or gave a shit about trans people until a friend confronted me one time about me saying the t-word. that was one of the things that snapped me out of my Big Transphobia era. i genuinely didn't even understand it to be a slur at the time. made me realize "holy fuck, i don't actually know a goddamn thing about these people what the fuck am i even doing?" and now i'm trans as are most of my closest friends. language is undeniably important, but its certainly not the most important. Totally agree. The way I phrased it wasn't really representative of what I was thinking, but you said it perfectly
|
|
|
Post by newjess on Feb 19, 2023 13:23:05 GMT -5
That's the disconnect that's really hard to break and I don't think language or media representation is going to change that. That definitely makes sense. I'm curious about your thoughts on what you've seen as the most effective in reducing that disconnect? (also thanks for providing the labor of educating on this subject as you have for so many years, I've learned a lot)
|
|
|
Post by darthoso on Feb 19, 2023 23:25:20 GMT -5
nobody except that Yale professor is trying string us up I don't know if that's true. I shared an article here a few months ago about wheelchair user in Canada who was told to commit suicide by the veterans association when she was trying to get her home to be more accessible. I haven't followed up on the reporting but apparently it wasn't an isolated case. During the worst of covid, I saw so many comments about how we just have to accept the mass death of immune-compromised people. Right now there is a fight going on in the FDA over labeling of sesame as a major allergen, and the comments I see in articles reporting on it are shockingly callous, like all those kids with food allergies need to hurry up and die already because it's unreasonable to expect manufacturers to clean their equipment to prevent cross-contamination.
That's wild about the Yale professor, thanks for sharing that article. You can tell he's a tool by those ridiculous glasses. He didn't even really mean it about the mandatory suicide because he walked it back after getting backlash. I'm sure he only said it to rile people up to increase his personal brand on Twitter, so gross. He's 37 now. I bet when he's over 75 he'll be advocating for organ harvesting from healthy young people to give to the elderly. Anyway I still think scolding people on Twitter never accomplishes anything, and PWD activists shouldn't exhaust themselves fighting over a single word, but inclusive language does matter. It matters most when ABs are talking to each other, and in messaging coming from positions of authority. Gay rights may not have started with language shifts but they also didn't wait until legislation was passed to reclaim slurs.
I think those examples pull at what's different about disability rights vs other group. COVID requires the masses do something to protect the vulnerable, the issues I care about require spending public money, accessibility requires annoying building inspectors and ADA lawsuits, killing PWDs is a way for a bureaucrat to be lazy. I don't recall any "well actually" ghouls defending the Canada thing. Culturally I don't think, at least in the US, we as a society do well sacrificing to help others. Other civil rights issues aren't an active ask of society, gay marriage became more accepted because a large number of people went from opposition to "meh". We don't face nearly the same level of hate as trans for example simply for existing. That's the disconnect that's really hard to break and I don't think language or media representation is going to change that. That definitely makes sense. I'm curious about your thoughts on what you've seen as the most effective in reducing that disconnect? (also thanks for providing the labor of educating on this subject as you have for so many years, I've learned a lot) Point out the absurdity and stupidity of the disability system. I'm currently job hunting, I asked a friend about a posting and he said the benefits sucked, I reminded him I'm not allowed to have a retirement account anyway. Here in NC we spend $250k per person on disability nursing home care, while the average home care cost is $60k. The cost of the State ran facilities would cover the waiting list cost. The asset limits, ABLE Accounts needing to exist, that I can't control my inheritance, that we can't get married.
|
|
imupforanything
Full Member
Posts: 138
Gender: Male
Dev Status: Disabled
Relationship Status: In a relationship
|
Post by imupforanything on Feb 19, 2023 23:35:29 GMT -5
A lot of great points of view going here so I will just add how I personally feel.
I'm all for inclusive language and support it for others but I myself don't worry much about it. Many people will always look at it how they want to. I've never been offended by anything someone might say or think of me as it is often based on a lack of knowledge and/or taught bias they have likely heard from others.
|
|
|
Post by newjess on Feb 20, 2023 11:06:46 GMT -5
Expecting people to change the words and phrasing they use to refer to specific demographic groups reminds me of the corporate diversity training that is required by many work places today, and there isn't any evidence those trainings actually change anyone's thinking. They may be effective at communicating to employees that certain behavior is not tolerated by management and therefore make some employees change what they say around members of minority groups during the work day to avoid being reported, but follow up studies with people who have taken these trainings show no change in their attitudes and perspectives. This makes me doubtful that asking someone to use different language will change their thinking. I think it does help for some segment of people, like people who are generally open-minded and conscientious but aren't the most informed, but I don't think it will change the hearts or minds of the people who are the biggest problem. This is interesting. To me, these types of trainings are more to create as safe of a workspace as possible for folks who are impacted by racism, homophobia, transphobia, sexism, etc. While it may not change people's closed minded views, I wonder if there are studies that have shown whether or not they are effective in creating a safer workspace for folks who have historically been subjected to hostility/prejudice/etc at work.
|
|
|
Post by newjess on Feb 20, 2023 11:30:46 GMT -5
This is interesting. To me, these types of trainings are more to create as safe of a workspace as possible for folks who are impacted by racism, homophobia, transphobia, sexism, etc. While it may not change people's closed minded views, I wonder if there are studies that have shown whether or not they are effective in creating a safer workspace for folks who have historically been subjected to hostility/prejudice/etc at work. I agree. Even if they don't actually changes anyone's minds about anything, if they make the work place a better environment for people who feel excluded simply because offenders are forced to act more respectful, then they're still valuable. I think there also isn't evidence they improve overall workplace culture, but given today's political climate, maybe workplace culture would have actually gotten worse without these trainings. Thanks for sharing this! Have you come across any research that has shown approaches that have been effective or shows promise in improving workplace culture? I'm super curious to dive into this more
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2023 18:03:49 GMT -5
I’m no political scientist, but I don’t think policy changes culture or culture changes policy. Laws and culture influence one another, along with many other factors. In a functioning democracy, laws are supposed to reflect “the will of the people.” However, in the US there has been a steady decline of majority rule (funded mainly by rich white men who don’t want to see the will of a minority group — oddly enough in this case, but numerically, rich white men — overruled by a coalition of the majority, ie everyone else). They keep us focused on bickering over identity politics so that we lose sight of any collective power we might develop. I think this is one source of these endless conversations about wording. More food for thought: long ago, the Worst Swear Words in English were all religious in nature (god damned, hell, taking the lords name in vain). With the rise of secularism, the Worst Swear Words shifted to being about the body (shit, piss, asshole) and about sex (cocksucker, motherfucker …George Carlin anyone?) Then with the sexual revolution pushing boundaries about what was considered obscene, we now find ourselves in an era when all the Worst Words have to do with slurs against identities (n word, r word, c word for women, f word for gays, and all the ethnic slurs). What does this say about the times we are in? Why are THESE words considered The Worst nowadays? im also no political scientist but i am a political economist and in my world we call that relation of ‘Laws and culture influenc[ing] one another’ dialectical. sorry had to comment on your post bc i love phrases like ‘collective power’ and helping build it is sorta my day “job”
|
|
|
Post by ayla on Feb 20, 2023 19:13:36 GMT -5
I’m no political scientist, but I don’t think policy changes culture or culture changes policy. Laws and culture influence one another, along with many other factors. In a functioning democracy, laws are supposed to reflect “the will of the people.” However, in the US there has been a steady decline of majority rule (funded mainly by rich white men who don’t want to see the will of a minority group — oddly enough in this case, but numerically, rich white men — overruled by a coalition of the majority, ie everyone else). They keep us focused on bickering over identity politics so that we lose sight of any collective power we might develop. I think this is one source of these endless conversations about wording. im also no political scientist but i am a political economist and in my world we call that relation of ‘Laws and culture influenc[ing] one another’ dialectical. sorry had to comment on your post bc i love phrases like ‘collective power’ and helping build it is sorta my day “job” Yes! That’s exactly what I was trying to describe: a dialectic. Talk about the importance of language! :)
|
|