Comments on: Blogging against Disablism Day

By: Rae

Rae — Sat, 02 May 2009 08:36:12 +0000

I have to feel for the dog watering priest. He probably didn’t know what to do for the best – do I not sprinkle and get accused of not treating the dog as a member of the congregation and cause offence, or do I sprinkle and possibly cause a giggle and possible offence ?
Of course, the best idea would have been to ask the blind guy if he would like his dog sprinkled or not. It’s amazing how many times people don’t think of just that simple thing – just ask !
On another note, many people think a guide dog is public property. My s.o. has a guide dog. I’ve lost count of the times that someone has petted it without asking, or said – and this is a real corker – “I know I shouldn’t but I just had to pet him, he’s so lovely !” As if knowing they shouldn’t and admitting that will make it ok – no, it makes it worse, you damn fool ! You know you’re doing wrong – at least the little old lady who petted the dog in innocence at the pelican crossing was mortified when she was told how dangerous it could have been.

By: Gary Miller

Gary Miller — Sat, 02 May 2009 05:57:24 +0000

Great post for BADD 2009…or for any time, for that matter.

That TV presenter episode sure provoked a storm of protest. Like you, I later watched the video and, even later, watched the show on TV with my 4 year old niece. I, also, was first struck about how pretty she actually was. Jessica (niece) said “How does she tie her shoelaces?”.

These parents should start listening to their children…

Thanks for sharing.

By: NTE

NTE — Sat, 02 May 2009 05:00:55 +0000

I was appalled at the outrage surrounding this TV show host, but I suppose I shouldn’t have been: parents can make anything seem dangerous or scary if they present it that way. (“Cookies… they’re poison!”) As an early childhood educator, who used a wheelchair every day that I was able to teach (in fact wouldn’t have been well enough to teach if I wasn’t using it), I learned early on that little kids do not make a big deal out of that kind of thing unless their parents do. Many a parent was shocked on PTA night to find out that I even used a wheelchair – their child had never mentioned it to them in their discussions about school. It became quite matter of fact very quickly.

By: ThePickards » Bloggers Blogging Against Disablism (BBAD does BADD)

ThePickards » Bloggers Blogging Against Disablism (BBAD does BADD) — Fri, 01 May 2009 19:28:53 +0000

[...] disabled, so there’s no need for accessibility. This is also illustrated by another post from Radio Clare which highlights how some people want people with disabilities to be hidden away from the rest of [...]

By: Maria

Maria — Fri, 01 May 2009 18:46:43 +0000

One thing about disablism, is that it is not yet understood, even among those of us who live it everyday! I think of silence of disablism as silence of violence! No mater who perpetrates. We need to find a way to shout it out.

By: Ruth

Ruth — Fri, 01 May 2009 17:24:04 +0000

In the US there are starting to be disability ministry groups in each diocese, although I think each parish needs one. There’s a need for clergy and laity to acknowledge the presence of pwd and welcome pwd to congregations -and avoid some of the kinds of oversights that go on, like only concentrating on “steps”. I’ve been interested in hearing other peoples’ experiences since the day I was asked to leave a Catholic church because I (in my wheelchair) was a “fire hazard”. Sigh.

By: Take 5: Blogging against Disabilism Day Favourites « What Sorts of People

Take 5: Blogging against Disabilism Day Favourites « What Sorts of People — Fri, 01 May 2009 15:27:35 +0000

[...] Radio Clare [...]

By: seahorse

seahorse — Fri, 01 May 2009 12:43:53 +0000

Parents can do so much damage. And it’s a real shame when a child shows natural curiosity about something to dampen it with something negative and ill-conceived. I just hope that for every negative reaction to this presenter, there are two positive ones out there.

By: Radio

Radio — Fri, 01 May 2009 12:40:30 +0000

Hi Jack It was kinda the expression on the priest’s face which made it seem unacceptable. You could see him grinning as if he was thinking, “Haha, this will be a great laugh – I can flick water in the dog’s face and the owner will never know!” I guess the point is that he wouldn’t have done it if the owner hadn’t been blind… Okay so clearly if the owner hadn’t been blind he wouldn’t have had a guide dog anyway, but you know what I mean…

By: JackP

JackP — Fri, 01 May 2009 09:27:51 +0000

Ah, youze are just saying that ‘cos you don’t understand the Tombliboos and the Ninky Nonk. You’re just NightGardenists…!

As for the CBeebies thing, my son asked about the presenter’s arm. The response given (by child’s grandmother) was simply that either she might have lost it in an accident or she might have been born without a hand. Child goes “ah, okay”, not in the slightest bit concerned or horrified, gets on with watching telly…

I misunderstood what you were saying about the priest at first: I thought you were saying that the act of sprinkling water on the dog was sort of “actively” disablist, which I didn’t understand as it may simply have been that the priest was happy to sprinkle all people/animals in the church. However, upon re-reading, it’s obvious that the result of these actions was to single out the blind guy/people, and make it seem like people were laughing at him, because now not only was he the centre of attention, but he didn’t know why: as far as he knew the priest might have been specifically making fun of him.

I hope the priest spoke to him at the end to explain/apologise for his thoughtlessness – or if he didn’t realise, that someone else could explain it to him. It’s one of those moments where someone might even have been well meaning but didn’t bother to think of the consequences of their actions and their impact on other people first.

On the other hand, it’s presumably an honest mistake, and we’re all capable of making honest mistakes through ignorance…