For example, recently I got a comment on my abortion post that suggested a number of ‘facts’ that were obviously incorrect. Yet the person leaving them clearly believed them to be true, because the internet told her so. Now, the internet can be a wonderful resource, but you have to know where to look. Does the website have an official seal, like the CDC website? Does it let you know its affiliation, like the FBI website?

Not only that, but when a person offers you ‘facts,’ check them out. For example: “abortions cause infertility.” Well, I am sorry random commenter, but I am much more likely to believe the Mayo Clinic website than I am your random regurgitation of twisted logic and half truths.

Therefore, I urge everyone to at least find a source or two that backs up what you are told. Don’t be gullible, don’t be naive.

Question everything.

 For example: “A report found the double stigma of being isolated from the LGBT community because of mental health issues, and from the mental health service because of their LGBT identity, led many to suicidal distress.”

The article also mentions failures of the mental health system, a system that is frequently set up by and for heterosexuals. The mental health system in America, for example,  is already deeply flawed. There are simply not enough professionals to handle all the sufferers. This leads to a tendency to over prescribe medication in an effort to treat the person quickly and get them out of the office to make room for the next patient, and frequently sentences the ill person to a much longer run of drugs that don’t work for them or exacerbate their symptoms, because the appointment they need to attend in order to get their medication changed isn’t for another four months.

Mentally ill people are often treated as though they are particularly truculent children who simply need a firm hand and frequnet admonishments to hold their heads up high and pull themselves up by their bootstraps. This may in fact be what some people need, but I will go out on a limb and suggest that this isn’t what truly mentally ill people need to hear. So many therapists don’t seem to understand the very people and disorders they claim to help and treat, so when LGBT issues are added to the mix, it creates a potentially destructive situation.

One of the women in the article linked above was asked, while in the hospital recovering from a suicide attempt, if what had happened to her wasn’t her fault for dressing up in women’s attire.

As you can see, this sort of comment is perhaps the very last thing a suicidal depressive needs to hear. I was inspired to write this article because people’s attitudes about suicide being cowardly really stick in my craw. Had the woman above killed herself, you can be assured that each person who made light of her distress, who asked if being assaulted was her fault for being gender variant, who prescribed the wrong medicaton, etc would be saying something along the lines of “why would she do something so selfish?”

Suicide is ultimately a failure in one’s ability to appreciate the potential for better things inherent in the future. It does not break free of its poisonous embryonic slime in a vacuum. It s aided and abetted by friends, family, nurses, doctors, and the very mental health professionals who are suppossed to support you. Then as soon as suicide claims another victim, all these people go about laying the blame squarely at the toe-tagged feet of the person who could no longer bear the looks, the comments, the hate, and most of all, the pain that invades every cell and pore.

Today I came across a new movement. A group of Catholics calling themselves the Rainbow Sash Movement has been showing up to mass wearing rainbow sashes to force the issues of GLBT individuals in the church, and their right to take the eucharist. (Holy Communion)

Much of the Rainbow Sash literature focuses on the all-encompassing nature of God’s love, and how that love embraces everyone, including homosexuals and other groups traditionally scorned. Mary Anderson writes on their website as part of her article What is the Relationship Between the Eucharist & the Gay Catholic Community? that “For Catholics, the problem is not how to reconcile homosexuality with the scriptural passages that condemn it, but how to reconcile the rejection and abuse of homosexuals with the love of Christ”

I began to think of other individuals I know in passing, in particular one woman who is Mormon yet also practices bondage. These examples led me to a greater question: what are the bounds of acceptance? Where does love end and abuse begin? This is a question I am calling on my readers to answer, with only one caveat: please, if you use the term consent, define its meaning within your own moral code. I hunger after a deeper analysis than the careless tossing about of the word consent generally provides.

The next question being, can one be Catholic and gay? Can one really be Mormon and a practicioner of bondage? Is there a point where what you are and who you are neccesarily divorces you from a particular spirituality?

Discuss.

This particular crime against free speech was perpetrated by JetBlue airlines. I have flown JetBlue several times, and it stands out as one of the most pleasent experiences I have ever had involving planes and airports. (I loathe airports, don’t like flying, and have had bad experiences with just about every other airline I’ve been forced to deal with) I have reccomended JetBlue to many, based on my experience. Now, I am sorry I did so.

Still, I encourage you to fly on this airline, but only if you are properly adorned, not to mention girded for battle. There are many potentially offensive but right-on shirts out there! I like classics such as “Bush Byn-Lyin,” and “Bush Lied. Soldiers Died.” There was also one particularly memorable one with a picture of Bush and Cheney behind bars. The caption read: “I have a dream.”

I think this is the best:

Perfect! The symbol is Arabic for peace, or Salam. I reccomend putting some more obviously Arabic text across the back, or trying to find a shirt with a similar message in bold Arabic script. I love the idea of someone being hassled for promoting peace. How sadly American.

Happy uprising!

The National Federation of the Blind has many good points and I certainly reccomend it over membership in the American Council of the Blind, as I think its been shown time and again that the NFB has a much more proactive philosiphy and actually teaches their members to live as blind people rather than telling them they’ll never be able to fold their clothes or write their own checks.

Yet, one of my major frustrations with the NFB is what I’ve come to call mobility discrimination, or the tendency to push one very specific method of blind mobility on everyone.

The NFB has a general policy of providing long, straight white canes to its members, especially new people and people going to any of the affiliated blind skills training centers. Oftentimes these canes are too long (the NFB wants them to come up to just under your nose) and can actually pose a threat to others. (Case in point: A woman at convention had a cane longer than her body, which I tripped over. There’s a difference between clearing one’s step and transforming oneself into a juggernat of irritation) and are inextricably bound up with blindness philosiphy in many people’s minds.

When I first joined the NFB, I used one of these canes for several months. I think it was ultimately positive, because for someone like me who has been trying to downplay my blindness my whole life, the long white cane does make it impossible to hide and forces you to deal with how the sighted world sees an obviously blind individual. However, for me, the straight cane’s usefulness has passed and I now use a cane that folds into four sections.

I know many other people in the NFB who feel the same. One of my close friends, for example, uses a folding cane with a rolling tip when she leaves her guide dog home. (Hey, guide dogs need breaks too!) According to her, a rather highly placed member of the NFB tore her apart for using that type of cane. The woman whose apartment I am moving into soon is also blind and was forced to endure rudeness because of her choice to use a guide dog. This must stop. The NFB is about freedom in that it fights to give blind people equal opportunity next to our sighted peers. Part of that freedom is the right to choose the mobility aids that work the best for the individual.

I would suggest the following etiquette, because may not always agree with one another’s choices. If you are curious as to why a fellow blind person is using a particular aid, ask politely why they like it. You might learn something. However, this is not an invitation to moralize or try to convince them to learn something else. Many blind people have been blind for many, many years and know what works for them. Do not presume that you know better. To suggest that a person with a folding cane is ashamed of their blindness is not only very frequently inaccurate, but rude and intrusive. Some people, like me, are very comfortable with animals and do not mind relying on them, though personally I would suggest keeping one’s cane skills sharp, simply because, as I mentioned earlier, guide dogs need breaks. Some people may even eschew mobility aids altogether. These decisions must be respected. If you wish to enter into a dialouge with someone about their mobility choice, do so respectfully and in the spirit of learning, not in the spirit of lecture.

JAWS is Freedom Scientific’s screen reader, a powerful tool for the blind that works through a number of keyboard commands and voice feedback that can be toggled in a variety of ways for the individual user’s verbosity and voice tone preferences. JAWS enjoys frequent upgrades. In fact, JAWS 7.1 upgrade was handed out to those people in the audience who already have the program. (along with free Freedom Scientific shirts and fierce shark toys that squeak when you squeeze them. That shark is still my favorite thing I brought home with me) There was also talk of JAWS 8.0 being released soon.

One exciting feature is that JAWS now works with Skype, an exciting program in and of itself. JAWS can also work with a refreshable Braille display, so the user can switch between Braille and voice or use one or the other.

Pictures forthcoming!

While a person’s identity and outward cues should be respected, passing as a goal should be reevaluated. Right now passing effectively silences trans activism, because passing as a biological female or male becomes the ultimate goal rather than demanding that trans individuals be allowed to move outside the binary and establish their own gender roles.

Gender Identity Disorder, the disorder one must be diagnosed with to begin the transitioning process, relies heavily on language and criteria that reinforce the binary. Essentially, the diagnosis of childhood gender identity disorder is a process of singling out the potentially gay or bisexual child and traumatizing him or her in the interests of maintaining the outward signs of heteronormativity.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual is the Bible of mental health diagnoses. It has undergone several incarnations, with the language of certain disorders changing, while others have crossed the border from disorder into legitimate lifestyles or choices, depending on one's politics. Homosexuality, for example, remained in the DSM until the most recent revision.

Gender Identity Disorder remains in the DSM and falls into two categories, with one type being diagnosed in childhood, the other in adulthood. The criteria that must be present for a diagnosis to be made raises questions about its validity in the very first paragraph. It states:” There are two components of Gender Identity Disorder, both of which must be present to make the diagnosis. There must be evidence of a strong and persistent gross-gender identification, which is the desire to be, or the insistence that one is of the other sex (Criteria A). This cross-gender identification must not merely be a desire for any perceived cultural advantages of being the other sex. There must also be evidence of persistent discomfort about one’s assigned sex or a sense of inappropriateness in the gender role of that sex (Criteria B). The diagnosis is not made if the individual has a concurrent physical intersex condition (e.g., androgen insensitivity syndrome or congenital adrenal hyperplasia) (Criteria C). To make the diagnosis, there must be evidence of clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning (Criteria D).

On its face, these criteria may seem reasonable. It is certainly true that many transsexuals experience significant distress associated with their gender identification. Yet transsexuals are told that their distress is the result of a mental illness rather than the result of a rigid, binary society.

In many ways the diagnosis, especially that seen in children, is defended because of the child’s symptoms. For example, a gender variant child may experience depression, harmful relationships with peers and family, and social withdrawal. Yet, are these things not the result of a society that is, at its core, still homophobic and transphobic? Much as the bullied child is frequently sent to therapy to learn to deal with the abuse rather than sending the abusers for treatment, the gender variant child undergoes ‘therapy’ to become “happily male or female.” In reality, this happiness comes about because the abuse of a society that values gender conformity ceases once little girls fire up their E-Z-Bake ovens and boys begin playing Cops and Robbers.

In her book Gender Shock, Phyllis Burke outlines many of the cases of Gender Identity Disorder and the trauma that many children went through in order to be 'cured' of their 'inapparopriate' gender behavior. In this example, she talks about a boy named Kraig: "

Kraig was the first child to be treated by Rekers and Lovaas for "deviant sex role behaviors," and the treatment took place both in Kraig's home and at the clinic. Many other young boys would follow in Kraig's treatment path. Rekers and Lovaas go to great lengths to explain why it was important to behaviorally treat a child like Kraig. The first reason was that the child will be scorned by his playmates, and that it is easier to change the child, rather than the society in which he lives. Secondly, the doctors believed Kraig to be at risk for adult transsexualism, transvestism and "some forms of homosexuality." (Homosexuals whose gender identities conform to their sex are not considered to be quite as pathological as those homosexuals whose gender identities do not conform to their sex. Therefore, a gay carpenter is not as sick as a gay hairdresser, and a lesbian nurse is not as sick as a lesbian plumber.)"

This is born out by the criteria for diagnosis: in children, four or more of the following must be present: “1) repeatedly stated desire to be, or insistence that he or she is, the other sex 2) In boys, preference for cross dressing or simulating female attire; in girls, insistence of wearing only stereotypical masculine clothing. 3) Strong and persistent preferences for cross-sex roles in make believe play or persistent fantasies of being the other sex. 4) Intense desire to participate in the stereotypical games and pastimes of the other sex. 5) Strong preference for playmates of the other sex. In adolescents and adults, the disturbance is manifested by symptoms such as a stated desire to be the other sex, frequent passing as the other sex, desire to live or be treated as the other sex, or the conviction that she or he has the typical feelings and reactions of the other sex.”

Within this system there is no room for the trans faggot, the trans bull dyke, or any other non traditional combination of gendered traits. To pass through the gate to hormone replacement therapy and sex reassignment surgery, the transsexual must convince the gatekeeper that they belong in the community of women or men, as evidenced by behaviors and appearances that are highly stereotypical.

The heteronormative society in which all Americans live assumes that male and female necessarily compliment one another, and that sexual and procreative relations between men and women are not just the norm, but are natural. Transsexuals challenge these notions by their very existence, so they are only allowed to change their bodies to fit their inner vision (and thereby relieve the suffering that so frequently accompanies a body vision that does not coincide with physical reality) if the transsexual is willing to undergo a systematic pigeonholing process, wherein they are taught to be heteronormative. Oftentimes the transsexual is encouraged to be even more heteronormative than the average biological representatives of male and female; transsexuals are frequently expected to become the embodiment of their chosen gender’s archetype. (i.e. the most feminine female, the most masculine male.)

The gender variant child is especially vulnerable to attempts to counsel him or her into behaving more ‘appropriately’ in regards to their assigned sex, rather than their chosen gender characteristics. The gender variant child is usually counseled because he or she is undergoing significant distress due to their transsexuality, or in an effort to discourage future transsexual, gay, lesbian, or bisexual behavior.

Already we are asking one of the central questions of this article in particular and the transsexual movement (if such a thing can be said to truly exist) in general: is the distress, which is very real, the result of an individual set of characteristics that would torment the individual no matter society’s make up, or the result of a society that is still essentially homo and gender phobic? The fact that intersexed individuals, or rather, those individuals possessing physical characteristics of both sexes (ex: an individual possessing both testicles, often non descended, and ovaries, or other physiological combinations) cannot be diagnosed with gender identity disorder, effectively removing them from the realm of transsexuality within the current medical and mental health system. Apparently, if one’s body is already considered variant from the heteronormative notions of male and female, one cannot desire to be a different sex or to present as a different gender. We rely so heavily on heteronormativity that intersexed children are almost always assigned a sex at birth, and are then surgically altered to fit that arbitrary sex. Sometimes this is done without the parent’s knowledge. The diagnosis is therefore inherently flawed because it assigns legitimacy to only males and females.

At no time is room given to the intersexed individual, or the trans fag, or the trans bull dyke. The rigid nature of the diagnosis should inspire concern at the least, for it reinforces the binary as transsexuals pay lip service to the heterenormative stereotypes of what constitutes male or female to relieve the distress they may experience as part of having their chosen identity thwarted and challenged. These criteria essentially silence the transsexual community, as one’s desire to pass as one’s chosen gender is reinforced by the strict binary treatments and proving process the transsexual must undergo.

As trans people, we are uniquely placed to effect change. Our very natures challenge heteronormativity. The GID diagnosis and the process of obtaining HRT and SRS are attempts to assimilate us, which we should reject forcefully. We will not have a voice until we demand a world that respects gender expression. Heteronormativity links genitalia and gender expression inextricably; it is our task to shatter that link. Right now we must satisfy a phalanx of professionals that we can pass as heteronormative, rather than being given the treatments needed to alleviate suffering that arises from body vision versus body reality regardless of how we wish our physical self reflected our mental self. The notion of a non conforming gender identity being classed as a mental illness says much about the state of our society. I am a transsexual, transgendered individual. I am a hermaphrodite, or intersexed. That is my trans identity. Yet I am willing to bet that if I were to try and play the game and receive HRT or SRS to bring my body vision into line with my body reality, I would not be allowed to pass through the gates. By my very nature I cannot be heteronormative enough to satisfy society’s concept of that which is natural. Those transsexuals who focus on passing through the gates above all else do themselves a disservice. While there is much debate over the power of identity politics, as trans people we have no collective identity. The process silences our voices by shrouding us in heteronormativity.

 I propose a few things to better the situation. Gender Identity Disorder should be replaced with Body Vision Incongruity or something to that effect, that suggests that one’s internal vision as it pertains to sexual characteristics is signifigantly different from one’s body reality. When this incongruity causes undue mental and emotional (and sometimes physical, in the case of those who physically attack or sever their genitalia) suffering, the money and care should be provided to alleviate that suffering. Under this system, one’s desired end state would not need to conform to a binary notion of that which is feminine and that which is masculine.

Also, (and here's the scary one, folks) if we truly want to effect change, trans people must come out as trans. Trans people frequently have a common experience, an experience that we can organize around and work to change. When we allow hetero society to tell us that we will only truly be our gender of choice when our genitalia matches our behavior, we lose. Essentially when we submit to SRS, we are paying for the privilege of being heteronormative. Keep in mind that I am not against SRS, but against the way it is currently doled out. As it now stands, we as trans people don’t control whether or not we want to change our genitalia; it is presented to us as the only way to legitimize our feelings of being gender variant and the only way we will be accepted in a heteronormative society. That same society is what inspires us to pass and go “deep stealth,” we must appear to be normative in order to have our selves respected.

If you want to get involved, here are a few starting points:

Blog Against Heteronormativity, and The Transsexual Menace. Blogging is a rapidly expanding phenomenom that allows people of all types a voice. When we speak out it makes a difference. Trans people and others who challenge the binary must be out, loud, and proud for change to occur. The world will not accomodate us, we must fight for our right to exist as we choose. I've included the Transsexual Menace because they are one of the formost orginizations dealing with trans resources and events. They are a great way to begin exploring what it means to be trans, two spirit, gender messy, etc.

* Please note that online dictionary sites should be taken with a grain of salt, as they are often edited by many different people.

Bibliography:

Diagnostic and Statistical Manual IV. 2000. 4th Ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.

Bornstein, Kate. 1995. Gender Outlaw: On Men, Women and the Rest of Us. New York: Routlege.

Burke, Phyllis. 1997. Gender Shock. Des Plains, IL: Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group Inc.

Califia, Patrick. 2003. Sex Changes: The Politics of Transgenderism. San Fransisco, CA: Cleis Press.

 Ok, there you go. A nice abortion picture of a fetus in its ninth week. This is the kind of imagery that has been plastered all over campus for the past few days, the kind of imagery that has invaded our public space. Do you feel sick when you look at the picture? Outraged? Small and scared? Good. That's exactly what the Religious Wrong wants you to feel.

This is what I hate the most about the use of sensationalist imagery. First, they show a picture prominently featuring fingers and toes, characteristics that immediately draw the average viewer in emotionally. A being that has recognizably human features is relatable on a visceral level. Secondly, they place a quarter in the image to show you the size of the fetus, thereby underscoring its alleged status as defenseless and in need of outside protection and intervention. Often they compare these images to slaughterhouse video, implying that human babies are just as easy to destroy and throw out with the trash as are chickens or cows. (The fact that animals are so easy to disregard is a rant for another day) But in reality, spaces where these images are displayed are the real slaughterhouses, emotional fattening grounds where the objective is to prep the casual observer for easy harvest.

There are no rights that come without blood. The anti abortion group who came to our campus claim in their pamphlet, entitled Why Abortion is Genocide, that "[pro abortionists] cannot look at their handiwork or the handiwork they defend. Across the country, they shrink from the photos of babies killed in abortions…They are, at least to my mind, like the Germans who refused to think about what was happening at Dachau and then vomited when they saw–and never wanted to see again." (qtd in Why Abortion is Genocide, Ben Stein)

I disagree. I will look at their imagery all day long, and still be pro abortion. Why? Why would I, someone who genuinely loves and appreciates children, feel that way? Because my rights are worth more than the life of an unborn fetus. The rights of all women everywhere are more important than thousands of aborted fetuses. Period. End of sentence. Done.

Groups like these claim to be for fetus rights, but the reality is much different. What they are really advocating is the continued oppression of women. If they truly were against abortions, wouldn't they be the staunchest supporters of birth control methods that prevented egg fertilization? Where are the pro lifers when the fight over condoms in highschools is being fought? Where are they when pharmacists attempt to refuse birth control on moral grounds? Shouldn't they be jumping for joy over something like the Pill, which prevents pregnancy and thereby lowers abortion rates? Instead groups like the one on campus care little for the reality of their cause. They are not for fetus rights. They are anti women and anti sex.

If any of you make a habit of perusing this sort of hate literature, it might become apparent to you that the thereotical woman who is a neccesary participant in carrying and birthing a child is never mentioned. She becomes nothing more than a faceless, mechanized incubator, incapable of feelings, wants, or even rights. The pin up girl for the anti abortion movement never speaks. She does not move of her own accord, but exists to be positioned like a mannequin by hordes of (usually) white men. Her vagina and uterus are rented out to her; she never owns.

Our world history is built on multiple oppresions, but I feel comfortable suggesting that the most pervasive oppression is that leveled against women, across societies, across time. In South Dakota there is now no caveat for abortions if the child is the product of rape, but I say to you now that to force a woman to carry the unwanted result of a rape is to continue to rape her.

The fact that so many suppossed pro lifers are men ought to tell you something, and that something is chilling. As someone who was raised a woman, and as someone who can still bear (and might possibly do so in the future) children, I say with great pride and unshakable certainty that I am the author of my own destiny, and anyone who tries to remove my right to govern my own body is my enemy.

*Thanks to <a href="http://www.lake-desire.com/newgameplus/">Lake Desire</a> for the last photo.

Because I never tried to learn these things until recently, I hadn’t been exposed to the constant, subtle discrimination that is the cross to bear for most, if not all, disabled folks. There was a certain amount; cruel little children love to ask you how many fingers they are holding up, or wonder aloud in obnoxious tones why it is you have to sit so close to the computer screen.

Since I began advertising that I am in fact blind, the disturbing sociological information has been pouring in by the bucketful. Ragged Edge is currently talking about these “little acts of degredation,” and I thought that I could tell them quite a few stories already.

1. I now have to sit behind the driver on Greyhound buses. I have yet to understand why this is. Someone suggested to me that it was because of safety, i.e. if there was an emergency I could get off the bus first. I think that’s pretty damn silly because, even if I was completely blind, a bus is pretty much one big long aisle. If I can’t figure that out, then it’s a wonder I’ve survived this long.

2. Invasions of personal space and/or baby talk. I swear to god, baby talk. I know this may be hard to believe, dear reader, but I am actually too nice to tell people who talk to me like I am a sweet, slightly confused child to fuck themselves. There is something deeply rooted in my psyche that goes all wibbly when I am called kiddo, hon, dear or any other things you might conceviably hear your average grandmother utter.

3. I like this one the best. I get to hear all the weird misconceptions people have about how blind folks do things. I was at the Greyhound station last weekend, paying for a ticket to get back home from Seattle, WA. I took out a twenty dollar bill and handed it to the person behind the counter, who asked me how I could tell it was a twenty. I explained that I can still see the numbers in the corner of the bills, but that some blind people fold different bills different ways, i.e. a twenty might be folded length wise whereas a ten might have all its corners folded inward, and so on. I really don’t mind answering these questions, and to his credit he had the decency to look embarrased by his next question, which was: “I heard you can tell the difference between bills by how they feel. Is that true?”

4. People not only assume that a disabled person can’t do anything for themselves, but that two disabled people together is a miracle akin to walking on water. Actually, it might be more accurate to say it’s akin to a strange, extraordinarily rare phenomenom such as frog rain or spontaneous combustion, judging by the looks my friend (who is in a wheelchair) and I get when we go out together. If we’re going on a long trip, multiply the basic number of strange looks by ten for every day you’re out of your protective plastic bubble, because god knows all disabled people are required to live completely insulated from society.

These are just a few examples of some of the sublte indignites that the disabled have to deal with, not to mention the more obvious ones like the fact that if you happen to be in a wheelchair, you can be assured that all neccesary buildings and consequently, services, will be as inaccesible to you as possible. If you want to get the word out about these and other issues facing the disabled, I encourage you to join The Goldfish’s Blog Against Disabilsm Day. Check back here on that day as well, since I will be participating. At this point I think I will write about the other side of the blind coin and explore the notion of the blind priestess or oracle as an archetype in history, myth, and fiction.

Yes, I can get around with it, and I can see well enough to do things like read a book or respond to a street light, at least for the most part. I can even fire a gun with a reasonable degree of accuracy and navigate in strange cities. These abilities, however, do not mean that I should be forced to go through life without the aids available to visually impaired/blind people.

I find that there is an attitude that is pervasive in Western society about the abilities of those who are impaired. I believe it is the same attitude that spurs people to come into work with pneumonia rather than suffer the guilt of missing a day of labor. We are, whether we like it or not, a country founded on Puritanical values. One must master the flesh, and if one does not, then that is a failure on the part of the impaired person. Therefore disabled people country wide are pushed to look as ‘normal’ as possible. I myself went through life without any visual correction for nearly nighteen years. There was a benefit in that my burning desire to be ‘normal’ forced me to learn many alternative techniques for doing sighted activities, but the disadvantage was that I was never taught what the National Federation of the Blind calls the skills or tools of blindness.

Because the value of conformity was so clear in the cramped halls of disrepute known as American public school, I fought all of the feeble attempts to teach me non sighted mobility. I thought the instructors who tried to inform me were calling me retarded. And anyway, there were plenty of people with less sight than me, so why learn these things when I could already get around? If mobility instructors truly want to bring about change for school children, the issues that fester in the shadows at public schools will have to be dragged out into the light and forcibly slain. A mobility instructor is hampered from the moment she steps foot into the room with the impaired child, hampered by the inherent humiliating nature of public schools, hampered by ineffetive intervention for bullying, hampered by a social system so cutthroat it would make the boardrooms of major coorporations look like ice cream socials. When the mobility instrucotr is called in to help a child who has gone many years with no aid, they are facing a task of Herculean proportions. Not only is the school culture in place (not to mention the opinions of parents, oft well meaning, who do not want their child labeled as disabled) but years of resentment and rage may be in effect, a bulling elephant smack dab in the middle of the room.

The point is, those people like myself who use the tools of blindness (and my use of these things is imperfect. I am that angry child, grown up now yes, but still struggling with the reversal of attitudes. My whole life I have tried to appear as a sighted person. So much energy has gone into fueling this illusion that it is hard to admit that I am an Other.) are not lying. We aren’t out to get your sympathy or your money. The word blind encompasses so many conditions and levels of vision that even a person who is partially sighted can be classified as blind.

As for me, I will say this. It used to be that if I lost my glasses I couldn’t do even basic things until I found them again. I couldn’t get around at all. It was always a scary experience that was disorienting and panic laced. Now as I learn to use a cane, the fear receeds because I know I can get around now should something happen. Glasses, after all, are not a permanent fix. They aren’t part of my body and can be easily be rendered inoperable by a variety of circumstances. The cane is not a part of my body either, of course, but the skills it imparts to me remain even when I don’t have it.

So, next time, think before you ask “do you really need that?”