From the Comments
I wanted to take a bit of time to highlight some awesome comments that you may have missed on last week’s posts. I originally intended to go through all the posts last week and pull up interesting comment discussions, but so much interesting comment discussion has gone down that I’m just going to highlight a few from the earliest part of the week.
In response to our introductory post Welcome to FWD/Forward, Rosa started a conversation about the different ways that disability is talked about in North America vs the United Kingdom:
You use the term someone “with” a disability, I don’t know if this is different in the US but in the UK the disability movement have rejected this term in favour of a “disabled” person. The reasoning behind this is the social model of disabilities understanding that someone is not “disabled” by their impairment but rather by societies reaction to that impairment – thus they do not “have” a disability but are “disabled” by society and the goal is to remove those disabling barriers. So I just wondered what the reasoning behind your use of “with” is?
Chally, Amanadaw, and Oyuang Dan discuss that point in response.
I hope this is not an inappropriate question, as I am still learning about these issues, but I wondered about the part of the definition above in which “Disability, additionally, is a term that refers to a long-term or lifelong condition.” Given the preference for “temporarily able-bodied” as the descriptor for those who are currently without disability, can people not be temporarily disabled as well?
Amandaw responded to that in the comments.
In response to abbyjean’s How Do We Understand This Experience?, many commenters responded with their own understanding of their disability, including this from Meg Thornton:
Part of me knows it’s all neurotransmitters and chemicals in the brain. But then again, so is sight, hearing and everything else which makes up the complexity of life. So I’ll keep thinking of Charlie trying for his commission when I get those little thoughts which say “don’t forget, you could always kill yourself” in the middle of things now and then, since it’s easier to just tell Charlie I’m not interested than it is to try and decode all the complex thought patterns which got me to where I am.
Really, all the comments on that post are great.
The comments in Lauredhel’s post Telegram to TABS on Spoon Theory get into another interesting discussion about language, both inclusive and exclusive. A.W. wrote:
For language and spoon theory, I do and don’t have a problem with tab. It fits very, very well for the judging of actions and the conservation of resources when dealing with bodily illness/pain. But deciding on actions and juggling resources also fit for severe depression and other mental illnesses, say, ptsd. (which I’m tempted to post about, but not sure it would go anywhere. Managing triggers (and how much of them you can reliably handle) is a pain in the ass). It’s over and under and – through -, and you can’t get away from it. For me the doling out of spoons when dealing with my mind is incredibly similar to when I’m dealing with body problems. An able mind is just as important. And no, lack of sleep from a kid at 2 am for the third night in a row isn’t the same dynamic. I’ve dealt with those things too, it isn’t even remotely the similar. Perhaps dropping the body bit and shortening it to ‘temporarily able’ would work.
Thank you so much to everyone who’s been participating in the comment threads, giving us feedback, and discussing ideas they’ve developed around or related to our posts. My schedule is such that it’s hard to keep up with comments as they’re happening, but it was great going back through earlier posts and seeing what people had been saying!