Midweek slumgullion #26
Thought-provoking reads from across the pond, courtesy of Ouch!:
From the New Statesman: "Funny peculiar" -- Mat Fraser on disability and what is funny.
The Guardian: "I won't be happy until I lose my legs" -- A woman tellls of her lifelong desire to be a double-amputee.
The disabled and Wii: An open letter to Nintendo -- I've wondered if the new gaming system would or would not be an opportunity for exercise for the involuntarily sedentary, or anyone whose athletic options are limited. The comments are interesting.
4 comments:
The comments on the letter to Nintendo are such a good illustration of attitude toward disability that they should be in a textbook... Start with a (simple) constructive suggestion, and everything from there is "Well it seems like a good idea, but..."
But that's unfair treatment.
But that's just not how it works.
But that's your problem, not mine.
But we could never make this work for every conceivable disability so (a) we should just do nothing or (b) that would be unfair treatment to other people with disabilities.
Maybe I shouldn't be but I really am surprised that gamers would be so against this. They are sure letting their prejudices show in speaking against a setting that's otherwise pretty common... One person in the comments also mentioned being able to reassign button functions... It always pisses me off when that is not available, it's so easy to do. And even if some buttons can be reassigned it's usually not all of them. So many people not thinking things through.
Hi, I'm a lurker! Delurking because that was a good letter and geez, most of those other people thought they were responding to something like "you should make this game playable by every single person, by default, right this minute". Kind of a long comment I guess, I just am annoyed.
Shan, I know!
The comments there are classic. What's so interesting to me is that some nondisabled people are so defensive about sensitivity options on a computerized game, which, if anything is easily and obviously an adaptable invention to suit everyone's capabilities, this is it.
I'd be really interested in hearing your thoughts on the Guardian piece...I can't seem to even wrap my brain around it quite frankly. Except that it makes me feel quite sad.
Thanks for sharing these links.
Jessie,
In a nutshell, I'm not sure what I think.
It seems as wild, misguided and wrong to me as nosejobs and breast implants that serve only to satisfy vanity. I mean, I imagine myself in a much sexier body that matches my mind and the sense of who I am internally, and I don't entirely understand how body identity integrity disorder differs from my strong sense that my body does not represent fully who I am in this culture. I have not sought out surgeries or other treatments to limit this difference.
But maybe it is something different. I don't fully relate to what I understand to be the transgender experience of gender and body either, but I do see completely that when you don't and cannot fit into the categories society offers you (for gender, sex, ability, race, etc.) that your option is to make your own rules and challenge what society thinks and sees.
This is a real life Geek Love story, though, to amputate a healthy limb because you want to. I think there's a complicated moral component too. Is this woman independently wealthy? Can she afford a lifetime of equipment she'll need to function in the world? It's not fair to impose those costs on others, though I am not sure where that line is best drawn.
Post a Comment