Michael J. Fox and his political ads

It's been the topic of discussion everywhere this past week. Michael J. Fox's ads for three Democratic candidates aired supporting them because of their support for embryonic stem cell research. Rush Limbaugh accused Fox of faking and exaggerating the symptoms of his Parkinson's disease for emotional effect. Pundits like Keith Olbermann responded to the hoopla.

And bloggers, too, of course.

At Shakespeare's Sister, Zack Handlen writes:

To whit: they’re picking on the handicapped kids.

Seriously, what the fuck is this shit? At this point in most novels, a reader would start rolling his or her eyes at the astonishing absurdities in play. It’s not enough that they’re responsible for thousands of deaths, not enough that they’ve eroded our civil liberties to the point where I feel I should ask for permission every time I use the toilet in my own apartment- they’re now so enthralled in their own pitiless mechanisms that they actually think accusing a sufferer of a major illness of “faking” is a well-considered, do-able strategy. What's next, driving by cemeteries and screaming "POSERS!!!" at the graves?

I'm incredulous too, but the rhetoric on all sides of this discussion feels uncomfortable to me, ambivalent as I am about cures. Handlen (above) follows a tack I wish I wouldn't see. He implies that attacking Fox -- "the handicapped kids" -- is one step away from accusing dead people of faking it. It makes for a dramatic and amusing comeback, but it doesn't say much about society's perception of people who are ill or disabled. Practically dead. Absurdity is often best responded to with absurdity, but this particular comparison isn't original and speaks to the general societal belief that Fox and people like him are, indeed, helpless, hopeless victims.

At Norwegianity, Mark Gisleson says:

It should also be noted that the actor's Michael J. Fox Foundation (MJFF) for Parkinson Research has granted $74 million to Parkinson's researchers over the past ten years.

Fox isn't doing [TV show] Boston Public out of ego, he's doing it to make still more money so he can invest more into finding a cure for those who are cursed with this affliction, even though Fox knows no cure will be developed in time to help him.

In other words, Fox is working hard raising cash and fighting for the freedom of scientific research that doesn't serve his personal interests to the degree critics have claimed. As Gisleson says, most likely it is true that any cure of Parkinson's would come too late for Fox, though I also suspect he maintains some hope for himself. Yet this is an important point to make when others accuse the actor of self-interest -- what an original crime that is!

Amanda Marcotte at Pandagon says:

While no Republicans to date have explained exactly why their right to win elections is so great that it trumps things like noting their slivering evil in public, this premise is behind all arguments against Michael J. Fox’s ad supporting Claire McCaskill because of her stance on stem cell research. I keep seeing variations on this quote from Ann Coulter: “(T)he Democrats hit on an ingenious strategy: They would choose only messengers whom we’re not allowed to reply to.”

Is it wrong to be amused by and love the term "slithering evil" here?

Marcotte expresses the complexity of the situation well, in my opinion. She gives Fox the credit of his own agency while noting the weird problem some Republican critics have with their malevolent tactics being thwarted by the stereotypical view of ill and disabled people as sufferers and victims. Those meanies! Pricked by their consciences finally? Maybe, or by social mores. Too bad it's at the expense of the image of disabled people again.

In an interview with Katie Couric, responding to Limbaugh's comments, Fox calmly states:

Well, first thing, [Limbaugh] used the word victim, and in another occasion, I heard him use the word "pitiable." And I don’t understand, nobody in this position wants pity. We don’t want pity. I could give a damn about Rush Limbaugh’s pity or anyone else’s pity. I'm not a victim.

An excellent, excellent response. I remain uncomfortable with emotional pleas for help, which Fox's ads did have a flavor of, but that's partially my baggage in needing to vehemently reject the victim status given disabled folk. I'm glad Fox spoke (and continues to speak) for himself as well as the cause of stem cell research generally, and I'm satisfied with the way he faced the camera and implicitly said, "This is me. That shock you're feeling at seeing me? That's what this is all about. Don't turn your back on the reality for some moral ideal."

Other crip bloggers on Fox, Limbaugh and the stem cell campaign ads:

Zephyr

Al Masters

Penny Richards

Stephen Kuusisto

Mark Siegel