From: davros@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Buddy Brannan)
Newsgroups: misc.handicap
Subject: Re: Pick on Deana Day!
Date: 23 Dec 92 20:17:48 GMT
Reply-To: davros@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Buddy Brannan)
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin
X-Fidonet: Blink Talk Conference
Originator: wtm@sheldev.shel.isc-br.com

Index Number: 26896

I sent the following to someone who posted here about "Politically incorrect"
marriages, and, in writing it, I thought that the rest of the readership
may find it, if not informative, at least interesting.

To: mcgrew@ichthous.Eng.Sun.COM
subject: Re: Pick on Deana Day!
Newsgroups: misc.handicap
references: <26808@handicap.news>
organization: The University of Texas at Austin

I may be taking what Deana said out of context here, and if so, this statement
is invalid. As I recall, she said something like this:

"The best thing that happened to me was marrying a sighted person who had
a car ... etc. etc. ... so that I wouldn't have to travel alone, because
I don't like traveling alone ... etc. etc."

The way I read that was this: (and again, I could be mistaken; I don't know
Deana, her motives, or anything else.):

"The best thing that happened was marrying a sighted guy with a car, since
I really don't have enough confidence in myself to travel independently and,
because of this lack, don't like to travel alone. I don't even think I can
get the confidence to travel alone, because it scares me shitless, and it's
so much _easier_ to rely on someone else."

Now, I may be reading this incorrectly.

There is nothing as far as I can see with getting married to anyone, regardless,
as you say, of handicap or lack thereof. And it's true that in any kind of
a relationship, everyone gives up something of one's independence. However,
it is equally true that one must be able to rely on oneself to do what one
needs to do. Further, I think that just about anyone can get the skills needed
to do what needs to be done--travel, live a full productive life, or what
have you. I missed the posting about being "Politically incorrect", but I
can guess that the poster meant something along these lines. I've seen quite
a few blind people who have, as a friend of mine refers to them, "seeing
eye spouses". The marriage is not wrong--not in the least. What _is_ wrong,
in my opinion and, I think, in the opinion of quite a few, is a "I can't
do it" attitude. We can't afford that kind of an attitude. The blind comm-
unity, and the disabled community generally, can't afford it. With any minor-
ity, society tends to attribute the actions, behaviors, and attitudes of one
to the entire group. This usually means that the worst possible attitudes,
actions, and so on, are attributed to any one group. Case in point: Blind
people rock and do weird things with their bodies in public, are stupid,
can't think for themselves, can't get across the street, and so on. I exper-
ience it every day. Now ... I'm not saying that we should all be model citi-
zens, or even that we should be perfect or anything of the sort. I'm saying
that we should strive to be the best we can be. An "I can't do it" attitude
is part of the reason that the unemployment rate among us is so high. It's
part of the reason why people walk up to me and ask me "Where are you trying
to go?", or worse, assume they know and tell me to go where I don't want to go.
This, I think, is what the poster about "politically correct" marriages
intended.

Appologies to Deana if this posting seemed harsh or in some way took some
statement out of context or misrepresented anybody else. These are, of course,
my opinions only. Any intelligent or at least coherent arguments grate-
fully accepted. Flames and unintelligible ranting will be cheerfully ignored.
--
Buddy Brannan,  KB5ELV, Riff-Raff #4
Internet: davros@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu
"One foot in a brave new world, one foot still in bed ..."
--from Those Who Dig: "Mr. Banana Head"