If you can avoid grinding your teeth at the American use of the dreaded h-word, take a look at this new article from Ragged Edge magazine: . Written by Patrick William Connally, it compares the disablism we experience now with the sexism experienced by women in the '50s and '60s. For 'women' read 'disabled', for 'men' read 'non-disabled' - and then it all begins to make sense.
So what do you reckon? Is this a good comparison to make?
Jump to more content from this blog
For the latest updates across 91Èȱ¬ blogs,
visit the Blogs homepage.
You can stay up to date with The Ouch! Blog via these feeds.
The Ouch! Blog Feed(RSS)
The Ouch! Blog Feed(ATOM)
If you aren't sure what RSS is you'll find useful.
91Èȱ¬ © 2014 The 91Èȱ¬ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.
Comments
The thesis is spoiled by inaccurate terminology, such as "person with a disability" and the H-word, obviously.
I think that people in the 50's and 60's were interested in comparing temselves to others and making themselves equal to everyone else in society.