psa: if someone is
- a woman, or someone who’s generally perceived as female and treated accordingly
- a person with disabilities that they spent a significant part of their lives, especially in childhood and adolescence, getting treatment/therapy for
just assume that they have been effectively brainwashed into believing that it’s bad or wrong or selfish for them to contradict others, assert boundaries, or say no
if they do make some firm statement of preference, do not press and pry and pick away at it ‘cause you think they’ll be able to stick to it if they’re really really sincere and not just playing games
understand that this is not an equal power dynamic
If airlines are going to force wider passengers to pay an upgrade fee because of safety or passenger comfort or whatever, why aren’t we asking excessively tall people to do the same thing?
On my flight home last week, the guy sitting next to me was thin and very, very tall. He had no respect for my personal space or the safety of the passengers. He didn’t stop moving around the whole ride, crossing the line between our seats and at one point even leaning his back against my arm and I had to say something. He was also sticking his bare feet into the aisle.
Setting aside this guy was a total jerk, can we talk about the fact that he was probably legit uncomfortable and the space was too small for him? He was impacting the safety and comfort of other passengers by leaning on me and invading the narrow aisle space with his legs.
He was also related to the man who was sitting behind me, a man who was also too tall, and kept sticking his legs all the way through the bottom of my seat and kicking me.
And no one thinks about that or asks tall people to pay for extra space? But we do it to wide people?
Thin privilege is being too big for the airplane seat but not being asked to pay an upgrade fee because you’re too big in the acceptable way.
Not long after the diagnosis [of ALS], my wife at the time and I were discussing my future with the neurologist. He began going over the disease progression in a matter of fact way. He said your breathing muscles will become paralyzed and you will go to sleep and die. He quickly added that some patients decide to go on a ventilator, but there is no quality of life living that way. I shook my head in agreement.
It is extremely easy for a healthy individual to say how they would not live. I am guilty myself. If someone had told me prior to the diagnosis that I would be totally paralyzed, fed by a feeding tube, communicate via computer with a voice synthesizer and tethered to a ventilator that I would find more meaning in life and living I am certain that person telling me such a tale was insane.
Yes, my life is very difficult and requires a lot of resources to keep me alive, human and financial. I have considered disconnecting from the ventilator several times, but the reason is never because I had lost my appreciation for life and living.
I was admitted into the hospital and scheduled for tracheotomy surgery the next morning. That night my now ex-wife told me how selfish I was for wanting to live. That my young children had suffered enough and it would cause them only more pain. It was a sickening sense of abandonment. I have absolutely no doubt if I did not have the ability to communicate my desires the surgery would have not taken place."
See? The pressure to die is fucking everywhere. My experiences aren’t unique. Medical professionals tell you there’s no quality of life. Your own family calls you selfish. It’s everywhere. And for some reason feeding tubes are right about the first step along the way where you really start getting pressured to die rather than accept a medical device into your life. My experiences are the norm not the exception and disabled people are pressured into death constantly when otherwise we might choose to live.
Let’s imagine that instead of sending a handful of investigators from the ATF and the Chemical Safety Board to West, Texas, we marshaled every local, state and federal resource available to discover the exact sequence of events that led to the explosion. Let’s imagine that the question—Why?—became so urgent that the nation simply could not rest until it had overdetermined the answers. We’d discover that OSHA hadn’t inspected the plant in 28 years—did this play a role in the disaster? If it’s found that the company that owns the plant, Adair Grain, violated safety regulations, as it had last year at another facility, we might call it criminal negligence and attribute culpability. But would we ascribe ideology? And which ideology would we indict? Deregulation? Austerity? Capitalism? Would we write headlines that say—Officials Seek Motive in Texas Fertilizer Explosion? And could we name “profit” as that motive in the same way that we might name, say, “Islam” as the motive for terrorism? Would we arrest the plant’s owners, deny them their Miranda rights and seek to try them in an extra-legal tribunal outside the Constitution, as Senator Lindsey Graham has suggested we treat US citizen Dzhokhar Tsarnaev? Would we call for a ban on the production of ammonium nitrate and anhydrous ammonia? Would we say that “gaps and loopholes” in our nation’s agricultural policies were responsible for the tragedy, as Senator Chuck Grassley has suggested about immigration in the Boston bombing case?
No, we won’t. We won’t do any of these things, because even if the West fertilizer plant disaster is ultimately understood as something more than “just an accident,” it will still be taken as the presumed cost of living in a modern, industrialized economy."
A hypothetical narration of a drone targeting the Boston Marathon bombing suspect in Watertown by an American Facebook user based in San Francisco, has gone viral amongst Pakistani Facebook users. Within 24 hours the post was shared more than 5000 times and generated hundreds of comments.