Parableman roots out the philosophical basis of arguing the relativist view of “everything/nothing is “normal””. This is no ivory tower conversation, however. It hits home for many, and for Jeremy, in particular, when he says, “it’s not surprising that I’m going to find Fish’s comments on autism to be the most unhelpful ones I’ve ever seen”. Because the philosophy underneath impacts our real world decisions, it is never a waste of time to try to figure out the thinking behind some of the most prevalent buzz word phrases of our time- or at least read some of the discussions of those who go into the fray on these debates. I have a personally invested interest, as does Jeremy ( his is in views of autism), mine being in the area of deaf culture… as my husband and several children are hearing impaired ( some are moderately severe).
To catch up on the conversation, here are some high points (admittedly, through my own filter) :
Quotes from Fish’s essay, Norms and Deviations: Whoâ€™s to Say?
The X-Men example: “These abilities are seen by many â€œnormalâ€ human beings, and a few mutants, as disabilities, as an indication that the person who possesses one of them is a freak.
From this perspective, the best thing a mutant could hope for would be a cure,”” Storm …declares, â€œThey canâ€™t cure us. You know why? Because thereâ€™s nothing to cure!â€”
“the case of blacks and gays” segues to “why couldnâ€™t the same thing happen to autism and mutancy or to any other mode of being”
[ the first thing I would want to look at here is the presumption that race (blacks) and sexual orientation (gays) is speaking of “apples to apples” ) and then, whether this, in turn, can truly be related to autism, etc. I think there is a bit of equivocation going on here.]
The Deaf Debate: “many in the deaf community â€” a phrase that makes an argument: we are not just persons similarly afflicted; we are a community â€” have resisted cochlear implants, reasoning that to accept them would be to deny their culture, their language and their identity. â€œAn implant,â€ wrote the editors of Deaf Life, â€œis the ultimate invasion of the ear â€¦ the ultimate refusal to let deaf people be deaf.â€
“The story of the â€œhearing world,â€ writes Douglas Baynton, associate professor of history and American sign language at the University of
Iowa, is that deafness is an incapacity; but, he explains, what we are dealing with are â€œphysical differencesâ€ (exactly the point made in the letter to Time), and physical differences â€œdo not carry inherent meanings.â€ That is, they do not come labeled â€œnormalâ€ and â€œinferior,â€ â€œabledâ€ and â€œdisabledâ€; these labels, Baynton contends, are fixed by â€œa culturally created web of meaning,â€ a web constructed by no one and everyone, a web that those who live within it find difficult to unravel, even when they know that the meanings it delivers are false.”
“Deafness appears, it is said, as a defect only against the background of a norm that has been put in place not by nature, but by history.”
The Minority Argument: “A minority (deaf activists view themselves as a linguistic minority) is regarded by the mainstream as defective, impaired, criminal (Italians and Irish in the 19th century), inferior (Asians and blacks), immoral (gays, polygamists and gypsies), lacking in mental or physical resources (women until only recently) and either less or more than human (X-men and Jews).”
The Cop-out: “All we can be sure of is that the struggle between the impulse to normalize â€” to specify a center and then police deviations from it â€”and the impulse to repel the normalizing gaze and live securely in a community of oneâ€™s own will never be resolved.”
The Practical Problem of Personal Investment: “Fish, however, goes from discussing diversity in terms of race, sexual
orientation, and disability, to considering â€œpolygamy, drug use, pedophilia or murderâ€ and makes too vast a generalization about the politics of difference and self-empowerment. By mentioning all of the following in one sentence as various types of â€œdifferenceâ€â€”â€autism, deafness, blackness, gayness, polygamy, drug use, pedophilia or murderâ€â€”Fishâ€™s argument becomes no more than an observation about a kind of rhetorical strategy that says little about the real, lived experience of real people. I was frankly troubled to see â€œautismâ€ in a sentence with â€œpedophilia,â€” -Kristina Chew, Autism Vox
I have a number of things to say on these statements and proffered views.
I think there’s a very interesting argument to be had about whether autistic people are disabled to the point where they would be better off being healed or whether they’re fine the way they are and should be taken seriously when they insist that they wouldn’t accept a cure if it were found.
That seems a very good place to start talking.