posted
Some raw thing I just wrote. It's something that has been on my mind for a long time-
I'm reading Moving Violations by John Hockenberry for the second or third time. The first time I read this book I was in high school. He talks about what it's like being paralized from the waist down, or in his case, from the nipples down. I wonder if it's such a bad thing to become disabled. Usually people view it as a terrible tragedy. They talk about how sad they would be if they couldn't walk, hear or see. Many claim they'd rather kill themselves than live their lives out as a disabled person. Or, they long to find a cure. I wonder what I'd do if I was disabled. I like the way John Hockenberry views it. He did not get depressed or give up, he just went on with his life. His mother was so sad when he sold his bicycle and cried until he joked about it. He's traved all around the world, including to the war-torn middle east! He wrote a whole cool article about how disablity is like puppetry, about how all the technical advances can make so many people's lives easier. I found myself fascinated by the thought of prostetics. You see, I could have had my arm chopped off when I was younger, but my mother prevented this from happening. Now I have a left hand, smaller than the other with two weak fingers on it, the rest are almost as strong as the ones on the left hand. There is a mark on the center of my hand that is darker than the rest of it. When I was younger I got asked about it constantly. Most of the kids would exclaim, "ew" whenever they saw it. Yet, it did not bother me. I like my hand. I am proud of it. To me it is something unique and beautiful, not tragic. It's a mark of survival. People have a simular reaction when they find out their son or daughter is gay, or when they learn that their child is autistic or anything that is different, out of the ordinary, or will cause any kind of challenge. What makes the lives of someone who is different difficult? Their difference? Their disability? Or, is it simply the way people view it that causes the problem? Most people see homosexuality as tragic because they think that gays and lesbians cannot produce grandchildren, but many families prove this is not the case. Some view autism as a horrible thing because how how different the child is, and they struggle to reform the child for their own good. But is it really a good thing to force someone to be normal when they are not? What is normal anyway? Differences are the filter in which people view the world. They make for interesting stories, variations as beautiful as having different genres of music to express feeling. One is not better than the other, they are all equally beautiful if executed with as much feeling and passion as possible. What matters if one is different is to live a life filled with passion, honour and beauty. Instead of viewing difference as a challenge, why not see it as a mark of uniqueness, as something that adds to the vast human landscape?
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Depends on the variation. I would rather not have a child with severe autism or cognitive disabilities, because I would worry about how they would do after I and my wife passed away. The same goes for a physical disability that prevented a child from ever being self-sufficient. I could care less about their sexual orientation, especially as far as grandkids go. I am straight and have no desire for children myself.
I read somewhere about a basketball player that was born with six fingers on each hand. His parents had them amputated shortly after birth. For some reason, I felt sorry for the guy. The article did not say whether they were functional or not. I can understand amputation if they were non-functional, but if they were... well, I would not mind having six fingers on each hand myself, and would feel wrong making that choice for a child of mine. If they wanted to, they could always have them removed later.
If prosthetics advanced to the point of being superior to the originals, I would try them out myself.
The lives of different people can be harder for many reasons. In the case of homosexuality, the main reason is cultural. In the case of a paraplegic, it is because there are real obstacles to functioning in day to day life if one has no use of their legs. There may be additional cultural reasons, but even if those were removed there would still be tangible negatives to the condition. I am near-sighted, and it is silly to pretend I have an easier time with vision-related tasks than someone with perfect eyesight. Glasses help immensely, but should I lose or break them I am blind as a bat.
I think most parents just want their children to have the best and most chances as possible. I have nothing against homosexuals or autists, and would love a child with one or both traits as much as one who was straight and non-autistic. But because it cause them less pain and trouble, if I had the choice I would rather they be straight and non-autistic, and have 20/20 vision.
Posts: 1364 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
My father is one of the most alive people I have ever known. My uncle once said that if he ever won the lottery, he'd give the money to my father, because my father would know how to enjoy it, and how to make sure everyone around him enjoyed it too.
For the past 10+ years my father has been confined to a wheel chair.
He's had two strokes. He has Diabetes. He's lost the movement on the right side of his body, and his left leg.
He once told the greatest stories and jokes I've ever heard. Now he can barely get a sentence out in under two minutes.
Friday he goes in for an operation where, due to deteriation, they have to do vein grafts from his right arm into his mostly lifeless right leg, or the leg will come off as well.
If he loses that leg, he will be forced to move into a home, or into one of us kids homes. My mother can't handle him alone if she has to pick him up herself. Now he uses his leg for leverage to move onto his wheel chair.
He is still one of the most alive people I know.
Whenever he enters a room he smiles and crowds flock around him. He tells slow jokes, barely able to get the punchline out, and people still laough.
His grandkids love him dearly, I believe better than their other grand parents. He gives to them, listens to them, loves them unconditionally. He jokes with them and plays with them as best he can.
Yet his grandkids only know him as the man in the funny chair, the thin short person with ugly scarred skin on his leg, who can't keep his pants from sliding down and who needs help going to the bathroom. They don't know the strong rock solid man I knew growing up.
Everybody's road in life is different. No matter what disabilities are put in your way, its how you handle them that will determine if you enjoy life or not. Whether that disability is poverty, or paralyzation, or a zit on prom night.
Still, if I had my choice I would not choose the disablities that require so much of life's prescious energy just to move, to sit, to laugh.
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree with both Danzig and Dan_Raven*. The majority of disabilities don't have to rob you of your life entirely, but they can't help but rob you of aspects of your life. And that's never a good thing.
If you're deaf, you can't hear music. What about being deaf could possibly make up for that?
posted
I'd probably rather go blind than deaf, but, if I did go deaf, I'd spend a lot of time laying on large speakers and annoying the neighbours. Maybe the world seems different to a person who is deaf depending on whether or not they were born deaf. It would be an interesting story, and interesting perspective.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I know a woman that's deaf and until recently I took if for granted that she would choose to hear if she could. Nope. Not only that, but many deaf people are offended by the very suggestion that this is the case. Some of the people that get the cochlear (not sure that's the right spelling) implants are looked at as sell outs. Michelle
posted
Michelle - My mother used to be an interpreter, and so as a child I was familiar with a deaf community. That particular community seemed pretty insular and yes - there is a sort of reverse pride that went with being deaf. To be honest - and while I'm sure this will be mightily offensive to some - I think it's overcompensation for not only having the major disadvantage of losing an entire sense, but also a level of social retardation that naturally accompanies not being able to communicate with the vast majority of the world.
Plus, I think a disability becomes part of your self-definition. It's part of what molds you, and so you believe you're better for having it.
But I still vehemently state that nothing on the planet compensates for not being able to hear music.
posted
There are things that can make up for being deaf. Sight is more vivid. Deaf people are better at spotting things, and processing visual information than hearing people. Touch is also far more sensitive.
It isn't music that is such a loss. Deaf people go to dances, and feel the beat in the floor and their bodies. They can place a hand on a piano or speaker, and feel, if they want.
What is really missing is social interaction with the majority of people, and they cannot fix it by learning the language.
Posts: 3495 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
