SumBlog2 Disability

Whether or not you have a dichotic definition of a person and being disabled or abled, or if you view the differences between the two on more of a spectrum, there is still a line drawn somewhere that separates the two from each other. I myself am more of a spectrum person but when/where/how did the separations begin? Or have they always been there? Has being disabled always been a stigma? I’ve never really known and have never before thought to ask. While stumbling around the internet I found a thing or two that offered a few new ideas that have given me a thing or two to think about. According to www.english-heritage.org.uk , beginning in the 1660’s the ideas of God or astrology causing disability and madness began to fade. Madness was previously seen as a possession of the soul and disability transitioned from a divine message from a higher power into now a misfortune deserving charity. This is the part where W.I. Thomas would step in and say “As far as disability is concerned, if it is seen as a tragedy, then disabled people will be treated as if they are the victims of some tragic happening or circumstance.” In other words, the interpretation of the situation causes the action. In that transitional phase the people with these disabilities lost their divinity and for the first time were starting to be seen as inferior because their characteristics were only viewed as holding them back from functioning as efficiently as people without any condition. I’ve never liked how things have most often centered around the majority, especially when it creates inequality.  I found this excerpt from a website with several articles discussing different issues surrounding disability in society and really liked how it brought up the spectrum view between abled and disabled. It is also fresh to hear how it gets back to talking about people as one people, avoiding the dichotic classification.

Another trend involves trying to break down the categorical binary between abled and disabled people, instead recognizing that there is a spectrum of ability. For example, this icon (source): 

Ultimately, Powell and Ben-Moshe hope that access will be so universally designed into public buildings that it will eliminate the need for an icon at all: architecture would no longer be designed around a specific type of person considered “normal,” but instead would be designed for the range of people who will use the spaces.  This full integration would mean that differently-abled people would be considered just “people” and we wouldn’t need an icon at all.