Category: Let's talk
In the car today, my uncle and I struck up an interesting conversations about cures for blindness. My current condition is optic nerve hypoplasia, which means my optic nerve did not fully develop during pregnancy. As of now there is no known cure for optic nerve hypoplasia. My uncle asked, if you could get your blindness cured, would you? I told him I would not, because I'm used to being blind during birth, and I don't want to have to go through the adjustment process. He said it may be real benefitial for me, because I'd be able to read and get places on my own. Hahaha. I've been doing that though. I traveled half way across the country alone several times now. Anyway, no matter how I explained it, he didn't understand. I even tried explaining it from a reversed point of view. What I mean by that is I explained how difficult it is for people to adjust to losing vision after years of being able to see. I guess no matter how I explain these perspectives, and no matter how independent I am, some people won't understand blindness and its potential.
i wouldn't. simple as that.
i've been blind since birth, and it would take a hell lot of getting used to a new life with sight
so no..
AS someone who used to have pretty good vision, never 20/20 but still good, yes I'd love to have it back. Having said that, however, I don't think most people realize that we don't see with just our eyes. It takes our brain to interpret what our eyes are seeing, and someone who has never had vision or someone who has not had vision for many years like me, would have a hard time interpreting what our eyes are looking at if we suddenly developed sight. We would still be blind in many ways, and our brains might never fully adjust and allow us to use our vision like a person who has never been visually impaired can do.
But if this is purely a theoretical question with no concerns for reality, yes, I'd love to have 20/20 vision if given the opportunity.
I agree with what has been said here, and will say that yes, some people just won't understand. it my opinion, it isn't possible for them to imagine how we can still be happy, cause they're thinking of how distraught they'd feel if they should become blind.
Runner, I've got the same condition you do. For our particular case, the only cure may be in stem cell treatments to regenerate the nerves.
I've got partial vision, and I'd love to have full 20/20 vision, depth perception, peripheral, the whole thing. I'm glad I've got some over none, but it almost makes getting around harder because I have to second-guess most of what I can see.
II think there is some misunderstanding on both sides here. Most blind people, in my experience think that they'd get their sight back, and suddenly get thrown into the world with no training or anything. That's simply not the case. If you got your sigt back today, you wouldn't be able to use it very much for a whil. You'd still live just a you do now for several years, but you'd eventually get used to seeing. Its not going to be an instantaneous thing.
As for me personally, sure, I'd love to be sighted. There are a lot of things I want to do that require sight. As long as I can continue reading braille and tat kind of thing until I learn print, sure, why not? I complain about being blind all the time, I'd be a hippocrit if I didn't want to change that.
That was my understanding. I'm personally happy the way I am, and getting vision back seems to have a lot of variables. I'm not saying I couldn't handle them, but I'd rather remain happy as I have been, and I'd rather adjust to things that naturally happen to my vision.
Being like Blue, I'd love to have my sight back, all of it. It be wonderful to have had both sides and I could think of many things I know as a blind person I would use as one that can see.
Our world is sighted, and having sight would simply be easier. Sure, you'd have to adjust, but after you did you'd find life just that much easier.
Happiness should not be used as a measure of sightedness or blindness, because sight will not make you happy. It is just a tool, much like your computer, your cane, just one you'd receive much from having.
that's just it, though. some of us, myself included, wouldn't take the easy way out. when I say I don't care to be sighted, I mean just that. I realize there are some who'd disagree, and to each their own.
I don't think sighted people have any advantage over people who are blind. So what if they can drive? So what if they can read print? We have just as effective ways of getting things done.
I understand the world is sighted, meaning things are designed offten in a visual way. That does not mean, however, that we are shit out of luck. We need to adapt to the world. This is possible no matter what your vision condition/diagnosis is, so why change your vision and have to go through the hassle of trying to readapt? There are always new forms of technology coming out, new strategies that the blind can use to compete with other people. This may be a bit of an exaggeration, but it seems as though people have images and dreams of making the world perfect, which is absoklutely impossible. Would the world be better if everyone could see? I certainly do not believe so.
well said, Ryan. to be perfectly honest, if anyone is at a disadvantage, it's sighted people. for one, they rely heavily on one sense, where we use multiple ones, which therefore enables us to be more in tune to our surroundings.
Good point to the last poster. I've also been blind since birth and wouldn't care to have sight even if I could.
Nope, rather have all my hearing back instead.
I certainly would take complete advantage of any sight I could get. Never had sight and always was a slow learner in mobility. Now that I am older, some health issues have set in. When younger, i thought it would be depressing to have sight back. But I would now go into the chicago rehab center immediately for any training I would need for adapting. Then I would want to help others who are totally blind and have other issues with slow learning, because I know how it feels. I am one of those retinopathy of prematurity cases who always had health issues.
bea, I'm one of those, too.
if given the opportunity, would I take it? Well, to be honest, only if there was way to gradually gain sight, so that my brain could get used to it. But if it never happens, I won't be disappointed in the least, and I certainly don't think that being blind puts me at any sort of disadvantage.
Sorry to break it to you but being blind puts you at a disadvantage. There are jobs you will not be able to do, activities you will never take part in, and not because you are not talented enough or any of that. It is because you are blind, plain and simple.
For those who say that you can do everything a sighted person can, explain to me why there are dozens upon dozens of boards on here complaining about not being able to do something? How could a blind person, for example, live in a cabin in the woods, and commute to town on their own every day? Cabs don't go to the woods. Can a blind person go into any bookstore, sit down and read any book they wish? Can a blind person see a photograph?
The reason we have all the technologies that attempt to make us equal is because we are not equal. Going to college and struggling to get books and assignments shows a person just how unequal things truly are. You can do the basics, certainly, and I'm not advocating feeling sorry for yourself and doing nothing, not at all. I'm saying we should do everything in our power to become more equal. That would include using what technology was available to achieve sight.
I honestly don't understand why you're ok using a piece of technology that would read a book to you, or using a guide dog, but using a technology that would illiminate both those needs simultaneously, along with countless others, you're not ok with. Why are you ok using adaptive technology like voice over and jaws, but not ok using a technology that would make them unnecessary? You have to adjust to any technology, so it can't be that. And you adapt to changes in yourself on a constant basis, so it can't be that either. Personally, to be blunt, I think its fear of the unknown.
We laugh at sighted people because they are terrified of being blinded. They don't know how easy it really turns out to be, that's what we say. Even on this post someone has said that. But then, we turn right around and go, "Sighted, nah, that would be too hard". We're guilty of doing the exact same thing that the sighted people are, just in reverse. We have gotten so used to blindness, that the thought of losing that terrifies us.
it isn't a matter of just being too hard, though; that's what some of us are trying to say. it's the fact that, believe it or not, some of us truly wouldn't have it any other way. we see the beauty in blindness, if you will, and are unafraid to adapt to whatever challenges it presents, in whatever ways are necessary. it has nothing to do with fear, at least for me, and everything to do with the skills I've learned to attain, in order to make it a meer nuisence, at times. scoff if you wish, but that's my truth.
also, I don't think anyone here is saying blind people can do every single thing sighted people do, but on the same token, sighted people can't successfully do a lot of things that we can. however, why focus on what you can't do? wouldn't you rather make the most of what you have, and possibly encourage others to do the same?
Yes, and if the technology were available for me to see, I would take it and make even more of the best that I can.
The idea that you like being blind, and so wouldn't want to change it because you've gotten to like it is honestly just moronic. You got used to living life without a fully accessible cell phone until the IPhone was released, then you ran out to buy that. You can get used to everything, just because you've gotten it the way you like it, doesn't mean it can't be better. Saying that because you like it, you wouldn't change it, is close minded and idiotic. You should always be willing to change something, no matter how much you like it, because you can always make it better.
Being sighted is, plain and simple, better than being blind. If it weren't, evolution would have made all humans blind by now. Our world is based around sight. Thus, having sight would be easier once you learned how to do it. Its as simple as that.
Exactly.
If I came across as seeming to overestimate our potential, I appologize because that wasn't my intent. I realize there are certain things we can not do.
When it comes down to the unknown, I don't see it as a battle I'd like to become involved with. Sure, I am willing to try out new things. I've never gone white water rafting before, and though I'd be nervous at first, I'd love to try it. However, when it comes down to obtaining something that can be drastically life changing as getting vision, that is not something I'd be convinced to do. Yet. Who knows, maybe down the road, my thoughts may change, but right now, I'm succeeding and getting things done just fine. Honestly, it doesn't bother me that I can't read, see pictures, etc. However, I never had vision, so for those who may have had it before may see this from a different angle.
It's all personal preference, from what I've gathered, and it depends on your values.
well, Cody, I guess I'll remain moronic, then, cause although I used to see blindness as you and many others do, I no longer do, and am glad to have adopted this pretty newfound perspective of mine. it makes life a hell of a lot more enjoyable.
Oh, and if that's how you view me, so be it. Not that you have any room to say I am a moron, because we haven't spoken very much on here, therefore you don't have much reason to put such a disclaimer on me. But if that's your sad methodical way of categorizing people, oh well.
Read it again, you'll note I never called you a moron.
My folks and I actually talked about this issue years ago. I used to get severe headaches several times a week between the ages of ten and about fifteen or so that always seemed to center over my eyes. They would usually only last between fifteen minutes to a half hour (although anyone who's ever experienced such things will agree that they don't seem so short when you're actually enduring them). But because they always seemed to center over my eyes we thought back then that it had to do with my eye condition. Lookingback thoug we suspect it was actually childhood migranes since my symptoms were exactly the same. But my eye doctor at the time suggested a corneal transplant, but we eventually discarded the idea after a great deal of consideration since while it might have given me a tiny amount of vision, namely just enough to discern the very basic shape of an object, it wouldn't really have been worth it in the longterm. And even now from what I hear there isn't much if anything that can be done with my eye condition. They used to call it RF (Retrolental Fibroplasia), but I guess nowadays they just call it Retinopathy of Prematurity. But from what I've heard in order to be able to really do anything with this condition you would have to cut the optic nerve and, unless things have changed once you do that you can't really repair it. Again I could be mistaken but I'm not in any particular hurry to find out. I agree with the poster who said thatif there was a way to gradually regain full sight, thereby giving the brain more time to get used to processing visual information, I MIGHT consider it.
What's wrong with being accepting of the cards I've been dealt? You're claim that it is moronic sounds pretty insecure, honestly. I'm surprised to find you take such a stance. You're an intellegent guy. I've seen on several topics that you have a lot of useful hints to getting tasks completed, and despite going through months of training, I wouldn't have come up with those myself.
So, if you've got the tools to make it on your own and be independent, why would you come across so uncomfortable, insecure, and willing to throw that all aside if you have the opportunity? Are you man enough to say that there is something you are insecure about?
First, I have to say it's great to see some fellow optic nerve hypoplasias on here. Second I love my life the way it is. I'm given just enough sight to enjoy doing many of the things I love on at least a basic level. That said, would I give up my blindness to be able to see? I've thought about this a lot in the last few years. There was a time when I would have said no. Indeed, if there were a chance to lose what vision I DID have, I'd still probably say no. That said, if I knew some technology or operation would work without any side effects? yes, I'd do it in a second. It would be a huge transition. Even though I can see periferally, my condition works in such a way that my brain doesn't always recognize what I'm seeing. For instance, watching a movie, or looking at a picture. I don't always recognize what I'm looking at. But then when someone explains it and I look again, the images grow clearer. The transition from this to suddenly having full vision would take a great deal of getting used to. But to be able to see every intricate detail of my wife and our children, to see the world around me in all its wonder, to play videogames without any difficulty whatsoever? TO read print on the go without any aid at all? Yes, yes I'd do it. Being blind has contributed to making the person I am to be sure, but it does not define me. While I'd have to learn many things over again, I think it would be worth it. Even something as simple as being able to do my job more efficiently would make it worth it. I'm content with being visually impaired. I've lived with it all my life. And if I never see more than this, I'll be satisfied. But I'd give it all up in a heartbeat to see the world around me in full.
completely agree with the last post.
Wow, BG, that is the exact same way my vision is.
Here's my spin on this: when I was younger I said "never".
Not sure about that anymore.
After all, all the accomodations, including web site accessibilities and things, are all done for us only because we have no choice in the matter. If we had a choice, why should anyone accomodate us? After all, then it would be "a blind lifestyle", not a disability, so airline staff to Braille on elevators to every other accomodation we now get would no longer be required. They only have any kind of moral imperative because we cannot choose otherwise. If we could choose, it's not a disability anymore.
That's my perspective anymore.
I might if the proceedure or device had no sideeffects or at least moderate ones and if money were no object. But going sighted would mean I could no longer say I don't have to worry about car insurance LOL. But then aain it would also mean no more getting the run around in ob searching because the business didn't want to hire a blind guy or accomodate one but had to find ways to say it without giving me the exact reason. My soon-to-be former GF's mom thinks it's not discrimination against the blind when businesses refuse to hire us, but that the don't want to install the equipment we wold need. But that is, wheter youbelieve it or not, a form of discrimination against the blind. Because they're nearly always happy to make their business more wheelchair accessible if one of their employees needs such a device.
I'm not insecure about my blindness. I am happy with it, extremely independent, and highly critical of those who use it as a crutch.
However, that being said, it is still a disability. It is an inconvenience with me. It is one I've learned to live with, but it is still one nonetheless. Having sight would eleviate that.
You said, and you're correct, that I've given advice on many boards about how to do things, but that is exactly why I say one should take advantage of every opportunity. I would no longer have to advice people on how o do these things as a blind person. There is a board on here about how to cut in astraight line, that would be taken care of if one were not blind. Youcould justsee that you were cutting in a straight line. All the phone boards, the technology boards for the most part, anything on this sight that has to do with how to do something as a blind person would no longer be necessary.No longer would one have to hope one could get a cab in time, one wouldn't have to worry about how to cross a street, or deal with all the idiocy that we del with cfrom the sighted world. We wouldn't need any further accommidations from the government. In short, we would be normal. And I'm sorry to say, as we stand now, we aren't normal. Its a fact of life.
If anything, those who say they would not do it because they are happy with the life they have now are the insecure one. What is it if not insecurity that would prevent someone from making their life better, simply because it would change it? As Billy Joel said so wisely "Don't you know that only fools are satisfied?"
But what, exactly, is normal? Is anyone quote on quote, "normal"? I don't wear makeup every day like many females. Does this make me abnormal? And should I try to get used to wearing makeup every day so I can be like the majority of girls? If your answer is yes, then you're contradicting every board post in which you advocate not conforming to the standards of society. If your answer is no, then how is this different from becoming sighted? I mean, if you really think about it, I might be more appealing to the eye if I was always seen in public with makeup on, and therefore, I might get better service. So yes, this would be of some benefit to me. Don't get me wrong. I do agree with you that we can't do everything a sighted person can do, but like Chelsea said, many of them can't do everything that some of us do. and, for the record, not every sighted person can cut straight without some assistance from a ruler, or something similar. Also, I do tend to have some amount of sympathy for people who lose their vision later and life and have to adapt to this, but you know why this is? Not because they're adapting to change, but because they had no choice in the matter. Even if they were acting like an idiot and lost their sight in an accident that could have been prevented by a lack of stupidity, they didn't voluntarily choose to injure their eyes, or their optic nerve.
So, I guess that also means people are insecure for being content with not being rich, having a smaller home, having chicken instead of prime rib, and being content with what we have instead of taking it for granted. That, is moronic.
Ah, forgot something.
You can't honestly say things will be all better once you have sight. I bet, once that happened, you'd still be disappointed about something else.
And I don't care if people look at their blindness as a disability. That's their sad outlook. I refuse to consider it as so. We may have some disadvantages, but we also have advantages. I am not impaired, disabled, whatever. I am blind. Period.
Yes, being content is foolish. You should always be seeking more, or different, or better. Perfection should never be gained, for a perfect life is a boring and pointless one.
Normal is the accepted convention. There is being normal in the sense of make up, which doesn't exist because there are so many forms o normal in that sense. For example, there are groups of people who don't wear make up for dozens of different reasons. So that is neither normal or abnormal.
However, it cannot be denied that humans are ment to be sighted. We have eyes, we are born with eyes, working or not. It is in our anatomy. If ours don't work, which they don't, then we are humanly abnormal. Thus, we must seek to regain our abnormality. We do it now with jaws and IPhones, when the technology becomes available, we will have no excuse then to not do it with whatever technology is available at the time. We will then be the person who stays in a wheelchair even though they are perfectly helpful. At that point it willbe an elective disability, and those are not disabilities at all.
I would choose to have my vision back. I think if I had been blind from birth I would be different, but I lost my vision when I was 13. It wasn't something that happened gradually, or something I saw coming. It happened suddenly, and I still haven't really gotten used to being without sight, so yes, I would choose to see again.
I certainly agree. We should get out of our comfort zone and try things. We need to try to do better and better at at everything.
However, there are certain things we don't need to change about ourselves. Here is the reason why I believe getting back vision would not be benefitial.
It does not guarantee that life will be better. Sure, you may be able to do things you couldn't before, but is it worth all the hassle of going through all the adjusting and adapting all over again? That time could have been spent worrying about more important things. And, if you are content and successful despite your blindness, why throw that away? We are in a competative world, and I know for a fact you'd be at more of a disadvantage during that adjusting period than when you were blind.
Like I said, I think this has a lot to do with personal values, and what is important to you. I understand why those who have lost their vision may want it back. I am now understanding why you even want it back. But for me, vision is not a must, and I see it as more of a hinderance than a benefiter.
I can see both sides of this.
On one hand, any procedure that would give someone any sight would probably be controversial, expensive, and possibly have many side effects. While it's true that we all die eventually, and we all most likely have habits or indulge in things that might contribute to our death down the road, for something as complex as gaining a sense, it may be too much for our brains or bodies to handle. This brings me to my second point. Someone was talking about how you would get rehabilitation to be able to use your sight effectively. Who would pay for this? more importantly, how would it even be done? Let's just assume for a second that it would be as one of my friends once explained how he imagined it to be. he told me that you could be given lots of childrens' picture books and told what each picture was. My counterargument to this, however, is that you wouldn't just be focusing on the book. You would obviously be in a room, and no matter how plain the decor is, you would still have to take in the color of the walls, what the chairs, desks, computer, and every other object, both big and small, looks like. Not to mention, of course, what would happen if you glanced up and looked out the window. There would be absolutely no way that you could simply focus on one object and just tell your eyes to ignore everything else around you. It would be akin to a person deaf from birth suddenly gaining the ability to hear. They would have to learn to process speech, learn what background noises are important, etc.
Having said all that, I do agree completely with what Silver Lightning is saying. It's not a matter of insecurity, it's a matter of convenience. Even the NFB will tell you we live in a sighted world. Does that mean we shouldn't adapt, that we shouldn't make the best of what we have? of course not. A cure for certain eye conditions, much less a universal cure for blindness, probably won't even be developed in my lifetime. But to not take the chance to be on an equal playing field with everyone else would be foolish. You could argue that every single one of us has a handicap that could potentially prevent someone from getting a job, but if that were true, we wouldn't have unfriendly customer service representatives, abusive animal trainers, psychologists whose patients repeatedly commit suicide, clowns who are pedophiles, teachers that hate children, etc. Obviously, they make it in the job market, while the blind person more than likely is discriminated against. If it weren't a matter of discrimination, which I admit is not always the case, the unemployment rate among the blind would not be so abysmal. So, there is some truth to sight being normal. If we live in a sighted world, then surely having sight is an upper hand, no matter how much some people would like to overestimate themselves.
You make it sound as if you would not be exactly the same as when you are blind as you go through the adjustment process. What would prevent you from reading braille and using voice over while you learn to see? There's no rule that says sighted people can't use braille, so you would not be at any more of a disadvantage than you already were. You'd just be learning to be sighted.
You should throw away the contentedness with your blindness for the same reason you no longer use a briefcase phone, a better version has become available. When the technology exists for us to be sighted, a better version would have become available. Every piece of adaptive tecnology would be obselete. We wouldn't need voice over, because we would be able to see the screen. We wouldn't need jaws because we could see the screen. Braille could go back to its original use as a military code if the military wanted it. canes would be for old people who can't walk. Books would be regular sized and able to be carried around in a backpack. Dictionaries could fit on a coffee table rather than an entire bookshelf. In short, you would no longer need all the things you need now.
Does that mean you'd be able to bea fighter pilot or nascar driver, no, but it means you have a chance now. As it stands now, you have no chance at all. If you were sighted, you would.
Can you name me any way that it would be worse, other than the fact that you'd now have to see fat people in tiny bikinis when you go to the beach?
As someone that remembers seeing a little when I was 3 before I got canser that destroied my optic nerves. Yes I would get my sight back I'd jump at the chance. However I do have my terms I do not want cameras or whires sticking out of my head. I have real eyes and can see light out of 1 eye if seeing ment taring out my real eyes and putting in robotic ones I don't think I could do that either. It may sound a bit selfish to want it all or nothing but I had it all untill a stupid tumor fucked things up in there. Even if they can regrow optic nerves I have a larger problem to take care of first and that kills me to think about. That if they can regrow nerves that first they would some how have to get my tumor out but all that aside yes I want more then anything to see. Yes you can live with out sight there are alot of things we can live with out, we can live with out sight sound a lim or 2 but why live with out it if you don't have to? We can live 2 days by water alone, we can live with out technology we don't have the latest cell phone or tablit. Its not a need but a want. Sometimes that want may be so powerful that it seems like a need. Granted I do get the idea if you don't know what you lossed why get it and have to go through everything ajusting. Learning colors learning print, and so much more. If I got my sight back you know as good and better as sight is it would not be my primary sence because I already rely so much on hearing and touch. I am sure I would get destracted like awwwww hey look at that butterfly its so cuuuuute! Which is why it may take us a few months to learn what infents learn the first few years of there lifes. Yes it would be tough yes it would be chalanging. It would be fustrating because its not the snap of a light being turned on. In the end would it be worth it I think so. To be able to see my childs face or look at birds flying in the sky or playing Mario grabbing colorful mushrooms. The immages I can remember seeing from when I was younger although a little hazy remind me of what it was like to see and how much I want to see again. I have that want although I learned to serpress it. None of us need to fly or walk through walls turn invissible or talk to animals but its these abilatys that we don't have that seem completely out of grasp that makes us long for them. Man wanted to fly we couldn't fly natually so we built a way to fly a aircraft. Even before that our sence of wonder caused us to create boats and sail away and question everything we thought to be fact. Even today we question what we already know just 10 years ago Pludo was a planit and although I believe it sitill is 1 many people don't. If you could find out what it was like to see I think many of us would because you can go back you can cover your eyes if it really is to much to bare. The amount to fund for the sergery and adapting aside I would do it in a heart beat no second guesses.
Getting vision does guarantee that you will never have to ask for anything on the basis of your being blind. It would mean no more SSI for some of you, no more rehab counsellors and other such things for others, it would mean a lot actually.
If you do not consider blindness a disability never again ask for assistance because of your blindness, don't use or quote or rely on the Americans with Disabilities Act, since it only applies regarding disabilities.
So yes, especially in tight times, if finances permitted I would go through the process of gaining sight. I'm with Cody: I tend to take advantage of any and every opportunity that I can.
Being blind or not being blind has nothing to do with 'being myself' or any other such thing. Blindness is a physical condition regarding vision. It's no more myself than is my being 5 ft. 7 inches tall, moderately built and blond complected. Those who refer to it as such are speaking more about their ideology than anything else.
My blindness is an inconvenience sometimes but no more than that really. And let's face it, the older you get the harder it becomes to adjust to changes in your situation, regardless of whether or not you actually want to. I myself will be 33 this next June and while that's still a fairly young age I'm not sure how I'd do if they suddenly announced that they'd developed a procedure that, without sacrificing my eyes (I do have real ones although the lense was removed from the left one when I was a child), could give me 20/20 vision or close to it. As another user pointed out it wouldn't be a simple matter of shutting out all visual stimuli beyond what you were immediately trying to learn. Your eyes wold focus on the room and everything in it and it's entirely possble that you'd be overwhelmed just by that small area. And that's not to say what might happen if you happened to glance up and look out the window and catch a glimpse of the world. It seems to me that such things could drive you mad if you were unprepared for it.
I'm just glad this whole thing is fictional.
For some its not fictional at all.
It, as I have stated, not that seeing will make you happy, it will make your life easier.
We can't even go to the store and pick up a six pack of pop without having help to get that kind we want. If you can see, you simply walk in, grab the kind, and pay, and go. You've in manty cases saved about 30 minutes of your time instead of waiting for help, and in many cases getting the wrong thing on top of that.
Being sighted doesn't garrentee you'll be rich, but you could earn a living easier. Example, you could work as a city worker, or construction. In many of these jobs you don't need many skills except the ability to see what you are doing and understand.
Sure, mental people can see, but not understand, but we're giving you sight with all the rest you have.
Take away your technology, and what would happen? Your world now becomes darker, so to speak.
As things are improving for us, they are also improving for the sighted world, and sight just gives you the ability to enjoy all without the limits we face.
Be happy, but understand we are limited, and that is in many simple things, if we had sight we'd do without even thinking about them.
Is easier always better?
And what about the decidedly ignorant people you've met who know nothing about you or your life experience but they just know that your life is overall harder and you have it worse off than they have. Does the idea of proving them right or otherwise validating their ignorance by taking the cure OK with you?
Sure, I'm fine with that. Why in the world should I not live my life how I want to, just so I don't validate the claims of some mouth breather I may have met once who thought my life was hard? My life is hard. They're right. What does it matter if they're right, wrong, or pink with purple polka dots. What kind of basis for decision making is that?
Hell yes! Easier is always better.
Some of you can't even get to say the 7/11 down the street, and you are happy about that?
This isn't a put down, its a fact, and if you had even half of 2020 getting these 3 blocks would be second nature to you.
Why should a person want to live there life more difficult to prove to anyone else its good, and they are happy? I'm not a righ man, but I'll tell you what, I'd sure love to try it even if some say "well, these rich people aren't always happy, look at some of them." Doesn't have to apply to me.
I want to step up to the counter in my Starbucks and read what's new on the list, so I can try something else. I don't want to have to get the list half assed read, because the clerk is busy, doesn't speak English well, or simply doesn't read well. Lol
I went to the store on Saturday and I wanted a 12 pack of Peppsi. I got Peppsi, but it was diet. I didn't know it until I was home mixing it in a drink.
Okay I had 2 choices, deal with it, or waste some time to take it back. If I had had sight I'd have gotten Peppsi.
I chose to deal, because I had my drink ready, and didn't feel like walking back to the place, waiting to get help, and explaining.
Happiness, huh? Smile.
Wayne, you, Cody and I see things similarly on this it seems. But to us being blind isn't a religion. Proving how well a blind person does things is not part of our proseletyzing and we don't equate blindness with ourselves the way religious people equate their beliefs with themselves.
In answer to Godzilla's last question. You want the real answer?
I honestly coudln't give a crimeny blue fuck what people think about why I did it. Presumably, if I go do it, I have to take my own personal ownership of the situation, something I tend to do anyway. And then it means I've bade a choice that impacts not only me, but my daughter for whom I could go get things more quickly, other people who would never have to be put out in any way as a consequence of my blindness. Yes, we all are put out in various ways for each other, and part of being humans is to assist without complaint where we can. However, it's only responsible to remove any obstacles one can and any burden on other people. It's like going out and working, rather than living on the government. I'm not talking those who can't work or are struggling to find it, I mean the modern legends about those who supposedly are deliberate about sitting at home without working so that they can receive benefit.
As preposterous an idea as that particular legend is, I equally find it preposterous not to gain yet another advantage.
Look at it this way: You grew up speaking English, many of you. But how many of you have taken extra classes (outside school perhaps) to become familiar with a foreign language? All because you think it will benefit you on the job, in your neighborhood, etc.? And just because you now speak a second language, that doesn't mean you forgot your first one. And are you going to be all scaredy-cat to go get this second language because someone might call you a liberal for being bilingual?
What about survival skills? A concealed carry certification? Or anything else you have done, probably all of you on several or more counts, to improve your situation. There are some numbnuts out there, for instance, who refuse to learn a second language on the principal contribute to some so-called agenda.
And there's another kind of numbnuts pacifists out there who won't exercise or learn self defense or get a concealed carry when they live in high-risk neighborhoods, and when asked why, it comes down to some ideal.
By the way, that ideal doesn't protect them from the gang shooters. First responders do, or might, if they get there on time. And that comes from your tax dollars. You're paying for their "disability" if you will, based on their beliefs.
Sorry, beliefs just aren't worth that much to me. A bit like covering your face with a baby blankie in a driving snowstorm loaded with shrapnel, if you ask me.
absolutely not. have been blind since birth and it is all I have ever known.
I lost my sight twice in two years due to failed eye surgeries when I was a teen. Would I want my sight back if that were possible? yes, I'd take it back in a heartbeat and I feel stronger about that as I get older, especially now that I have a son. There is little to no hope of me getting any vision back according to the experts I've been to, but, although I don't think about it every day or every week for that matter, I'm not giving up hope all the same.
I really don't understand that, "It is all I've ever known" reasoning. The house you grew up in was all you knew until you went off to college. Your first kiss was all you'd ever known until your second kiss. If you'd only had dark chocolate, and liked it, would you not want to try light chocolate, simply because dark chocolate was all you've ever known? I don't understand how people can be so incurious about life and all it has to offer. So its all you've ever known, why does that mean it has to be all you'll ever know?
But trying light chocolate after only having had dark isn't likely to overwhelm you the way it might if you'd been blind your whole life and then suddenly you had sight or the other way around. As I said the only reason I might opt to get my sight back (not that I ever really had it), would be so I could get a job without having to go through what I like to refer to as Joke Rehab. It's been my experience that they usually spend more of their time telling you what they think you should do and why you shouldn't do what you're interested in than actually helping you achieve your own goals. And even if they do agree to help you with your own plans you have to deal with their hins, some sbtle and some less so, that you're doing the wrong thing. And it doesn't matter if it is in fact a field of work in wich a blind individual could realistically be successful. If it's not in one of the small boxes considered "safe" by JokeRehab you'll have to practically pull out their teeth to get teir support. So in that respect at least I might consider a procedure to give me sight.But again I'd be a little worried about the adjustment time since unlike sighted people going blind there are no rehab programs for the blind going sighted. LOL.
Prime example of having problems I wouldn't have if i could see. The Peapod web site has changed some junk and I had a bad time yesterday even placing an order for groceries. Talked to a tech who said the web designers could have cared less when they changed the site and now he is having to really get on the designers to straighten things out. Coming home from the store with the wrong stuff? yep I had it where a few items were missing. As you get older, the stuff that comes up gets real old.
I also wouldn't have to worry about audio captchas so garbled they might not even be there. Because as much as I like WebVisum I have noticed that there are some sites where the plugin can't solve the Captcha no matter how many times you try.
I've heard that captchas aren't always the easiest things for sighted people to solve, either. the add-on I use, Captcha Monster, wasn't even designed specifically for the blind. It just happens to work really well. True, there are captchas that it can't solve either, but having sight is no guarantee that we would be able to solve those stupid things.
Yes, and having sight does not give you many guarantees, but I guess you won't know for sure unless you get it back. If that's what you want, go for it. Let me know how it works out for ya.
The 'no guarantee' argument is fallacious on so many levels.
Who, but those who make that argument, have even brought that up? It's sort of like the way religous people will throw some pseudo claim out as a last-ditch effort.
People have made a lot of logically sound arguments for getting eyesight, and those who oppose it are relying on either complaining about the system they now use, or saying there would be no guarantee, or coming up with psycho/religion babble about changing oneself or accepting oneself.
In reality, it would change things, and I believe Cody;'s right. In order for sight to be effective, it would have to be brought on by a gradual process involving therapy. And you wouldn't lose everything you already have.
But what would happen afterwards? Everything that has been described, from no more relying on help, including incompetent help. No more expensive services which people on this site use and then complain about but don't stop using. No more requirements for accomodations, since lack of sight would then be a choice not a real bona fide disability that one could not help. It's not like we're talking about someone coloring their skin white. We're talking about some serious advantages that we spend a lot of time compensating for doing without. And Bea is absolutely right: the older you get the more of a drain it becomes. And the more dependents you have, the more you notice the problems as they affect unwitting innocent bystander participants.
So yeha, without the religion-style dogma of some, yeah, it would be logical. But statements like "there are never any guarantees" are the sign of the argument collapsing like a house of cards.
He said it, not me. I just happen to agree wholeheartedly.
I didn't say there were no guarantees.
I will say, however, that you guys have brought up a lot of points I hadn't thought of. Perhaps if there is an affordable treatment in my lifetime that appears to work, I may consider it. I won't be a damn test of it though. I've learned my lesson of how that can go. So, along with what you have said, I want to see the results first.
On another note, viewing it from a religious point is absolutely incongruous. I don't have faith in God or any such affiliations that I will be safe. My fate rests on my shoulders. I never even considered it to be religiously sound to keep my vision, because God put me on this Earth as a blind person for a purpose. So, I just want to clarify I'm not a puppet of God.
that's why I'm hoping that stem cells will be able to advance as far as they're saying. it will be a lot safer, and if it fails, no real harm done. and no wires or robotic eyes, either. I'm sure getting there isn't that simple, but that would be the end result, if it ends up working as expected.
I don't believe that God put you on this earth as a blind person. Most likely it was either a doctors mistake, your parents lack of carring for herself, or accident, or natures way.
Next, you say sighted people can't solve these things on the internet right? Here's the differents, if a web designer gets even a few complaints from the sighted shit gets changed, but they can get a shit load of complaints from us, and shit stays the same. Face it, we just aren't that large a market to care enough about to fix things.
We are truly lucky to have people that work to keep webvisum and other things up and running for us.
You'll not find me complaining about what I can't have, but give me a chance to have, and I'm going to want it.
No, I'd not do it at the risk of my life, or to have cameras sticking out of my head, but if I could in a good way, I'm doing it.
All I've ever known is not to be working a really good paying job, I've had only jobs that pay small wages, compared to what I might earn with my abilities as a sighted person, so am I sticking to "all I've every known?" No!
Give me change.
Yep, I would absolutely love to have 20/20 vision. hell, I'd even settle for 20/100 with coke-bottle nerd glasses, so long as I had a full visual field.
in addition to all the things everyone else has already pointe3d out about, I would love nothing in this world more than to be able to see my son with my own eyes as he plays baseball, does karate, and all the other stuff he does. I'd love to see his smile. Yes, of course I can hear it in his voice but let's face it, seeing is very powerful. the phrase, "a picture is worth a thousand words" wasn't just some clever saying; it makes sense to me. Having said that though, I would only take the risk if there were no chance of losing what vision I currently have, 20/400 and a scattered 1 degree field.
I think it would be extremely convenient to fully regain the sight i used to have. Would I do it if it was possible via some operation? I'm not sure. I would need to see stats on the success rate. I would need to know what the rehabilitation process entailed.
I will admit I have a fear of the unknown; hell, one of my three biggest fears is trying new foods. I have experience with sight; I had it for the first three years of my life, and have very vivid memories. What I don't have experience with is restoring sight and learning how to process and sort out visual information.
The thing that is most terrifying about this is that it makes me think of an infant. Infants and toddlers are taught to identify things by sight, and naturally learn to focus on objects and separate features of an object from one another. Would it happen the same way for recipients of this operation? I would think not. The adult brain is drastically different from that of an infant, and so this process of regaining sight, learning to process visual information, and learning to use it would be astoundingly overwhelming. I'm not sure if I would be willing to go through that process. I imagine that regaining an ability such as seeing, hearing, walking, etc. is just as hard as losing it, when you're going from 0 to 60. Your life has to be put on hold for a while so you can learn to adapt to a new lifestyle.
One has to wonder if there might possibly be a benefit to us being able to train our brains as adults. Could we, for an example only, train ourselves to see in more detail, or to distinguish objects faster or more clearer? Obviously there are physical limitations to it, but maybe there is something there that could be different. Its interesting to think about.
Cody what you point out is interesting.
You've probably heard that the older you get, the harder it is to learn things.
I'm only 42 now but yes, that is true. I've taken online courses for the Coast Guard, and all this material availability is an amazing dream for me. I know some fools would probably start talking accessibility this and accessibility that, but at its worst it's untold thousands of times better than the printed handouts and writing on the blackboard which made up my experience as a young person.
But even with this radical aspect aside, I've found something else: Sure, I can't memorize things nearly as quickly. Sure, it takes me longer to grasp a concept than it does for some of the young textin' fools my daughter's age. However, I have learned over half a lifetime *HOW* to learn. Meaning, I am infinitely better at picking out the material that is likely to be most important, and prioritizing it, than I was as a college student.
And yes, we teach little kids to sort things: "Pick out the green one," "Find the number 1", and all sorts of deliberate and not so deliberate things we teach our kids. We even do this with teenagers: "Go into your Google Playstore and look for a checkbook program that has the following features ..."
teaching them not just about checkbooks but how to settle down for more than five seconds without a lfao or a text or a Facebook post.
If the teens can learn to pay , attention to a task with phones vibrating, texts dinging, flashy things anywhere and everywhere, I think some of us older guys could hack learning to cope with similar stimulus overload.
It's not like we don't know how to prioritize: we do it all the time.
And, Domestic Goddess has a really valid point. I have not had any visual experience to bank on so I have not been left to wonder what the daughter's features feel like. But there is an area where I wish I could share with her: the visual arts and her photography. Not that I have a real emotional connection to either, except of course the chronicling of family events and the like, but I do obviously wish I could share it for the simple reason that it's hers. I think it's hard for her to take support from me for her artistic ventures, simply because she knows I can't have a direct opinion on how it looks. Sure, I notice how professional she is with managing it, and trust the opinions of people I know who understand these things, but to someone in the visual arts, they could no more take a compliment from a blind guy than some of you musicians / composers could from someone who is stone deaf. So because it's hers, I do wish I could see it.
And I'm pretty sure I miss a lot from people's expressions, possibly more than even they know at their highest point of frustration with it.
That's wild, man, Ryan/Miss M, I've never run across anyone that had That condition besides myself. Anyway, yeah, I'd do it in a heartbeat. It'd take a lot of getting used to, as previously said by I don't know how many other people. But wouldn't that be the cool part? I think it would, as someone who's never seen.
I can understand the change that would happen if a person that has been blind all of life could see. Think of it this way.
If you could see, you could choose not to see, and so adjust at your own pace.
You get a new item in your house over the old item you had. You can choose to use it or not. You've still got the old itme, but the new one works better, faster, and quieter, so you can actually experience the new one as you like, because your old one still works.
I'm not saying we should crave vision, being that I am one that has had the benefits of it for a while, but I am saying if given a choice, why not try it out?
Why say your life would not be better, or that you really don't need that new item, because you are content, when you understand the new item would and could improve your life?
Here is another example. I've read that some of you can't tie your shoes. Now, I can tie my shoes, but I don't remember learning to do so because I could see the laces, I've always done this by feel. Even when I could see the laces, I don't look, I just tie them.
Okay, imagine if you could tie them now, because you can see them. Look at all the different types of shoes you could now wear.
You put on your Converses, and stroll to the store 6 blocks away a few times, and you tell me how its better not to see! Smile.
It certainly is interesting to think about. You'll be able to see things, but it will take time to learn to distinguish exactly what you are seeing. There are so many variables. Along with distinguishing objects and Print, it'll take time to learn colors. Also, distance and depth perception will come in to play.
Well my blindness was due to a doctor's mistake. My mother was using a IUD at the time I was conceived and it had failed. But the doctor didn't perform a simple test that would have shown them this, so chemicals from the device kept getting into my mom's blood stream. That led to me being born prematurly, which in turn led to my being blond since I had to spend my first three months of life on oxygen.
What does IUD stand for?
More than likely, the reason I am blind is because my mother was an alcoholic, (and still is from what I have seen, unlike most of my family), and she drank while she was pregnant with me. Nobody ever came out and told me this. I figured that was the case after doing some research about optic nerve hypoplasia, and that was one of the possible reasons mentioned.
Enter Uterus Device. That is close enough.
It is a device placed inside a woman to keep her from becoming with child, but in the past, sometimes they don't work.
I understand the new models don't create this issue anymore, and soon as a woman knows she's with child it should be removed.
Yup. And had the doctor been competant such would indeed have been done in my case. But it wasn't. And as often seems to happen in military hospitals the records of my prenatal care and birth mysteriously vanished not long afterward. A fire or a flood is what they said but I rater suspect they were disposed of so my parents would have no means of seeking compensation. But such is life I suppose. But in order for me to consider taking my chances on a procedure to give me sight A. it would have to be enough vision to make it worthwhile (.E. enough for me to drive at least during the day), and B. the process would need to be gradual to allow time to get accustomed to this new way of processing information.
It will also be interesting to see how they would know when you have all of your vision back, without giving too much or not enough treatment. When it comes to testing, the person being treated can't judge that alone, unless perhaps they had vision in the past. For some, a doctor won't be able to hold up some Print and ask the person to read it. I'm sure there's a way, but I'm not sure how that would be determined.
They do this with animals, so say some in the biological sciences, so if they can tell with an animal, they would be able to tell with us also, I presume, since we can communicate.
Its simple. They have a machine which can measure your vision by the reflection of light from your retina, and the degree of angle on your eye. Its highly technical, but its available already. If you want to go to the olympics in goalball, you'll get to know the machine.
I can't think of a reason NOT to learn to see if given the opportunity. There is no advantage in being blind. I suspect the reason some people don't want to see is that they belong to a group of blind people. If they see then that ceases to be their group.
And, referring back to an early post, what is this "beauty of blindness" concept? I understand the beauty of music, fragrence, language, and even data structures, but blindness? All the things I take pleasure in are somethings. Blindness is a nothing, a blank. That's like finding beauty in a vacuum.
BTW, I am totally blind from birth.
It's not beauty, but rather acceptance. I wouldn't go that far out on a limb to say there is beauty in blindness.
Also, I don't let any group define me. I am affiliated with the NFB, but that is not my entire life. I go to them for when I need help and advice. The problem with some people is they get wrapped up in the group and end up going beyond its purpose.
speaking of peapod.com I had a prob with them too recently in placing orders
I guess as a middle aged guy I should quit the workout routine and just return to the beer belly days? Because that would be self-acceptance? And with proper training and blah blah blah I could learn to function with a huge gut I haven't even had yet just to say that I did?
Nah, I'm opting for working out since it gives me physical advantages not just in health but overall strength and stamina. Guess that makes me a self-loather. After all, I have incurred the occasional injury while working out. Oh, and by working out that may make me so-called normal, and according to some, fighting what is so-called normal is somehow socially superior. Hmm.
I do agree with you, Leo. And I'd like to point out once again that I don't think this is a bad idea. I just think, like any major life change, it needs to be carefully planned before hand. When a procedure is first introduced, the risk of complications tends to be higher, much like bugs in glitches upon the original release of a new software, for example. But in time, they are identified, and fixed. I also think the lifestyle of the individual needs to be considered. Are you relying a job you won't be able to take much time off from? Is your life style very fast paced? and if it is, would it cause you any harm to slow down for awhile while you adjust? If so, and if said life style is working out for you, then why not wait until a slower point in your life? Also, what kind of support are you going to have access to after the procedure? Some of the adjustment can't just be done completely by yourself. At least, I wouldn't think so. Even if you learn to identify colors by relating them to things you already know, like smells, there's always the issue of photos, print text, ETC. Now, I realize a lot of us already know the basics of printed text, but do you know all the fancier fonts and styles?
Bottom line: I wouldn't write it off just because it would be a huge change. But don't just blindly jump into it without at least attempting to prepare yourself for what you'll be getting into.
I think many of you are missing the point. speaking for myself only, I'm not trying to advocate not embracing change. in fact, I'm someone who jumps on every opportunity I find, or that directly comes my way. however, sight isn't one of those I'd choose to take. would I adapt accordingly, though, if I somehow became sighted? sure. am I knocking those who think differently than I do? not at all.
I'll grant that I've always been curious as to what it feels like to actually see, but my concern would be what would happen if I got sight, had it for a while and then, as with the gu in At First Sight, decided liked my life better the way it was.
Chelsea, your post is a contradiction in terms. You cannot both "jump on every opportunity that comes your way", and then not jump on one that comes your way. Really that idea, at its purest form, just feeds the argument that essentially those who say they wouldn't do it, wouldn't do it simply because they are afraid to do so.
For us, arguably, there is no greater change, theoretically speaking, than going from blind to sighted. So for you to say that you welcome change, and jump on every possible opportunity, then to say that you wouldn't jump on that one, gives me the sense that in this instance you are afraid of the change. Brian's post after yours supports this. Every person on this board who has said they wouldn't do it has either said it was because the life they have now would be changed, or because they don't know how they'd handle the effect afterwards. That is the very definition of being afraid. You fear losing the comfort you have now, or you fear not having the same level of comfort when you become sighted.
I feel that, if you are going to continue in this vein of argument, that it would behoove you to at least argue honestly. There is no sin in admitting you are afraid. Saying, "I don't think I would because I would be terrified" is perfectly fine and valid. Why do you shrink from it?
Well, I'm sure if you give it a try and want to go back to the way it was before you went through the proceedure, they could just as easily make that happen.
I've said what I needed to say here, so I won't repeat myself. I don't care how benefitial it may seem. You can not honestly sit here and say it will work out this way, because you haven't experienced it firsthand, period.
I can say I've experienced it. I once could see lots, so I understand how it differs.
Now if you could see I highly doubt you'd wish to go back, but that be lots easier to get back to being gblind then getting to see, so that could be fixed. All you'd need to do is wear a sleep shade for an easy solution.
Pardon me, I didn't think of those who were able to see at one point.
if I was afraid, I'd have no problem saying so. people are gonna think what they want regardless, so all I can do is present my truth.
What the hell? Some of my last post was cut out, but that's pretty much what I was going to say. People assume too much sometimes. And, for the record, I'd rather come across as a pussy than come across as an ungreatful, insecure one. Then again, it really doesn't matter to me how I come across. I ain't trying to impress anyone.
I see both sides of the coin here: On one hand, You can't just assume that if you can't honestly see a valid reason for refusing change other than fear, no such reason exists. On the other hand, Cody, I do agree that when you say you jump at every opportunity for change...except this one, and later tell us you aren't afraid, without telling us what it is, it does leave me wondering. At the same time, I'm still hung up on this idea that blindness sets us back. it certainly doesn't feel that way to me. But I will freely admit the reason for this is because I've never known any differently. I've always felt that, while there's no harm in imagining your life another way, it's better to be happy with what you have than to want something you don't have. But then again, I don't have a chocolate bar right now. Am I upset about this? am I going to go on a raging rant about the chocolate bar that I don't have? No. But if I had the opportunity to acquire a chocolate bar, of course I would jump at it. This isn't a life changing opportunity, though.
I'm well aware of the fact that I've contradicted myself several times in this post, but the truth is: I'm honestly really on the fence here. One thing I am absolutely sure about, though, is that the choice to see, or not to see, is neither right nor wrong, as long as you've made the decision with confidence.
I pretty much agree with what has been said; in fact, this conversation came up between my grandmother and I, and when I explained that the adjustment that would need to be made would be next to impossible for me (almost like someone who once could see losing their vision), she could not seem to understand my perspective no matter how much I explained it to her; she actually rudely stated that "I'm just too set in my ways, and will never be open to new things...". Very far from true, actually. I'm glad I'm not the only one who feels this way, after all.
And, I probably should've read all of the posts before responding. I too have a condition similar to Optic Nerve Hypoplasia; where the only known cure is some form of stim sell procedure; so if there was a way for me to just gradually gain my sight in order to help me adjust, then sure, I would go for it. But onestly, I don't know if I would be up for such a drastic life change as this. But as some have already said, I guess the desire to take (or not to take) advantage of the opportunity to see depends on the aspects of each individuals life...
Here's my perseption about "jumping at every opportunity" and the idea of contraditions. You have a choice of going for an opportunity, or letting it go. However, some opportunities seem to be benefitial. In fact, you wouldn't think they were opportunities in the first place, otherwise you wouldn't go for them. But, that brings up a good question. Are opportunities always benefitial?
Maybe the statement "jumping at every opportunity" is a little far fetched, because there are always opportunities that someone won't go for. Here's an example.
Let's say you find a wallet on the ground. In the wallet, there is a debet card, and an additional $1,000 in cash, plus another credit card inside it. Now, you have many choices and opportunities before you. Would you take the wallet? Would you just take the cash? I'm not trying to be all technical about how or what people leave in their wallets, either. Ugh.
Another example might be you go to a party. Kids start drinking, smoking, and they even have cocaine that they offer you to snort. Would you jump at that opportunity?
In short, life is full of opportunities. People may go for several good ones, but they will not go for others.
I suppose this'll be judged as another pathetic argument, in some way, so go on and amuse me some more. Lmao.
In life people hate change. Microsoft says there getting rid of something, people complain.
Someone says you must move, its difficult.
You have to start getting up at 4 instead of 6, its a bitch.
Seeing or not seeing is change, and change is difficult for some.
From the Merriam-Webster onlind dictionary:
Definition of OPPORTUNITY
1: a favorable juncture of circumstances <the halt provided an opportunity for rest and refreshment>
2: a good chance for advancement or progress
Unlike the temptation to steal and/or use illicit and harmful drugs, a chance to see is, by these definitions, an opportunity.
I used to think like many of you when I was in my early 20s. But a bit of history: people went from pre-mechanization to a mechanized society. People went from very little technology in the early 1900s - my brandparents' generation - through computers. And those people, the ones who made it anyway, were quite optimistic about change and science, unlike today's elderly who frequently just get stuck in their ways.
I am surprised that nobody else wants to touch the responsibility / entitlements / lifestyle issue.
If it ever becomes possible and economically feasible to see, it would be a lifestyle choice and not a disability to remain blind. For those who say "it's not a disability, it's an inconvenience," well then, all rights accorded by the Americans with Disabilities act would not apply because it's not the Americans with Inconveniences act.
Ironically, I think gaining sight if I could would only be an extension of the self-reliant lifestyle I embrace. After all, doing so would mean probably getting paid better. Who are we kidding? The blind in general make less money than their sighted counterparts for the same work. We'd have more opportunities for employment. After all, many on here use the social systems because they cannnot find work, and we all know people's ideology about what they want to believe we can or can't do plays a major part in this. Wouldn't it be cheating the social system if you could otherwise gain sight, be off the systems and have nothing between you and any employment you could find? Gaining sight would just be a mere extension of the self-reliant responsible lifestyle you already do lead. It's an extension of what your father taught you as a kid, to put your best foot forward and to strengthen the weakest link.
I would support someone who wanted to remain blind if that technology existed to give us sight, only if they were honest about it and said it was a lifestyle and not a disability, meaning society would then owe them no accomodations. All that expense is given to us, a population who if we vanished nobody would notice, because of a decided-upon moral imperative that they should, based on the fact that we cannot manage as well without it. If sight were possible, the situation would be that we were choosing to not manage as well. Once it becomes a choice, then all your benefits will disappear, all blind-related services gone. All gone. But in their place? Complete freedom, the only environment where the human spirit really thrives.
Any of you who travel in and out of country, go to school, have jobs, go places and do things, by your very nature prove my point. If you use any technology, not just sit on the sidelines, you already are able to see better than people who were blind in the 60s and 70s.
Our iPhones and Androids are visual extensions of us and when I think about it, I get rather emotional actually. I remember well when I only had access to books out of date, few in number, and highly restricted material. Now we can read everything on the net at the same time as our sighted counterparts. Now with our mobile devices, we can identify packages, look up instructions for how to use things, etc.
There was a time we never got Braille manuals for commercial products. Now if you have a Braille display, you can see to read the instructions you download onine. And you participate online, which is the great equalizer, in places where people don't know whether you're blind or not. We've already come so far, even in my own lifetime. Far away from the drudgery of manual labor where you Brailled everything out, then to type it all out letter perfect on typing paper, spending all your time with the mechanics and very little of it learning the material, all the way forward now to where we access materials in real time with our sighted counterparts. Now if there was technology that feed up my hands so I need not carry a cane, and would allow me to go for a run in my neighborhood, sure I'd use that too, and never again impose on someone else to be guided someplace new. All of these compensations we develop for ourselves and far too often have had developed for us, think of all your creative energies you would expend elsewhere rather than compensation, if you could see. It would benefit the world at large rather than a small minority who if it vanished is so insignificantly small, the world at large would never know the difference. Instead of compensating around all these things we compensate around, we would leap forward and use our creative energy that we have had to employ to benefit society at large. We would be like the Steppe people, raised in hard conditions, who were smart enough to embrace the civilizations (that they had conquered), and implemented amazing creative changes borne of a life of necessity. The steppe people who remained tribal steppe people are no more. Those who entered civilization, and changed it, still exist in the DNA of millions of Europeans and Chinese today.
If I refused to gain sight, I think it just might be one of the more narcissistic things I ever did, presuming on others to continue to help me. That would be true, even though those instances get rarer and rarer with technological developments. It would be a mere extension of the self-reliant lifestyle, or "independence," if you will, not a denial of it. After all, I've taken every single opportunity I could, and fought for many of them, to enhance myself via technology in order to compeete and participate more fully in society. So to me, gaining sight will probably someday be a logical extension. I do not see myself as having the luxury of ideology or beliefs or religion, which can excuse all manner of refusal to change, or refusal to embrace responsibility.
That's true. But it does no good to sit around pining for something that may or may not come to pass in our lifetime. And the older you get the harder it can sometimes be to adapt. I certainly wouldn't choose to have sight if the procedure to achieve that didn't become available till I was in my sixties or older. It might have been different if I'd had sight once and still rememberd what that was like. Now if the procedure were to become available in the next several years I might consider it, but I'd still be worried about complications. It's like watching TV and a commercial for a new medication comes on and they list the sideeffects. Half the time it seems like the sideeffects are even worse than whatever it was the medication was supposed to cure in te first place.
I agree that if the technology becomes available, and we choose not to take it, provided the risk of complications is relatively low, then of course we should not continue to ask for benefits and handouts. But not everyone who refuses the surgery would exhibit this double standard. And if someone does, and I'm sure someone would try, they have a choice: Take advantage of this opportunity, or give up your current disability benefits. Your choice.
Ryan, your example does have some validity. People have bragged about the better experiences of taking drugs, claiming they had none of the side effects. At the same time, I think it's pretty clear that taking drugs that have been scientifically proven to potentially kill a user with just one use are extremely risky. Likewise, if a surgery to regain sight came with similar risks, I wouldn't take it, nor would I blame anyone else for refusing.
As to Bryan's comment about 'pining'? The only pining going on here that I see is the people set in saying they would not change after a certain age, or blind so-called training compensates all, or what have you.
I personally hope that in my 80s I am still neuroplastic enough to embrace change, and that is a non-narcissistic lifestyle choice based on self reliance rather than religion or ideology.
I'm not sure whether this will come via medical implant or just technological extensions. After al, as I pointed out earlier, we alredy do things independently now that required help even 10 years ago. And any of you with a Mac, for instance, can do any maintinance tasks on the machine with no sighted help. With our devices, we're already seeing packages, if you wll: not fully seeing what they look like, but for all practical usefulness being able to identify them. Still more slowly than our sighted counterparts. And speed is, and always has been, the enemy of the blind. Anyone who successfully overcomes both speed challenges and input challenges for us will have taken us enormous leaps forward, whether it's by a smartphone or an implant.
I see what you're saying about opportunities, and I can't disagree with the dictionary. Lol. However, we all know full well how people are, and if they can try to justify why they went and did something, thus trying to make it come across as a good opportunity.
I agree with Leo completely. I'm quite surprised at the number of people who say they wouldn't jump at the opportunity to be able to see. Sure it would be a big change but worth it when you consider all the things you'll be able to do for yourself that you couldn't do before.
I don't think it's so much "all the things we couldn't do", as much as it is "the things we could do more efficiently". Many of us already live more fulfilling lives than those of some of our sighted counterparts. Gaining sight, in itself, won't magically give you abilities you never had before. You will still have to learn. if you're not in a good position to do that for whatever reason, you probably won't take well to the change, whether you want it or not. this is why I say we all need to consider this decision carefully before jumping into it, because it's not going to be the end all be all. If you don't adapt well to change, or have trouble learning other methods of doing the same things, it's probably not for you. And if your life already has all the things you feel you need, and you're not relying on any benefits that come with being blind, then you won't be putting yourself or anyone else at a disadvantage by remaining blind, though ironically, these are probably the people with the best mental capacity to handle the change. At the same time, those who have the least to lose also stand to gain the most.
Just food for thought:
All of us, working people included, are getting benefits because of being blind. Whether it's assistance at the airport, web sites made accessible, apps made to work with the VoiceOver, someone reading the occasional screen on a device that went kaput, or any number of other things that cost other companies and citizens. This is precisely why it would not be optional, unless I could choose to forfeit all of that or get sight, because the only reason anyone does any of that for us is because we cannot. But in that situation, we could but chose not, even if the choice to take the responsible path was costly. Responsibility usually is.
Oh, and "not the be all end all," What does that even mean? Has any of us even suggested that? It's just the same types of debate tactics used by the six day creationist or the Planet Nibiru types use. It's nonfalsifiable. How would you prove what was be all end all? What does "be all end all" even mean?
But responsibility has meaning, people doing for us what we can't has meaning, our avoiding situations that burden other people has meaning. All of us know that, because we all do it.
If you want to go into the specifics of benefits, everyone technically gets them in some way. I can't count all the times I've been on a family road trip, and we had to stop and ask for directions because we didn't know the area. with the appropriate skills, and the best use of those skills, that's all blind people should, in theory, have to ask for as well. No we can't drive. yes, we need to rely on either a driver, or public transportation, but there are other people who cannot drive. Plus, it creates more jobs.
don't get me wrong. I do see your point, leo. But if we do regain sight, for those of us who have been totally blind since birth, in the best case cinario, we will still need to rely on others somewhat to help us relearn some things. In short, there will always be a need for "benefits" of some kind, both temporary and permanent.
If I'm wrong, I will freely admit it when everyone in the world is walking around, free from the need of all benefits based on limitations they have.
I think you're mistaking benefits for assistance. Everyone needs assistance at times in asking for directions or for carrying a heavy box up the stairs, but that is not a benefit. Getting money from the government simply on the basis that you are blind is a benefit. Programmers making software that reads the screen for us is a benefit. Having companies include that software like apple does is a benefit. Having braille signs by law is a benefit. Asking for directions is not a benefit.
I think there is a large amount of misunderstanding going on here. Those of us who are saying that you should take the opportunity are not saying that suddenly your life will be perfect and you'll be able to instantaneously become a fighter pilot, hockey player and race car driver the very next day. What we're saying is that the opportunity for us to be on an equal playing field with the sighted world will be there. As of right now, there is no possibility of us driving a sports car, for example. Now not all sighted people can do that, certainly, but that is because of circumstances, not disability. Perhaps they don't have a driver's license or a sports car to drive, but they can, in theory, get those. Even if we were to be sitting in the seat of a sports car, with the key in the ignition, we couldn't drive the sports car because we'd crash. The only thing that would change that is sight.
Yes, there would be a time of adjustment, but you would not be infirmed during this time. Its not like you would suddenly lose every sense you ever had for a time. You'd be on the exact same field you are now, you'd just be working to get off of it. You would still know how to read braille, use a screen reader, and all that. So your life wouldn't actually change very much during that period.
So really, the only argument you're left with, at least that has been promoted here, is that you would experience a great change in your life and you mmight not want to go through that. That, in simplest terms, is fear, and you should never let fear control yur life. You're willing to cross a street with a cane, and live on your own now, why are you afraid of jjust one more change in your life? In all probability, your station in life wouldn't be degraded if the process failed for any reason. You'd be right back to where you are now, so what are you afraid of?
No wonder they hire you to write, Cody, if my memory serves me regarding your career goals. You summed it all up like the rest of us couldn't. Thank you.
Well regardless of how others feel about those who would choose not to see after having been blind their whole lives, particularly older individuals, the worry about possible complications and sideeffects from the procedure is, as far as I'm concerned, a justifiable one. Even if I hadn't accepted my blindness years ago I still might not have a procedure done simply because of the possibility of complications. And no way would I be a guinea pig for such a procedure. Besides, it would probably be an expensive procedure and if I know medical insurance companies they probably would not cover it because it isn't strictly speaking a necessary procedure for survival.
Leo pointed out the example of us blind people asking for assistance in the airport when talking about benefits. If that's what we're talking about, then no, the need will not suddenly go away upon gaining sight. If we're strictly talking about assistive technology, government related SSI benefits, not including other financial assistance for those who have fallen on hard times and need a bit of a boost while they get back on their feet, then yes, I do agree with you.
In response to your point about the procedure, Brian, I don't think anyone is disagreeing that acting as a test subject for this procedure should be necessary. I'm pretty sure we're talking strictly about when the procedure is proven to be both safe and highly affective. On the other hand, if the government/health insurance providers cannot or will not cover this for whatever reason, it wouldn't be fair to hold that much against people who refuse it. Likewise, if you're living a life where you are self-sufficient, and you will not be relying on any other person to provide you with any sort of lasting benefits, I.E. screen reader support, SSI, AT, ETC., then refusal of such a procedure shouldn't be held against you. Because I know someone is thinking this, yes, I know that screen readers have to be updated often to keep up with the advancing updates for any given operating system. You'd have to be okay with using out of date software, and/or learn to code your own screen reader in order to continue using one without relying on others. So yes, I agree this situation is very unlikely. To address your final argument of fear of change, that question is still really hanging in the air. The only thing I can really say about that, personally, is that I would take the opportunity to see unless it would prevent me from seeking other opportunities that I currently seek. So, in a way, I guess you could say that yes, I am scared that regaining site might slow me down a bit while I relearn things, and therefore might inhibit me from pursuing my other goals in life that I've been after for years. In that sense, I admit I am afraid. But when I really stop to think about how quickly I usually adapt to change, and how I would want to wait until the procedure came with a relatively low risk of side effects, the risk of failing to achieve my goals is quite low compared to the benefit of adding to that with the additional things I could do with sight. All that considered, I don't see a personal reason to refuse the procedure. This is what I mean when I say we should all consider our own situations before accepting or denying this new change.
We will lose the benefit of pre-boarding ahead of everyone else, though, and the right to request assistance through a strange airport we have not been to.
Oh and here's another critical thinking question for a sort of Creationist-style statement: What the crimeny blue fuck is "accepting your blindness?" What a religion-based crock of shit. Blindness = vision loss, whether you 'accept' or 'reject' it. It simply exists if your vision is sufficiently impaired. I know what some people think it means: 'get on board with my priest, my program, my dogma, do as we say, ...'
Sorry, I don't buy it. My lack of sight is not an entity. This is like saying 'accept my limitations imposed by gravity'. OK I guess. Except, if we could affect the ability to fly, we would. Oh yeah, we did that, a hundred years ago. And all the anti-flight people, usually from the churches by the way, came out in droves saying how dangerous it was, how we need to 'accept that we are not made to fly' (whatever that is supposed to mean).
Truth is, we would not have evolved, or developed, if we did like religion says and 'accept our station', 'accept our blindness' or 'accept our inability to fly.' We've developed tools, language, techniques, and more simply because we weren't willing to just accept things the way they were.
OK. I have an admission, and a question for those that don't want this.
First, for the admission. I can agree with those who say they wouldn't have the surgery after a certain age, such as in their seventies. The way I see it, the procedure is probably very expensive. You only have a bit left to live. Is it really economical to spend the rest of it learning to see well enough? Utility versus cost, I believe, and the utility is going to be lower the less time you have. However, I don't get the idea about earlier surgery, such as when you actually have a chance of using your sight for more than a year.
Now the question. If you, and by you I mean someone who doesn't want this surgery, lost your hearing (if you're deaf, then you lose your fingers, all of them). In fact, even if your not deaf, consider the loss of your fingers. Hearing is closer than the finger loss to blindness, but now imagine that you had to live like this for ten years. You'd get used to it, would you not? So now, ten years later, you can get back your hearing and your fingers (how about you just lost the ability to feel with them but could still move them? That's better). Would you take the opportunity?
The times i asked my eye doctor about this, the first question has been what percent success rate is there? Under 60 percent, forget it. I also decided I won't have any surgery; I would let them inject cells into my eyes. Again, would ask about the success rate. I'm blinded from retinopathy of prematurity, never have seen. Would gho for a little sight if the success rate was high. Would go to a training center to learn about seeing. I'm 64; don't think there will be a procedure in my lifetime.
Leo it's accepting the fact that you're probably likely to be blind your whole life and therefore not spending all your time being depressed about it. That's what accepting your blindness is. It doesn't always have anything to do with religion. I'm not even religious myself and in fact I have a deep distrust of religion in general. So your argument has no merit as far as I'm concerned. But as frustrating as my blindness gets when it comes to finding employment I'm still not entirely certain being able to see would be worthwhile. Seems to me it would complicate my life more than not. Besides, then I'd have to worry about car insurance, which I'm content not to have to bother withnow since there's no evidence that either the NFB's supposed car or the Google Car is going to work out or, even if tey do, that it'll happen in any of our lifetimes. In fact I've heard that the Google car in particular has already had some states passing legislation to ban it. Besides like I said, this procedure if one existed would almost have to be extremely expensive, and if health insurance providers refused to cover it then I'd be screwed even if I wanted to have it done. And you know oke Rehab wouldn't cover it since they'd be losing a client. As for training centers there are no training centers for the newly sighted the way there are for the newly blind, or if there are they probably aren't very common.
Benefits aren't only for the blind and siabled physically. Many others receive them for other reasons, so even if you refused to see you'll keep your benefits.
What you won't get is advancement in your life no matter what your age was.
It is possible right now to have your nose fixed, or your face changed, but many people remain as they are, so this surgery won't be any different from any other.
Yes, personal, but like flying, if I could? Smile. Yeah!
I see the point with excepting keeps coming up. Of course you'll except, or die, or be mentally a reck, so sure you except your plight in life, but if someone came and said to you "I'll give you a million dollars no strings attached," well are you going to remain in your same financial situation, or are you taking the money?
This is how I see it. Sure, I except I'm not rich, and I'm happy as can be, but.
I can see that some would actually get mad with others that decided to see. "what did you go and do that stupid thing for?" "Now all you're going to do is look down on us that can't see." The ones that decide will be "those people!" Smile.
Exactly. This is what's called a hypothetical situation. This means that the process has no side-effects, works all the time, has been tested and does not require cameras, wires, etc. If this were real, and there is no current way, then this wouldn't be the case. Can't you guys imagine, for a while?
Synthesizer, you are asking many of us to imagine a situation we have never been in. For those of us who have been totally blind since birth, or soon after, losing our hearing or fingers would not be the same thing, because we learned to live with these things. We did not learn to live with sight. that said, I can't imagine having wings, and using them to fly like a bird would. this doesn't mean I wouldn't consider acquiring them if they ever became available.
Leo, by "accepting our blindness", we're not saying turn a blind eye to any and all change or advancements. At least, I'm not. it just means, well, you're blind, and as of now, nothing exists to change that, so you might as well learn to live with it and get on with your life. Now, to me, "embracing one's blindness" would be more like what I believe you're describing. Since blindness, to me, is nothing more than a characteristic, I neither embrace nor turn away from it.
Yes, although many here had their sight before. But for those of us completely-blind people since birth, you can certainly imagine that the sighted have some ability you don't completely understand, but enables you to do infinitely more than you can currently. Wouldn't this alone make you consider getting this ability?
Also, about your hearing or ability to feel, I was simply making an analogy. You know how much this sense of yours matters to you. If you could get it after losing it, it would be worth it, I'm sure. Thus, why do you believe sight is less important? If you don't understand how sight would be on the same level with your other senses (indeed on a higher level), I don't understand your thinking and we can stop right there.
I also accept my blindness. I know that there's nothing I can currently do about it and will deal with it. I don't endlessly bemoan the fact I don't see, nor do I spend all my time thinking about fixing it. If I get a chance like this, with no restrictions, why not get an extra sense? It certainly helped the sighted, and I believe that if not useful, it would not have evolved. We have eyes because we are supposed to detect light. They don't work. That doesn't mean they aren't supposed to. Don't spend your time lamenting your status, but attempts to improve it.
I don't know where people get the idea that refusing a procedure that might or might not give us sight means we'll never advance in our lives. And I see no reason why tose who've been blind since birth, to use folks like myself as an example, should be punished for not aving such a procedure done if it ever became available. Not everybody is very adaptable, so not everyone could adjust to that.
i think it would be awsome, because then i could watch movies and stuff- and actually be able to see what is going on.
not rely on audio description (because they dont always get everything!)
it would be so cool to see the screen like a normal sighted user
The not daptible excuse is my least favorite of all the excuses. Basically what you're saying is that you still want to receive money from the government, and aid from all kinds of different companies, for a disability you're choosing to have, simply because you don't want your life to change. People can adapt to anything, there is no adaptibility talent. Its not singing or throwing a football, its adapting. If you can use an IPhone to read your text messages, you can adapt to any other situation.
I don't remember ever claiming that not seeing refuses you advancement. If that were the case, we would all be the equivalent of infants, because merely learning to talk would require advancement. What I did claim was that seeing would be an advancement, and would improve your ability to perform tasks. You should already know this. Have you ever had a problem because your computer wouldn't talk at a certain time? Have you ever had a problem reading all the print papers that come your way because you don't have your scanner with you? Have you ever had the problem of not knowing how to get somewhere because your GPS was out and you couldn't read a print map available at the nearest gas station for a dime? Then you can see how having sight would be better. Why not improve your situation? If it ends up annoying you, simply don't look anywhere. Easy enough.
Cody, I will give Brian one thing I couldn't give others who say they would refuse the procedure: At least he's admitting he's not very adaptable.
Bryan, I usually agree with you, but I think you've got the wrong end of this. We all adapt to things, and evolve, because that's what humans do. We either change or get left behind when the situation calls for it. how would blindness as a lifestyle choice rather than a disability really benefit you? If society looks down on us just for being blind when we can't help it, imagine what the average person will think if a person can either choose or not choose to be blind. If it becomes a choice, you're pretty much on your own. What are you going to do, have blindness pride parades?
Besides, you're talking about having to pay for car insurance, which is one of many expenses associated with having a car. Step back for a second, though, and think about how many things you've had to buy that you wouldn't have to as a sighted person. Some of these may not apply, but let's just assume you've paid for a screen reader, OCR software, a notetaker, cab or Paratransit fare so you could travel independently, etc. Let's face it, even having an IPhone is an additional expense, since it's the most accessible phone there is, when the average sighted person could go into Wal-mart and grab a $20 cheap phone if they so desired. The fact that most people do have smart phones nowadays is a moot point. While the note taker and screen reader costs may seem like a once and done deal, you do have to pay for upgrades or repairs, just as someone might do with a car. And don't even get me started about how expensive cabs are, and how much of a waste of money Paratransit is when they screw you over more times than not. But we do these things to get from point A to point B, to keep our jobs, to be on a level playing field with sighted people, hell, even to keep our dignity. So, how is it honestly different? Everyone is faced with financial burdens, but out of either necessity or choice, people shoulder those responsibilities and weigh what they have to gain or lose. That's how it is with any major purchase. People gripe about their cars all the time, complaining about gas prices and repair costs, but I'll tell you one thing, I would give just about anything to be able to drive. It's the one thing I truly hate about being blind. Having grown up in a rural area, I've felt the pain of never being able to go anywhere unless my parents approved of where I was going, because they were the ones who were driving me places, so they could lay down the law and say no, and I had absolutely no grounds to disagree with them. Even now, I want very much to move out, and live with my boyfriend, but my parents would flip shit if they found out we were even dating because he's black. He's visually impaired too, he does have some vision, but certainly not enough to drive up here and bail me out. To get to where he is, I would probably have to pay a ridiculous cab fare. He lives just over an hour away from me. But you can't exactly cram your stuff into a cab if you're moving out, either. And you can't hire a moving van until you're 25, or so I've heard, and I've still got 2 years to go until I reach that age. Besides, you have to drive those, and I don't think I'll be doing that anytime soon. But if I could drive, do you know how much simpler it would be? It would be a snap. It would be a breeze. I wouldn't have to wait 2 years, or leave three quarters of my stuff behind. I would just be able to load up the trunk of my car and go!
Don't get me wrong. I have my doubts, too, as I said previously in this topic. However, I hesitate because of the possible risks and side effects such a procedure could have. If my physical health or even my life was in jeopardy, I wouldn't go through with it, even though I know people who would tell me that it wouldn't matter, and I should just take the plunge. But if people adjust to a life without sight, surely they can adjust to a life with it. I'm not exactly sure how it would be done, and I'm positive it would be pretty overwhelming, but would the shock of it kill us? I honestly can't say, but I somehow doubt it. The reason no centers exist now that would rehabilitate and help people adjust to gaining sight is because there's no way to have this done at the moment that's feasible or remotely successful. If, however, a need should arise for this type of service, I'll bet that the current agencies that provide help for those who have lost vision might just turn around and provide the opposite service. It would still bring money in for them, and it's all about adaptation, right?
Silver you're quite wrong. A desire to receive government money has nothing at all to do with why most people who might refuse this hypothetical procedure would do so. Ok so maybe some of them might indeed do so for this reason but you're dead wrong about the majority. And the "not daptable excuse" as you put it is a valid concern. Not everybody is adaptable, and this would be a very! big change to adapt to, no different really from a sighted person becoming blind. And I wasn't necessarily claimin that I myself am not very adaptable. Usually I am if given a reasonable time to adjust and if I'm not given too much at once. It seems to me that regaining sight would trigger major sensory overload, particularly if it happened all at once. It's a very valid concern believe it or not. It would't solve your problems the way people seem to think it would. ou'd just be trading old problems for a whole new set. And given the crappy economy just now it wouldn't even necessarily help you better your chances for getting a job.
Actually, there is physical rehabilitation for people who regain sight. Just like there are physical rehabilitation centers for people who have to relearn how to walk. It happens more often than you'd think.Granted, these people didn't lose an eye to cancer or have some genetic disorder that stole their vision, but they still became blind for a while and had to relearn everything.
Ah, but these are still people who, if I'm reading your post right, had sight at one time. So it still wouldn't really apply to those of us wo never saw before. Because with someone who saw before you at least have something to go on with their rehabilitation. Not so for folks like us. I mean more power to anyone who would decide to have a procedure done but those of us who would choose not to do so shouldn't be penalized.
Well, in that case I'm sure they'd have centers for people to learn how to adapt to seeing.
You talk about car insurance, you'd not have to get a car. Just the simple act of walking anyplace you wanted to go without fear of not knowing the layout of the land first would be a joy.
Ride a bike, cost you nothing after you purchase it except your sweat, and after a while new tires.
ShatteredSanity, just FYI you can rent a moving van at 21 if you've got a license, but in your case just rent the movers? Smile.
Bring up another point. Living in a rural area is difficult, but not if you see, even without a car. The simple ability to walk a few miles without sidewalks, or paths is a joy.
Take a walk in the woods.
On the job issue, it improve that greate. You don't have to get a great or even high paying job. You could rent your servidces as say a painter, or repair person for houses. You could get a paper rout, or flip burgers at the local bar.
Your world opens up greatly.
Now as a blind person think of all the skills you'd have with tech? Smile. Not only do you know how to use your iPhone, but if you could see it just think how easy it be to teach anyone interestede? We use tech as a necessity, so look at how much we could do if we could see it too?
That's a valid point. That's why my parents enjoy living here. Of course, they have cars, so they don't actually walk places, but they say it's beautiful out here, and it's isolated, which they like. They're, well, very unsociable people. This area that we live in suits them well. As a blind person, though, it sucks for me.
That's fine and dandy if you're lucky enough to live in a locale where every single place you might need to go is within walking distance. But not everybody is that fortunate. Nor does everyone live in a place with a good, reliable public transit system. So you'd still have to either get a car or rely on others to take you places. And in that case you may as well have just stayed blind. Besides as I said, the older you get and the longer you live without sight the harder it would be to adapt, particularly if you never had sight before. I've heard a lot of stories about folks like me who got sight in their thirties or forties but ad lived sightlessly for so long that they couldn't adapt and so never used learned to rely on their new sense. Seems to me that would be a waste of time and money. And I for one couldn't just slap on a sleepshade to simulate being blind again because those things have always driven me crazy. And yes, I've been in classes where even I was required to wear a sleepshade during an activity to make the rest of the students feel more comfortable.
Some of us pay for car insurance and cars, and expenses, even though we may not drive them, or count upon their use as it's for the rest of the household.
As to the unreliable transportation? Well there are all sorts of medians. First, as some said, you could bike. Or even get a motorcycle, if you wanted. Such narrow-minded views of some people: especially those who have no dependents.
Incredible. some of the bullshit excuses folks come up with in order to make an argument for refusing an operation that could possibly give them sight, so they can live more independently. I truly don't get how the idea of remaining blind and relying on the government and others to support and take care of you is more appealing to anyone. Talk about laziness and stupidity...
then again I'm a very independent person and don't like relying on anyone for anything if I don't have to. Guess I'm different from the majority on here. Oh and car insurance? That has to be the worst one of all. I laughed when I read that one... A lot of sighted people don't have cars and have a much easier time getting from point a to point b because they can see where they're going, and have more methods of getting around that we as blind people just don't have, such as the ability to ride a bike.
Make the cure mandatory, no exceptions.
"we're fixing blind people. Your SSI will decrease by 1$ for every month you refuse to see. hahaha
It will never happen like that and even if you refuse you'll receive benefits. Even sighted people choose to be limited, so we're no different.
The people would never stand for that. Besides, one thing you guys are forgetting is that there is a physiological component to this. So whenI say that the older you get the harder it would be to adapt I don't just mean emotionally. I raised this issue over on audiogames.net and one of the responses I got reminded me of a documentary I saw a while back that dealt with this very subject. It was about a man who, like me, had been blind is entire life and who went through an experimental procedure to give him vision. He was at most ten years older than I am now. But though the surgery succeeded in giving him sight, he never learned to use it, not because he didn't want to but because the part of his brain that processes visual information never developed properly. He could see the object but he couldn't tell you what it was, what color it was or how near or far away it was. And he never learned to do this even after years of rehabilitation. So you're saying that it ought to be mandatory to potentially waste time and money on something which may or may not work for everybody.
Any of you ever consider that possibility? I'm guessing you didn't Tech.
It has absolutely nothing to do with wanting to rely on the government and others, at least not in the vast majority of cases. So no, it's not bullshit. It's just being practical.
Awesome. Then stop relying on the government.
The only reason anyone has to accomodate us *because of our blindness* is because that is out of our control. We all accomodate each other in various ways, yes, but disabled accomodation is entirely different, and laws like the Americans with Disability Act have everything to do with disability not choice, and not nonsense about as you get older this, or as you get older that.
Honestly? Even at 42 some things are harder than they were in the early 20s, and it's up to me to figure out how to make that happen. I would support a government benefits decision like was jokingly mentioned. And why do I support that? Because tax dollars for entitlements are for people who can't help it. Period. End of story. If I can help it, it's cheating if I can collect, pure and simple. Too bad, kids.
I would stop relying on the government if I could actually manage to get a job. Unfortunately people are ignorant of what we can do and not all are willing to be educated. Nor are they willing to make accomodations, even if they themselves wouldn't have to pay a peny to do so. So it's not as easy as you seem to think. But we'll just have to agree to disagree since you obviously don't see the possible down sides to suddenly having sight after having never had it. Believe it or not my arguments do have merit, however much you might want to deny it. If, let's just say, the part of our brains that processes visual information does indeed develop mostly in childhood, it's possible even likely that someone who became sighted in their adult life might never be able to learn to truly process what their eyes were telling them. Someone who had the procedure done in their forties might be in their seventies before they were able to use their sight on par with those who'd been sighted their whole lives. Or they may never be able to, in which case the procedure was a waste of time. It should be each individual's choice whether they did or did not have this supposed procedure done, nobody else's. Nor should they be penalized for refusing. For those who would choose to have it done more power to you. But do no jump down the throats of those of us who would refuse.
You can't say that you would not get benefits if you could get a job in the first sentence. Then make excuses for why you wouldn't do something that would allow you to get a job in the second sentence. You want to have your cake and eat it too.
The basic essence of your argument is that it would be hard. Well welcome to life, its hard. Yes, you'll have to learn, yes it will be challenging, so are lots of things. Get over it.
Sure I can. These are valid points. I wouldn't have a procedure done if I might have to spend the next twenty or thirty years just trying to learn how to use my sight to do things I'd always done by touch, and certainly not if the procedure didn't become available for another twenty or thirty years. By then it wouldn't be wort it.
Neuroscience now states that the visual centers of the brain just get rerouted and could be rerouted in time. So, in other words, you're actually using the same visual centers in your brain that sighted people do, but the input method is different.
The visual centers light up all pretty like Christmas lights when you do things like read Braille, operate in a spacial environment like when you're out and about, and a zillion other things.
I used to believe Bryan's mythology to some extent, when I was a young 20-something, regarding what would happen to us if we gained sight.
And of course everyone on this site understands why in our current situation we can't get jobs as readily.
My experience? I'd say it's easier to change us, no matter how hard that might be, than it is to change someone else. Because you cannot change anyone else, or their position or ideology or perception about what we can or can't do. It would be challenging to learn to see, yes, but fortunately for us, in that event it would only be up to us and not some other poor sheeple's perception.
I think I saw just how bad ideology and perception can get when once I went to pick up the daughter at the bus stop. Some mom started bleating about me and wonder and a bit of psychobabble / religionbabble, and her little tyke nearly took a nose-dive into the road. I happened to hear him heading straight for traffic and instinct / nature being what it is, I just grabgbed him and gave him back to his completely oblivious mother. She didn't come around to what passes for her senses until I said, "look, your kid almost went in the road!"
You will never change someone like that. All the so-called blind education in the world won't change someone like that any sooner than you will teach a horse to do Algebra. That one was thick like a stick, I'm tellin' ya. But we can change what we can, and for now it's been technology, wit and grit. Sight would just be an extension of that, and be totally within our control to learn, any medical issues notwithstanding.
Think of it now: Does it matter to you that your average babbling brook can't imagine how you are using your phone to identify objects? or how you can grill food? You just go do it, provided that you have the means. Truth is, we're always better off changing ourselves than trying to change some poor simpleton's perspective, especially the ones who can see you in action and just can't connect the dots. I doubt even the Shrinkosphere can really help those people.
One other thing you're overlooking is that given the state of the economy even sighted people are having trouble finding and keeping jobs. So your argument that having this hypothetical procedure done would allow me to get a job is far from accurate. Besides, employers would still look at the fact that I'd been blind for most of my life. This is at least possible, you know, at least as possible as your own seeming argument that everything would be lovely. Besides, I myself ight only want vision long enough to find out what it was like to see. But I long ago came to terms with my blindness and have lived with it too long to jump recklessly into something like this.
Way to go, Bryan. I think some of you should consider looking for a cure for arrogance before even considering to get back vision.
Agreed. Because the fact is we don't know how we'd react in a situation unless and until we find ourselves in it. We discussed that in the views on rights topic when the subject of torture was raised. We can make guesses based on what we know of ourselves and our personalities but that's it. I just know that while I like to think of myself as fairly adaptable I also know that I don't always handle it well when too much comes my way all at once. So if I were to have a procedure that gave me 20/20 vision I would probably be too overwhelmed by the constant visual stimuli after experiencingbasically nothing for the maority of my life. And light perception doesn't count as far as I'm concerned, even though I do have it. Those of you who seem to think we should be punished for refusing such a procedure might want to really think what you yourselves might do in this situation.
I'd love it, I already know that. I'd go looking for the things I've always heard about but never understood. I'd watch sunrises and sunsets, even if I couldn't tell you what color what what, just to know what I've been missing. I'd watch a storm from the beach, and try to teach myself to read as quickly as possible. I'd work to understand it, not complain about how much my life has changed.
Everything is hard to adapt to if you go in thinking you're going to have to adapt. If you go in thinking you'll have to explore, its a lot easier.
Bryan, you have to admit that as a sighted person, yes, even in this economy, you would still have the upper hand when looking for a job. You may not get calls back from every place you put in an application for, but you, as an average sighted person, would have a better chance than the average, even overqualified, blind person. You could walk into any restaurant and wash dishes, or be a waiter, or work at a cash register in any store, but we can't do those things, or at least, employers will never believe we can do those things.
Growing up, my parents always drilled it into my head that I had to go to college, even though neither of them graduated from high school. Do you know why? Because I'm blind, plain and simple. They never told my sister she had to go to college. When they spoke of college to her, it was a mild suggestion. For me, it was an order. I haven't gone to college, and they're very cold towards me most of the time. I know that I don't want to go to college. I've had enough bad experiences in school to last a lifetime. I honestly don't think I could take any more. I worry for my mental health enough as it is a lot of the time. Going through school, and voluntary school at that, would probably push me over the edge. I don't say that to be melodramatic, I say it because I'm self-aware enough to know my limits. I've gone through bouts of depression so severe that the only reason I got out of bed every morning to go to school was because I lived in the dorm at the school for the blind, so I had no choice. Literally, no choice. The one day I tried to skip school, security guards busted into my room, so I had to pretend to be sick so I could go home and not get in trouble. I once tried to tell the guidance counselor that I was depressed. She was yelling at me because I wasn't doing stupid meal plans. They had a program that you could take part in when you were a senior, where you would get to live in your own apartment. It was on campus, of course, but that supposed simulation was the biggest joke I've ever seen. You couldn't do anything without a staff member hanging over your shoulder, grabbing your hand to stop you if you even slightly looked like you might make a mistake. It's a wonder I was allowed to wipe my ass without someone watching. Anyway, the one thing they could not supervise, since I was writing them on my Braille Note, was the meal plans: detailed accounts of everything you were going to consume for a week. You had to write down specifically what you were going to eat each day, and once you wrote it down, you couldn't stray from that plan at all. Well, I didn't care about them, they weren't realistic, and besides, I didn't care about much of anything at the time. Anyway, she was throwing a fit, getting up in my face and telling me how disrespectful I was for not doing these retarded meal plans. Finally I yelled back, "do you know why I refuse to do this shit? It's hard enough just to live!" Boy, did she think that was the funniest thing in the world! She stood back and laughed. And now I realize that no one believes that a person can be so low that the only reason they stay alive is because they're afraid that if they try to kill themselves, they won't die and will instead be "rescued" and subjected to more ridicule. So why the fuck would I subject myself to more of that? As an adult, I have even less of an excuse now than I did then. As an adult, I'm not supposed to have emotions, let alone talk about them. I've always been weak, though, and I always crack and talk about how I feel, like now. I tell myself it's ok because I'm not doing it in a setting where anyone will ever figure out who I am, but it's very little consolation.
Anyway, now that I'm done with that little tangent, the reason I brought that up in the first place is because, as I said, if I were sighted, I could acquire any lowly position and be content with it. You see, I believe that, even though I might still struggle with myself, earning a living would at least take the edge off of it, because I would feel as if I could stand on my own two feet and be somebody. I could give back, earn, be responsible, and be the adult no one thinks I'm capable of being. My parents never went to college, and I consider them successful. We're just a middle class family, but we have a nice house, and we don't starve, and we don't want for anything. Want to know what my parents do for a living? Well, currently, my mom is an assistant manager at Rite-aid. My dad is a maintenence man at a company that produces titanium. He works on the presses and machines and so on when they break down to keep the production running smoothly. What their job descriptions may lack in social circles, they make up for in their ethic. They hardly ever miss a day of work. They taught me to be driven and take my work seriously. I know these are strengths, because a lot of people nowadays are lazy and lack initiative. But if it were me, I would appreciate just being able to work, no matter how much I hated it. It's a job, not leisure, so you're not supposed to like it. My sister did go to college, but it was her choice. Now, though, she works at rite-aid as well. But I never look at them and think to myself, "oh, they are such lowlifes! They could be so much more!" My family may be dysfunctional, and I'm not all that close to them, but they taught me that having a job isn't about how much money you make. It's about how much you put into it, because whatever you put in, you'll get back out. Maybe not in possessions, but in how you feel about the work you've done. that's what I want to say about myself one day. I don't want to be great. I don't want to be remembered. I just want to know that I've done my best, and if my best wasn't much, as long as I haven't fallen into poverty and squalor, then I'm ok.
What does this have to do with blindness? Well, I can't just stroll into McDonald's or Wal-mart or Rite-aid and grab an application. I know, I know, if I were sighted, I might not be able to land jobs there, either. But I'd have a fighting chance, rather than not a snowball's chance in hell. That's what I, personally, would have to gain in getting my sight back. And if the procedure failed, or at least didn't work as expected, I wouldn't have lost much.
no not really.. Because as I said before employers will look at how long you've had the use of your eyes and, if you're a recently sighted person, how well you seem to have adapted. So no, you wo't necessaril have a better chance of getting a job. The US is, to put it bluntly, in the financial toilet just now and it isn't just the blind in unemployment lines, so to speak. And there are not hundreds or thousads but probably millions of sighted individuals, lifelong ones, ahead of us in those lines. And Silver before yo cold go looking for those surises and sunsets you'd still have to teach your brain to recognize them, and if you're a lifelong blind person that's not likely to take just a few months or a few years. You have to ask yourself whether or yr brain will be able to handle and process all that. Like I said anyone who would want this procedure more power to them, but don't be surprised if it's not as easy as you think it is to adjust.
Exactly. I'd hate to see the disappointment some of you would have when you realize it wouldn't be as good as you thought, but some need a good kick in the ass and need to learn the hard way. Furthermore, just from reading most of these posts, I feel confident in predicting that most of you who would want it back would find something else to bitch about.
You're definition of neuroplasticity, and your belief in wat it does is rather flawed i'm afraid. You'd be able to recognize things once you were told what they are. I could look out to the east at about six in the morning and realize what I was seeing was a sunrise. Learning to read would be a lot harder, but not impossible. The problem is that most people simply don't want to try, we expect results. I'd love the challenge of gaining those results, I live for that stuff.
Like I said, you'd find something else to whine and complain about, because it would not be wat you would expect.
Note me saying, wat.
son, who's bitching here? I don't see anybody bitching who says they would accept the challenge of gaining sight? I accepted the challenge of studying abroad also. And I would have shrugged off anyone who told me it would be the be all end all, or whatever words you all have said about it not doing everything. It did make my college experience better. That didn't mean I didn't accept my American heritage. I'm rather proud of that heritage flaws and all, especially the part about where we are honest about our mistakes and try to do better.
So if studying abroad didn't deny my heritage, how would accepting this new challenge, and all that Cody described of challenges and benefits, be some kind of not accepting of my current situation?
The only people who have said every, all, instant, and those nonfalsifiable terms, have been those who have said they would remain blind. You haven't seen Cody or I or anyone else who wouldd accept the challenge using these terms. Or even remotely hinting that it was a solution to everything. That's such a cop-out argument. Nothing, not a single thing, is a "solution to everything," even using that as an argument against us is ridiculous and silly.
It's not ridiculous. You are missing the point. All of you want the ability to see. None of you have said you need it. It kind of reminds me of so many people who want sex, just because of the benefits of how it will make that person feel. And yet, they don't look out the full picture all together. Will it surely benefit you in the long run? Trash me for saying this if you wish. There are not as many guarantees as you may think.
I'm sure that, as you say, once we got sight we would find other problems. That car my neighbor drives sends up this exhaust cloud and I hate looking at it. I can't read fast enough, etc. We never claimed it would fix everything. We think that it would enable us to do things that the sighted currently do but the blind cannot. Also, about your arrogance post, I challenge you to quote what I said that was arrogant. You have all my posts, so please show me what content you find when I claimed myself to be better than others. I don't believe this was the problem, because I don't believe we were comparing ourselves to others. Did you really mean "arrogant"?
Thank you, Leo. Couldn't have said it better myself. Anyone who thinks there's a single solution to every problem is a damn fool. And, of course suddenly having sight wouldn't fix everything, what an idiotic statement that is. No one has even hinted that it would. Yes, gaining sight would certainly be a challenge and would take a lot of adjustment, but does that mean we shouldn't accept that challenge to help better our lives? And, even if the operation wasn't 100% successful or didn't turn out like we hoped it would, what have we really lost? At least we tried. If we don't even try how will we ever know? How can we ever fix and learn from our mistakes if we never accept challenges?
All I have to say is, bull fucking shit.
I won't waste my time and name who's arogant, but I wasn't implying it was you.
Gaining sight would not be as much of a challenge as you think. I’d like to explain a concept from a point of view of someone that has experienced both worlds.
Things feel like they look.
Example, if you are using a regular keyboard now, chances are it is some sort of plastic. As you run your hands over it you can feel what it is like, and that same perception you feel, if you could see it would be exactly the same. You can feel and see textures, thickness, size, and the lines between the keys, if it is dusty or clean.
As a blind person, you also notice the smell of your keyboard, but a sighted person, although they might smell the scent, will not perceive it.
The sighted person will notice the colors, or color of the keyboard, and we cannot.
Here is another concept. Brick comes in different colors. We can actually feel if brick is red, yellow, or brown brick. We can also, if someone takes the time to show us smell the different types. Now if you could see it you’d see the texture and color, but not perceive the smell, or if you did not understand that you smelled brown brick.
Gaining sight would be like that. You’d just start visually perceiving what you’ve always felt, and you’d notice what you saw was exactly what you touched, but you’d add the color.
That actually seems like a pretty good comparison, Wayne.
Leo, interesting point about visual information being processed in the brain of a blind person; just in a different manner. When I took a tour of the state center a few months ago, I was talking to someone about this very thing. I said I believed myself to be an audio learner. their response was: "I thought I was, too, but it turns out I am a visual learner. that is to say, I learn best by picturing objects by how and where they appear, rather than what they sound like. I just have to use what little information I know about them, including sound, to imagine them visually". It was really something I hadn't considered before, but after thinking about it awhile, it made sense. In conclusion, none of us, at least those of us who have never seen, are completely aware of what challenge may lie ahead. It may be more difficult than we're expecting, or it could be easier. Just like the person who thought they were an audio learner, only to be proven wrong later, it's all about understanding the different ways of processing information besides the stimuli alone.
The question that still begs to be asked is, how would an employer know how long you had been sighted? They wouldn't ask that in an interview. If you were worried that the person who was hiring you would know you were once blind, or had friends who would tell them, and this would become a problem, then move to another town, or hell, another state if you must. That's easier to do with sight, too, as I've already said before. Not completely without problems, but easier. There's a difference between carrying the weight of the world and simply carrying your own weight. Some of you, it seems, are content to carry the weight of the world. That's ok, you're probably stronger than I am, and people like that make me question my worth. But one thing I do know is that weight would be shifted, maybe in more desirable ways for some people, and less for others. What it comes down to is that this is all hypothetical. While I have deeply compelling reasons why I would want sight, as I stated originally, I don't actually know if I could go through with the procedure. I would mostly be afraid of side effects, medical complications, and so on. But if it was proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that there was, in fact, a good and steady success rate, with minimal complications, this part of me, this part that wants something more, would probably win out against the uncertainty about what might happen. As someone just said, it might be easier or harder than we expected, but that shouldn't stop us from taking the plunge.
As for the implication that we're all miserable fucks who would find other things to bitch about once we got sight, well, that statement is frankly laughable. Who *hasn't* bitched at one time or another in their lives? Maybe more at times than is necessary? Right now, I'm falling fast. I feel myself slipping down into the depths of depression once again. this always happens during the winter, so I know to expect it. I may bitch more now than I normally would. I may seem more bitter now than at other times. But does that make me a bad person? I think not. It just makes me human.
They would know you were recently sighted by how you conducted yourself. They wouldn't ask you directly of course but they would observe you and they'd still judge you based on what they saw.
Can you please describe how exactly you could act recently sighted? I mean, I have pople ask me if I'm sighted all the time. I do my best to act like I'm not blind. So how exactly could I act recently sighted?
At one time in human prehistory, people developed the concept of projectiles: not just thrusting with a spear, but throwing it at a distance.
There it goes, that spear you worked so hard for days to create, and you missed your throw and threw it into a rock wall instead of the prey you were looking to bring home for dinner. Ah, but the thrown spear isn't the answer to everything. Why can't you just accept that beforehand you could get game by spear-thrusting it? Why must you always bitch about the frequent hunting accidents, loss of life, and failed hunting expeditions by your thrust spear?
And then, horror of all horrors, they developed the spear-thrower: a spear that came in two stages, was attached to a block of wood, and whose speed and distance were at least doubly increased. Poor spearhead just went down a precipice, never to be seen again, since you're farther away from the target now. That thrower you have there: Why must you insist on treating it like the be all end all? Ah, but you say, you now have more ability to do better by those you depend upon, bringing them more food, yet again decreasing risk, and the population is able to increase.
I don't know if prehistoric humans had such debates like the silly one going on here, but just imagine looking back on that now.
Union Pacific in its museum still has a letter denouncing trains. She also said they were not the be all end all, the people should accept the horse and their ability to walk as what God gave them. She referred to the breakneck speed of 15 miles per hour, and all the horrid side effects like fires that started because of the steam engines.
What in the world would she do about 400 miles an hour in a jet aircraft? Probably come up with stories about chem trails, I guess.
And those trains were the precursor to the interstate highway system that lets you buy fresh berries in January and oranges in July anywhere in the country.
Name me one human innovation, one development, one evolutionary step that was created or affected by people just accepting their current situation, or just learning what they call the coping skills. Someone name me one innovator and cite their innovation, and how it came about by just accepting their station.
Perhaps a recently sighted person would have trouble focusing on one thing, or even two things, at a time. Perhaps they would be easily distracted, which many sighted people seem to be anyway. In this situation, I would think that any trouble with focusing would be taken care of before one went out and started applying for jobs. I mean, hopefully, people will know how to read and recognize colors by then, or at least be able to pretend they can.
And for people who have never seen, simply saying that things look how they feel means nothing. At least, it doesn't in my experience with people who have been blind since birth. My best friend has been blind since birth and seems to have trouble imagining how things look or remembering how to put something back together based on looking at how it was as a completed object. And I have heard from others that things do not look as they feel. Maybe this is because applying color to an object gives it an altogether separate appearance from that same object devoid of coloring.
I don't recall anyone saying that sight would solve all their problems, make life complete, or lead to a better life. From what I understood, all who say they would receive the operation are simply saying that regaining sight would allow for more opportunities in life. I completely agree with that. No matter what you choose, there will be advantages and disadvantages, and those who would take the procedure obviously feel that the disadvantages of being sighted are far outweighed by those of being blind.
But everyone does not share this viewpoint. Should they be penalized for it if this operation were possible, I don't think so. I'll tell you why.
I feel that choosing to remain blind does put you at a disadvantage. But then so does choosing not to graduate high school, choosing to have children, sometimes choosing not to attend college, choosing not to work, choosing to keep fixing your hoopty and not buy a new car, choosing not to own a smart phone, choosing to live with your job as a janitor or waitress, or choosing to keep gaining weight or remain obese. Such people are already at a disadvantage, so your solution to the problem is to set them back further? I'm not positive that would help the situation.
Yes, ocean, seeing is not audio at all, it is visual feeling or touching, if that makes sense to you.
You can't look at something and thing about how it sounds, you have to hear it to know the sound. Think about it this way. You smell a steak cooking, the smell doesn't translate in to how that steak will feel, only taste. Seeing is touching, and smell is tasting.
ShatteredSanity, when you got to the point to go interviewing you'd not be recently sighted, you'd be sighted. Example, last week you had a cold or the flue, but when you feel better you don't think of it as being recently better you just think, I'm feeling good today, and the flue doesn't come in to your mind.
The same goes with losing sight. You don't think, well I'm recently blind you just think I can't see anymore.
Know one will care if you are recently anything, they just want to know if you are qualified for the job right now.
Raven, we aren't trying to penalize them for choosing not to take the operation. We're simply saying that it is a life choice at that point. You don't have to be blind, so it is no longer a disability.If a man purposefully cut his own legs off, yes that does happen, he doesn't deserve disability compensation. A man who has his legs cut off in a car accident does because their was no choice involved. You are purposefully handicapping yourself, and I for one do not feel you deserve a reward for that. In fact I feel that if it were harder to get the benefits, we'd have a lot less poverty in this country.
One word: no. I constantly get asked: would you go for an operation? I say: no. What's the point? I'd have to learn print, change school, adjust...It's a waste of time. I honestly don't think that sighted people get it: I love being blind! If I were sighted, I wouldn't be where I am now. I achieved so much, and to throw it away for sight would be selfish.
I have really learned something on this board. I guess because I understand both sides of the thing I can't imagine remaining blind if there was an easy way not to be.
I guess it comes down to change as I see it, and as I have said before, change is difficult or unwanted for many people.
I can understand change for the worst, or in this conversation, I can't call it the worst, because sight would really be a great tool, just like having a good computer, or a iPhone, or a cane that is new and works well.
What I mean like the example of having your legs cut off. Of course you're not going to choose to have an operation to remove your legs. "I love being able to not walk." Change seems to be the thing here.
I have a question. Has technology gotten so good for us that we feel seeing is just not something people need?
Suppose all the tech was removed, how would you feel about being blind?
Think about if you lived, say in the 60's, or we were now in the 60's and we had no tech like we now have, would you say the same? "If an easy way came available for me to see I'd not be interested."
EleanorW, what have you achieved as a blind person that you could not have done if you were sighted? In fact, I challenge anyone on here who thinks blindness is a good thing to name the practical advantages of being blind. If I asked a sighted person the same question, I would be unlikely to get answers like, "because being sighted makes me feel good," or "because the change from being sighted to being blind would be too hard." Instead I would get concrete answers like, "being sighted is a good thing because instead of taking hours of O&M, I can look at a map and walk/drive to my destination without much thought."
Oh, and I could not resist saying this: I have never heard sighted people talk about how they've accepted their sightedness.
EleanorW, I'm a bit curious as to what you meant in your post also. I read what you wrote on the rant board about how the other kids made fun of you because of your blindness. and how people stereotype blind people as if they're all the same. Of course it's not right, but there are stereotypes for just about anything that's considered different from the "norm." So, how is being blind wonderful for you? What have you been able to do as a blind person that you couldn't achieve if you were ever to become sighted?
For those of you who are questioning my judgement, I fully realise the privalidges of being sighted. But I think that having a disability makes you unique, and let's you not take things for granted. I'm not trying to sound snotty. Also, I've been an ambasador for disabilities, and people now respect me which they did not do previously. And I've been in a few tv screenings, which I refuse to elaborate on because it would seem like I am bragging. It's my personal opinion, and if you want to question me then that's fine.
I'm sorry, but its kind of sad to me that you think you have to handicap yourself in order to be unique and not take things for granted. You're human, welcome to being unique, as for not taking things for granted, that's up to you, can't help you there. I don't think you need to be blind to be unique, and judging from a lot of the blind people I know, it doesn't make you unique at all. There is a difference between being different and being unique.
You are so full of contradictions. What ever happened to being quote on quote normal?
Not really. The sighted take their sightedness for granted all the time. And I completely agree with Sword of Sapphire about acting recently sighted. I can be distracted easily enough sometimes just as a blind person. If I constantly had visual stimuli coming at me I could see the problem being a lot worse since it would be a new thing. And i agree with Enelor about it basically being a waste of time. But I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.
Yeah, I accept that I'm a contradicter, and I go back on myself. It came out wrong, okay? Please just don't be rude about it. I was trying to say something valid, and it didn't come out right.
I think I was meant to be how I am, but it would be nice just to be able to sight read instead of having to memorize everything.
EleanorW,
remember this is a discussion, not a judgment call?
If you like being blind say why.
Now all won't agree, but by you pointing out something you think makes being blind better we learn. I have learned how strongly blind people feel about not changing.
This is what I think I have learned anyway, but that is personal to me.
I often times want to say something like, "You don't understand how if feels to take a drive in the mountins, and not only feel the power of the car you are driving, but see all the beautiful things you pass."
I have decided that is a foolish statement simply for the reason how can you miss something you've never experienced? It be impossible to understand what I'm talking about, because you have no base for that concept.
That was why I tried to relate to things I understand from both worlds, like saying touch is exactly what you see, and smell is related to taste.
Yes, I have learned much.
I love the post about the 60s, or before technology. Sadly, because the pro-blind thinking is more an ideology and a religion than a practicl solution, people actually did spin in circular logic trying to justify that one back then, mainly as a means to accept what they had then. At least in the 70s and 80s.
Interestinly enough, we now can see a lot more than we used to. No offense to anyone who used to be sighted, I understand.
However, I have independently identified an object by its color - the daughter had left out two jackets that felt the same, one was hers and another a friend's, the only difference being color. So wave the iPhone at it, with a color identifier, and I could select the color that was her friend's and put it in the bag. That's a simple task that a perfectly intelligent parent, me, could not have done otherwise, and gotten the right one back to the daughter's friend. Neither of them even knew I had done it.
I've identified objects, or read off packaging, using the iPhone, something I thought of as science fiction as a kid. I realize this isn't actually "being sighted," but it sure is a hell of a lot closer than before.
I even was able to use the JAWS OCR thing to look at a chart picture for my Coast Guard work and report back on a couple things. My family may be sighted, but they don't know anything about the Coast Guard, except that I am in it. I could not have told them what to look for on that chart: I needed to examine it for myself and report back. And I actually COULD! I didn't just have some thingy that turned it all into linear text, I could actually see the numbered patterns and cloud info for weather because of its relevant position on the window, using the JAWS Cursor and a Braille display. Admittedly, not like a sighted person does exactly, but no sighted person would have just glanced at that and ssaid "OK, I see." It was one of those things you need to be looking over. And no transcription errors or linearization that used to happen when people would convert things into Braille on paper for us.
I bet you all on campus, you all who are young and unencumbered, when you go clubbing on the weekends? Now you can select clubs you never knew existed before because of your GPS making you, in a way, sighted, because you can find out what was there. You don't have to step in the door and check the place out first only to find out you stepped into an oldies bar or something. I bet some of you, at your neighborhood convenience stores, have stepped up to the shelves you were familiar with and used your iPhone and Text Detective or Tap Tap See to identify that six pack of beer you wanted, without having to put off the one guy working the store to come help you. You were being what it is like to be sighted, even though to real sighted people this is still extremely limited.
And none of us has sat back and said, "Oh, I already have 'skills' from before. I can already through trial and error take extra time and figure this out." No, you take the advantage, make yourself more marketable, hit the ground running and give it a go. Gaining actual sight is the logical next step.
Now, I imagine, there are people that would say things about the accessibility, with the Coast Guard situation, and they should make it a so-called accessible format, except why do all of that now when I could just go do it, incognito, deliver the goods. Well, can't exactly say incognito, everything we do our Number gets applied to it, but incognito from a disability standpoint.
Where we are now, though, I still cannot get certain qualifications in the search and rescue area because to do that, you need to be able to look at a chart quickly and find the best heading to direct the response vessel to the site of an incident. Again, it's not a so called accessibility disability issue, it's about let's keep people alive.
And even the ways we now can see with devices, they still are slower than physical sight. Mainly that is because of the upload and processing time, though that new Tap Tap See application is pretty fast.
I honestly don't know if medical devices, or electronic aids like the iPhone and whatever is next, will give us sight first. But just as I used a slate and stylus in the 70s, I use a iPhone and Braille display now.
Sure, that slate was good, but I could not write notes nearly as fast as I can now on the iPhone with a Braille display. Maybe some NFB person on here could, I couldn't. And, as religious as some people are about that slate, you still have to transcribe it using a typewriter to get it into a "accessible" format for everyone else. Now? I can do anything Command wants for making notes at a briefing or meeting, and disseminate at least as quickly as a sighted counterpart. I love it. I don't care what anyone says about groveling and accepting. I always hated depending on people and institutions, made me feel like a one-ball man to be honest. And to that end, I've always taken every chance I could to do things incognito like anyone else. I guess I don't share the ideology of many of the so called independence people, mainly just, well, I thought it was just nature taking its course. I bet that line between sighted and blind is gonna get blurrier and blurrier.
It already is now. You kids doing college? I bet you, like my daughter, do classes online. So who has to know who's blind, purple, one-legged frog or what else? I've done my share of Coast Guard training online, and just got a list of more to do. No trying to keep up with someone writing on the blackboard or demoing something and naturally forgetting to slow down and say what they wrote and demonstrated, which to be honest usually breaks their flow anyway. No waiting for months to get the course materials from a exasperated Braille transcriber saying you want something "not usually done by the blind," whatever that psychobabble means. You just log on, get the job done, turn it in to the Man, and you're done. In a way, being sighted. Sure, we have to use the NVDA, JAWS, VoiceOver, stuff like that, and all readers can be bitches sometimes: even the VoiceOver on the iPhone crashed recently for me. But it's light years better than anything I grew up with. More like being sighted, to be honest. Now with Nook and iBooks on the iOS and probably something on the Android, you can buy books, or get them for free even sometimes, from a regular source not specifically made up for us. If there was ever a extension that would let me run hands-free through the neighborhood, I'd do it in a heartbeat and love it. No more indoor cardio only, and who wouldn't jump on that?
Truth is, if you're using a iPhone or Android device now, and their apps that use the camera for us, you're already going sighted. If you do the online college where you don't have to say anything about getting someone to read things for you, you're already doing it. I realize it's not the same, and mean no disrespect for people who used to actually have real sight. I still wonder whether we'll get all the advantages of sight via electronic devices before medicine does it.
I'm certainly glad I didn't "accept my station" and try and stay with the typewriter, slate, waiting 18 months or more to perhaps get the Braille book I wanted (now out of date if it was a reference work). I'm at the point now where I'm getting confident enough with the new shiny iPhone and its apps, where I think it would be dishonorable of me to ask a sighted person to help me with something visual that one of my apps can do, unless time is of the essence and the app isn't that fast. This isn't binary: it's a continuum, from the pre-Victorian begging situation, through the Victorian prudes / institutionalization, to the 20th-centry use of all those transcribers and others, to now, where you can more and more unchain yourself and go completely rogue: not that you weren't already. On the far end of that continuum? Being fully sighted.
Elenor, Ryan distance runner wasn't saying you were full of contradictions; he was talking about Cody. I'm personally glad to see someone else who thinks similarly.
Again, you guys are mistaking different and unique. Everyone is unique. We all have little things about us that make us unique, its unavoidable, and frankly pointless if you think about it. It doesn't get you anywhere, or get anything for you.
Then there is different. That is when you go against what is considered the norm. We, as blind people, are different, we go against the norm. The blind person who rocks and sticks his fingers in his eyes, we shrink away from him because he's different. The person who never showers and smells like rotten cheese, different. Different and unique are not the same thing, and they aren't positive things either. Everyone is unique, so it doesn't matter, and different is negative because the rest of society looks down on you for it. Does it make sense now?
The majority never has to accept itself because there is nobody challenging its right to exist or trying to convince them that they should want to be something other than who they are.
Blindness isn't who I am, it's a circumstance I'm forced to deal with.
One answer I do have, Ryan said wanting sight is like people wanting to have sex and not take responsibility.
No, if I was contemplating this decision, it would be with responsibility in mind. Truth is, my earning potential would go up. Key word here is potential, kids. I know you like saying big words like guarantee, be all end all, and such, but we are just talking about potential here.
That is all any of us have ever even asked for as the blind: not 'give me this', but 'give me the opportunity to demonstrate I can do this'. And that is what sight would be. And how am I supposed to look at myself in the mirror with any kind of manly pride if I refused it? How am I with any kind of self-respect going to ask for assistance related to the blind, like asking where the bathroom is or where Suite Number X is located, if I knowingly turned down an opportunity dto do that for myself? Nobody says 'right away.'
After all, with the iPhone, you didn't do it all right away, but you learned it. You use a touch screen now, and camera apps. You take pictures of things and get them identified, I've heard that some of you, maybe you specifically who call the rest of us arrogant, have been running around using Text Detective to identify street signs and room numbers for you. How cool is that? I think that's fuckin awesome, no matter what you think of the rest of us. Now you don't put your phone in your pocket and ask someone to do it for you, because you now can.
That's how I look at going through the process of gaining sight. Going through the process of learning to use my iPhone took effort. I took a whole vacation from work to train myself to use the iPod. Just knuckled down and did it. Just made myself learn to type even though I can't flickety-lfao like the nieces and daughter can, I still can type on it, and now am about as good as other people my age. If they are ever making the Seeing With Sound app for the iPhone, that'll be a lot of stimulus to learn to handle. But I bet you people who consider us arrogant, will probably be some of the first to adopt it, do it really really well, and the rest of us will bust our asses too, to catch up and learn. How different is any of that from having sight? Except that sight would do so much more. And nobody has said anything abuot immediate or guarantee, or anything. It's all grit, man. You have to go get it yourself, or someone else will have your share. Nothing any of us can do about that: that's just nature.
And I'm with Cody: I'd embrace the challenge, it would be loads of fun. Sure, it would be the responsible thing for a middle age guy with aging parents and college age kids to do, to better situate oneself financially (at least potentially so). Then again, we're all doing that anyway. Sight would just be another extension of it, with some pretty profound benefits. Of course there are downsides, though none here would make my life any different. I still get to pay for everything I can't see to use, so for me it'd just be a matter of start using it, or like others have said, get a motorcycle. Now i'll admit there would be a problem: a motorcycle for your Uncle Leo would cause one of them marital disputes about "unnecessary" risks, but it wouldn't exactly be a surprise to her.
Leo, I'm with both you and Cody: learning to see would be hard, but it would be a lot of fun. I can't think of one thing in life that is way fun to learn that doesn't have some complex or difficult aspect to it. It would be like solving a puzzle. BTW, there is a new iPhone app that is similar to the seeing with sound program. It is called Voice Vision.
Ah. Riding a motorcycle is just great. Second thing I'd buy me. Lol
I like them BMW's at the minute. Sweet rides.
I don't know. The way some of you were jumping down our throats for saying we wouldn't have a procedure done you would think it was some be all and end all. So you can't go back ad say it's not when you were implying that it was. Let's use the job situation as an example. One of you said I'd be refusing something that would allow me to get a job. That, however, would be true only if the US were not in the toilet just now.
Welll I can't speak for others, and if you can show me where that was said I'll back you up for it. As for myself, what I said was it would level the playing field. It wouldn't give you a job, though in all probability, with the publicity of it you could live on royalty checks if you wrote a book about your experience. I'm not saying it will fix every problem in your life, but it will fix the one you and everyone else on this site that is blind complains about. I actually went through some of the boards yesterday and picked out which ones could be completely eraticated by having this operation. It was pretty much all of them. Try it yourself, you'll see.
Oh, I also have to point out here, because its what I do. I find it rather tellling that the woman on here who said she was totally happy with her blindness and that it made it unique, has a board up talking about how people make fun of her for the thing which makes her unique. I also have to say thank you, it perfectly illustrates my point that being different is negative. Blindness does not make you unique, it makes you different.
I tell you even with the economy as it is seeing will help you to earn some moneyIf you aren't a lazy person.
You don't have to have the terditional job to earn money necessarily. Example, all cities have news papers, and people like to read the paper copy. If you can see, and I believe I used this before, you can deliver papers.
It is winer in much of America, and shoveling snow can get you some cash in your pocket. Now, I know you can shevel snow as a blind person, I do it all the time, but what I mean is traveling from house to house, or business to business offering your services.
People will pay you to walk the dog, clean the yard up, wash the windows on the house, and other small chores, did you know that? It was how I earned some cash as a kid. My dad have lawns we cut, and yards we clean up, and we did a doctors office as well. My dad paid us, and kept a few dollars for himself too as his extra spending money.
You could get a cart. Have you seene these? Excuse that, I mean, smelled or noticed them downtown or at the WalMart,or on your college campus, or other places? What a cart does is sale food, like hot dogs, sodas, chips, hamburgers, and such things. I know a man that earned as much as 1 thousand dollars a weekend working his cart.
So, yeah, seeing will get you a job, or earn you some money.
Ah, the type o's. Sorry. Lol
No, seeing won't fix that. Smile.
Voyager, thanks. I just got that program and will train myself on how to use it. Getting used to how things sound this way is different but I can see how effective it will be for certain situations.
And here I am, having needed to struggle all afternoon using a site with flash that mainly says button button button for us, because the developers didn't lavel the buttons, or assign their roles as check boxes when appropriate, etc. etc. I could go on. These hours have mainly been wasted and would have been used doing something else otherwise. It is not enough to say that some so-called higher purpose would somehow make that all ok or worthwhile, as you who would stay blind indicate. If you believe that, put holes in your pockets and let the money just fall through senselessly: after all, time is money, and we spend a lot of it compensating for things that just don't work right. Time we would otherwise be spending doing things instead. Better than it was in the 70s, yes. No having to Braille it all out first and then retype it all out, hoping the ribbon doesn't go dead in the middle of page 2 of 50, but still. And when it costs us, it costs those who depend upon us.
Wayne is right: none of us have said anything about a guarantee or being given a job. That's the point. Nothing is given at all, but taking advantage of an opportunity like that would make it possible to go after more, and over time it would become less and less frustrating to do something simple like one's duty which involved a certain website.
Your welcome, Leo. If you think it's worth while I'd like to read about your experiences with it in the future.
I'm pretty sure that if I were in the same college program and could see, I would be further along. I've had to drop or extend classes because I didn't have accessible materials. I've had to beg and stomp my feet and use a cattle prod on the bureaucrats in the disabled office so I could get my math book Brailled. Recently I decided to get a BA (rather than a BS) in computer science because after fighting my way through two physics courses I had no desire to participate in any more science labs. Even if technology came along that made it easier for me to take math and science courses, homework and exams will ALWAYS take me longer than my sighted peers. My "choice" (and I have the word choice in quotes) to get a BA got me to thinking about how blindness often limits my options.
I didn't say anyone said it. I said you seem to think it is just by the way you jump down our throats for not having it done.
Oh, well no, it won't deliver you a job on a silver plate, i will give you a much better opportunity to get a job. Everything you have trouble wit now because your blind you will be able to fix. That's the end of the argument right there. You either continue t be blind, with all the problems it has, or you become sighted and work to fix them. That's it.
Remember he said problems you have because you are blind, not problems you have, because you have problems.
Oh, because blindness is such a horrible crutch. What a pittiful excuse that is. God.
Did you mean crush, or crutch? Cuz if you meant crutch, I don't think that word means what you think it does. For blindness to be a crutch, you'd have to lean on it, which one should never do. You should never lean on your blindness, its just blindness, lean on your self, or your strength or your family, but not your blindness. That's basically admitting, I'm helpless so please do this or that for me because I'm blind. That's disgusting. So maybe it is a horrible crutch, but I don't know if that's the way you meant it. Perhaps you could clarify what you meant?
Yep, that's what I meant, and a lot of times that's how many people come across on here.
Except the people saying they'd take on the adventure that is sight? Aren't exactly coming off as helpless, no.
Then again, was traveling abroad using my American heritage as a crutch? Makes about as much sense as what you're saying.
Nor are those of us who say they wouldn't, even if you all seem to think we are. We just don't want it is all.
I wasn't talking about every single person that said they would, but rather the majority who won't just come right out and say they are comfortable being blind.
I have noticed something.
Runner, you are not totally blind. Am I correct?
My reason for asking is you have posted about taking pictures out of a train window. You can see that the pictures don't scroll left to right, but go up the screen, and wonder if your eyes are playing tricks on you. You also can run outside. Am I right?
If I am, you are actually working with sight, not totally darkness.
Also if I am right I ask you to think about if things were totally dark. Would you want what you have back?
I'm not trying to convince you, but I do wonder.
Yes, Runner, I would like to know what technique you use to run. I am totally blind and enjoy exercise, so if you know how someone like me could run freely rather than be relegated to one of those confining stationary machines, please share.
And Forereel, I cannot resist pointing out that I neither see light nor darkness. <smile> Darkness is defined as the absence of light, but I've never seen light. In order for me to have a concept of darkness I would have to have a concept of light. So when someone asks me if it's "dark in there," I say, "No, it's undefined."
Sho ya right. Smile
But he'd know exactly what I mean if he can see.
When you are totally blind to a person that could see before it is dark, or stuff is just simply missing.
But sure, you'd not have a concept at all of that.
That's correct, I do have periferal vision. That's a good point though.
I went to a training center, the Louisiana Center for the Blind. Before that I used my vision a lot more, too much in fact. I strained it while traveling. I strained it while trying to look at smaller objects, such as small pictures. When I was done, I realized I did not have to rely on it so heavily. This was because the foundation of that training was the use of sleepshades, which we had to wear during training. We were also encouraged to wear them outside training hours while we went about our business in the apartments, which most people did not do. I did, for the second half of that training, and I noticed significant changes in how I traveled, cooked, and overall how confident I was.
I know that may bring up the question, you were able to adjust to working with no vision. Don't you see the contradiction here? However, in this instance it is slightly different. Anybody with vision could be put under blindfold, but a blind person can't put on glasses and see 20-20. Some people with limited vision might, but in my case I can't. Therefore, that is not a strong comparison.
After thinking, I've come down to this. The only way I would get back vision, is if it happened to me naturally. I'd rather not force my body to adjust to something like that. If, for some dumb reason, the world did away with all accommodations for blind people simply because it was curable for all types of diagnoses, then I suppose I'd retire and live my life, and manage how I could. It may get harder to live, but it will never be impossible, no matter what changes.
Oh, I forgot to mention. I just so happened to notice the video going in a vertical direction. It wasn't that I was straining my eyes to try and see what was happening. It was just noticeable to me. Good question though.
Lol. We were posting at the same time.
Voyager, I have gone through short periods where my vision totally blanks out on me, and that's exactly how I would explain it. Undefined.
As far as the running, most of the time I have used the vision I had to run with that too. However, I have tried running with sleepshades on. The best environment to run in is a long straight away, or an indoor track. Like I mentioned, when I was at the center, I was able to focus my hearing so well that I could hear where doorways were without feeling for them with my cane. I also applied my hearing to know when the indoor track was about to curve, because I could sense the wall getting closer on my side.
As far as running on a long straight away outside, some sort of landmark would help a lot. I could feel an elevation change where I ran, and I knew I was coming up to the street and I had to turn around and run to the other end.
I didn't care what people thought of seeing me run back and forth along that half mile stretch 10 times, because I love running that much.
I hope you walk that running stretch before you run friend. You can't hear if some kid has left his or her bike laying on the sidewalk, or some dumb person just wants to be mean that day, so puts a obstacle in the path.
So, you are not totally blind and have many benefits of sight.
In your case I can understand how you can be easy maybe with it. Some sight, no matter how little really helps you even when you do use a sleep shade to help you get better. You can take that shade off, and when you learn both worlds you are that much better believe it or not.
I think it is the reason I am able to travel as I do, because I also have a visual sense of what is around me.
Thanks for the answer. Smile.
Yeah, I forgot to mention that as a suggestion before you run. Lol.
I have done exactly as Wayne described, and run full tilt into a hurdle on a track before. That'll scratch up your legs good, for sure. Probably would hurt more to fall over it now at 40 than it did at 17. lol
Yeah, I bashed my knees up a little bit because I forgot there were picnic benches a bit off to the side of the path, and that left a few marks!
I run with a sighted partner. We use a loop of string so we can both use our arms. Itsa lot of fun.
Smart man. Its what I do when I want to run.
Something to be said for seeing. You can turn the corner even.
I think if I did run with someone, I would like the string idea better than having a harness or a rope.
Perfect argument for seeing right there. We spent the last few posts talking about ways to run. Do you realize how simple running is for sighted people? They can strap on a pair of shoes whenever they want and run to the store, or to the beach, or whatever. We have to make sure there are no bikes in the sidewalk, or find someone to hold a string for us. If we were sighted, all that would be fixed.
yes, but as has been said, it isn't like there aren't alternatives for us to be able to run. sure we can't run to the store as sighted people can, but instead of griping about it, or wishing I could change it when I can't, I just accept that this is the way things are. and, for the record, I used to have a tiny bit of vision.
oh, and something I forgot. people are saying that different is a bad thing; I disagree. the reason people see it as such, is cause they fear what they don't understand, or what they desperately wanna change, but can't. it's all in how you look at it, though.
Until recently I didn't even know that people moved their arms when they ran. I always had a cane in one hand, and my other arm was stiff at my side. When I had both hands free my arms were stiff and often in some protective posture. I often wondered what sightlings did having both hands free so much of the time, until one of them told me. Unfortunately, I don't know anyone who likes to run, and until that changes I will have to content myself with walking, swimming, or working out in the gym.
I accept that I have to be blind right now, but as soon as I don't have to be blind I won't have any reason to accept it. I also won't have to run on someone else's schedule.
Just a word. When running you'll not want to attach yourself to anyone. You don't even need anything fancy. A rope, or even a T shirt rolled up works, but don't tie yourself to them.
I didn't know sighted people moved their arms when they ran until a couple years ago, either. Someone tried to show me how it was done, and it was one of the most awkward things I've ever experienced. It made me feel like a complete idiot, having never done it before, and it also made me feel like maybe I was very uncoordinated. Then I started to wonder if maybe walking, as one of the previous posters described, with a cane in my right hand and my left hand stiff at my side, was the reason that sighted people have always told me that a cane is a sign of weakness, of vulnerability, and why I've had a lot of pressure on me to get a guide dog for as long as I can remember. Even when I was a kid I remember family members telling me that when I got old enough, I needed to get a dog to protect me. I've never been a dog person. Frankly, I find them to be disgusting. No offense, dog lovers, but I really don't care for slobbering beasts who are known to eat their own crap. What really sealed the deal though when it comes to my hatred for dogs, was an experience I had when I was about 8 years old. I was sleeping over at my aunt and uncle's house, and I was on an air mattress. I woke up in the middle of the night to find their dog licking my front teeth. I've been exposed to a few untrained dogs in my lifetime, as you may have guessed, which has slanted my viewpoint a bit, but to be fair, I've also been exposed to well-trained guide dogs. I decided a long time ago, however, that owning one was definitely not for me. Having a dog try to make out with you is scarring.
Despite having a little vision myself, I didn't know how people ran either. I can't remember exactly, but when I was younger I didn't run normally. I think I was trying to walk way faster, instead of letting my feet push me along while I ran. I'm trying to think of a better way to explain that. I also tended to tense my arms up and not let them swing. That all changed once I ran track.
Swinging the arms is actually natural,, even though we blind people have to learn to do it. Goes to show that the sighted also learned how, only by their surroundings. The arm motions actually help with propulsion and frankly, add to the experience, in my opinion.
Ryan's right about the feet, though. Most people, blind or otherwise, don't realize the running is actually way different than fast walking. With walking, you always have a foot on the ground at all times. With running, there are times both feet are off the ground. You can't analyze that one though, or you'll end up flat on yo' ass. But therein lies the difference. And you just thought that running made you feel like flight, or at times like you were on a cushion of air. It's not you or I being dramatic: it's technically accurate to a point.
I don't think it is something you learn because you can see.
You learn to run as a child, and blind people simply don't get to run or are not incurraged to do it, so you don't learn how until you are an adult, and sure it will be weird.
It is weird as a child except you don't know it, so you learn to balance with practice.
Speaking of balance, when it comes to walking on things that are narrow such as a balance beam, or a boat that rocks a lot, my balance is complete shit. I'm curious, is that a result of being blind? Are there ways of improving balance by itself?
I think bad balance is most likely a blind thing, since we are relying entirely on information from our inner ears, while everyone else can see the ground and other objects tilting relative to themselves. In fact I remember hearing somewhere that a group of entertainers who stack themselves into a human pyramid will lose their balance and all fall down when the lights are turned out. My balance isn't great either, although I think I've managed to lessen the effects of poor balance through things like core exercises.
A related thing I am terrible at is holding something streight and level with the ground. This came up recently when a friend was trying to show me how to walk somewhere in my neighborhood. I was using the compass on my iPhone. He kept saying, "hold the phone streight, you're tilting it." My response was , "I don't know what you're talking about. it IS streight!"
I don't have an explanation for this one. I have really good balance, even though I'm a lifer and have most the other problems the blind describe. Balance is not one of them. There must be something more to this one.
It must be a result of two things, then. I figured fitness helped with balance, but maybe the reason is height. Though I am fit, I'm about six foot and very lanky, and I'm guessing Leo is probably shorter than I am.
Not only much shorter, I'm 5 ft 7 in, but I also have short legs in comparison to the body, so that lowers the center of gravity. Great explanation.
My sighted wife who is 6 ft, and all wing / leg, has trouble with the balance also.
I could maybe agree with being close to the ground.
How about this idea. Some of us have what I call face vision. Face vision is the sense that you are getting close to something, or your awaearness of things around you.
It is not hearing, but sensation.
I'm about 5 foot 4. I don't know how my leg length / body length ratio compares to that of the average person though. I also have Asperger's syndrome. Shrinks tend to describe many people with AS as having poor balance and coordination, so I can't say for certain how much my blindness and my AS each contribute to my poor balance. If they wanted to do a study on lifers and balance they might exclude me for this reason.
Forereal, what do you mean by face vision? Are you referring to sonar, or the ability to detect an object by sensing heat coming off its surface?
You feel it.
Let me give you an example that might help. I can't wear a base ball hat because the bill on it makes me feel like there is something in the way or that I'm going to run in to it.
It is on me, so yes I know this is silly, but it really gets distracting.
Face vision tells me when I am standing straight and it can also give me direction, such as crossing a street. If I don't have face vision sensation I tend to walk crucket. With face vision or that sensation I can walk straight.
If I am crossing a wide street I lose it, because there is nothing to focus on, or a street with nothing on the corners.
What do you sense, exactly? If you woar headphones playing a bunch of static so that you could not hear your surroundings as you walked, would you still experience it?
No, I would not take the opportunitty to see for a number of reasons. First, I've been blind all my life, therefore, it would take me another lifetime to learn how to see, because, it's not like, omg I can see! I recommend reading Anthropologist on Mars by Oliver Sax, in that book is a story about a man who lost his sight when he was little and got it back at 50
Dolce.Eleganza,
That sad story has been cited on here (mostly by people who've "seen" the movie) more times than I can count. I read Sack's account a few years ago, and a couple of things immediately come to mind:
1. Virgil lack the support of his family. If you remember, they literally almost convinced him that he couldn't see even after the operation was successful.
2. From the story, "He was of medium height, but exceedingly fat; he
moved slowly and tended to cough and puff with the slightest exertion. He was not, it was evident, an entirely well man."
Sacks describes him as being in poor physical health and mentally a very passive person. Some blind people seem to point to this case study and say, he couldn't adjust to sight, therefore I can't also. But this is only one man. In the article, Sacks describes difficulties faced by several newly sighted patients, and I'm not claiming it would be easy by any stretch of the imagination, but I believe the adjustment would be possible. I've found a link so that anyone who's interested can read the aforementioned article:
http://www.willamette.edu/~mstewart/whatdoesitmean2see.pdf
But how about a story with a hopeful ending? Anyone read Emma and I, by Sheila Hocken? It's on bookshare.
I still think it has merrit, which is why I wouldn't do it either.
No, I didn't watch the movie. Not only does sax describe him as a man with poor health but of the overload he had that affected his behaivior. Many mistakes were made by his family and sax, which were that they were not letting him sloley ajust to his sight, Amy his wife after a few days took his cane from him, and he'd think shaddows were steps..` you see, whwhen they asked him to identify an object, he had to feel it first because he's learned to feel things in order to recognise them, so part of it was, not giving him the time to ajust... If I were to see a spoon, I'd not identify it because we're not used to 2 dementions. Most of his family did not believe he was blind, and thus, because of that pressure he acted blind. I'll read that book, thank you
Sure. Fortunately we can learn from those mistakes. I've read several case studies of people like Virgil, and they all have certain difficulties in common. For example, they all seem to learn the colors quickly and struggle with distances and shapes. If I were to gain sight, I have at least a few friends who would gladly be part of my rehabilitation process. One of them introduced me to a compilation of case studies called Space and Sight by Marius von Senden, so he is already familiar with the issues.
I wanted to comment on the balance issues that were discussed a few posts back.
I'm about 5'2, and my balance sucks, too. It's not bad in everyday activities, but I've tried to do things like walk on a balance beam and I was totally disconcerted. I'm not entirely convinced that height has anything to do with it.
Also, the thing about face vision that Forereel described is accurate. I can't walk with an umbrella for this reason. I'd rather get soaked, or try to go out after the rain has stopped if possible, than carry an umbrella and experience the sensation that something is constantly over my head or in front of my face. I'm not sure how to describe the sensation, really. I do have light and shadow perception, so perhaps some of it has to do with sight, but on really bright, clear days, or when there's snow on the ground, I can't see at all. I'm very sensitive to light, and if I don't go out with sunglasses on on those days, not only will I end up with a headache, but I might as well be glaring into a lightbulb the entire time I'm out. In other words, I can't see shit. So, anyway, even during those times, I do have that sensation if I'm coming up on something in front of me. Long before my cane hits it, I can just sense that something is in my path. I tend to slow down to a turtle crawl when this happens; it's a bad habit of mine, but it's also saved me from running into people and trees and stuff.
When I was in Grade School I could have done te balance beam ting but these days no way. LOL. I also can't walk with an umbrella, albeit for different reasons. It always seems, especially in hard rain, to interfere with my hearing what's around me.
You know, I'd never do this, butI can actually walk around and listen to music, so that cuts off the hearing.
What I'd not do it cross a street listening to music, or travel outside on a street, but I can navigate a building, and often do, or walk about in a yard.
Sure, II know my house, but I sometimes get on the phone, and because I want to do chorse or something I put on a heaset and go about my business. I never run in to a wall or anything unless I'm sleepy. I never actually run face first, but as described slow down for some reason. Put my hand up.
I've never ask anyone about it, and assumed blind people had it until I was teaching a friend to get around her apartment complex. I assumed she could hear or fill the stair casing over hang, so she'd not run in to it, but she says she can't.
Thank goodness she's to short, so it didn't bause her a problem while she lived there.
I do the same thing with music as well, even when I'm running inside on the track upstairs here. I can tolerate walking with an umbrella in the rain, I've found that hoodies or a coat with a hood makes it more difficult personally.
While we're on the topic of sensation, does anyone else here who was born blind have difficulty holding things level? I'm perfectly aware of what is meant when someone tells me to hold something level, but I often can't sense when I'm failing to do so. This means that for me, carrying a glass which is full to the brim is a bad idea. I usually will either carry a full plate in both hands or position it so that one edge is against my body. How does anyone get a true sense of where "level" is? For that matter, how can anyone sense whether or not they're walking straight? I doubt animals do it. They perceive some stimulus that interests them and move toward it. For this they probably wouldn't need a built-in "move in straight line" subroutine.
Yes on all counts, Voyager.
And there is a very real explanation the ra ra ra people, including those who used to beat me for failure to do this, won't like, but it's a matter of physics.
In truth, there is no absolute level or absolute straight. Straight and level are relative to the plane on which you're traveling, because of the shape and curvature of the earth. Most blidn people don't know this, but even on a so-called straight road, sighted drivers don't dare take their hands off the wheel. They must be constantly making adjustments to keep the car straight, on a straight road. Sorry religion/porn/fantasy ra-ra-ra- types, you're out, because you're too ignorant.
Straight or level is by point of reference only. I at one time felt shame over that stuff, but I don't anymore: physics is nothing at all to be ashamed of. And I too will maintain some relative basis like holding a load against the body or something to keep it level. By the way, construction workers depend on tools to verify level because the eyes aren't good enough. A lot of old architecture has a lot of flaws in it for just that reason.
As to walking straight? I knew about the plane and the curvature of the earth before, but my eyes were truly opened on this one when getting in the Coast Guard and hearing from pilots on recon (locating a missing person, may or may not be emergency), and seeing, from the air, a kayaker paddling in circles in a lake, too far from shore to see land. And when they tried to correct, they more often than not ended up near figure 8-ing it. They didn't just blind veer, they were bumbling all over the place, because they have no point of reference.
Now, since there are tools like GPS, this can aid a kayaker, and could frankly aid a person in a snowstorm, many of whom have died 10 feet from their house, due to exposure.
Straight and level are only available by reference to some fixed point. Anyone who does not know that got cheated when they were allowed to pass 8th-grade science. I love poppin' them filthy ideology-porn bubbles people have about us. Based on ignorance, not ignorance of being blind, but ignorance of things they should have learned in the 8th grade science classes. It's ridiculous.
You're not at fault for any of that stuff.
And, I've used tools to demonstrate I don't hold something exactly level. Trucking accidents, where people fall asleep at the wheel, happen most often on straight, boring roads. If only the blind veered because it was something about us, a driver on a straight stretch of I5 could nod off for fifty miles and be okay. Probably some of these ignorants who criticize us should do just that. It would serve to clean up the gene pool a little bit.
Hmmm that's something that makes a lot of sense. People used to give me a hard time about holding things level, though in the past I did tend to tilt my plates, etc. more drastically than I do. But at this point I'm way more self-reliant than back at that time. I'd be interested to see how someone would react if I told them, after they said "you are not holding that level", is there really such a thing aas perfectly level? Because there is a difference between tilting and holding things as level as you can, but I can't honestly imagine there being a perfect level object being held by a person.
Oh now Leo. hahaha. They mean holding your plate level so your food doesn't spill on the unlevel floor. Your drink doesn't spill.
I can't answer that question fairly, because I was once able to see, so now I can carry things, um, level. I can even balance a plate on my hand and carry something else in the other one as I walk, say to serve it, or put it on the table so I can eat.
I feel it, I don't see it, and the thing I carry I hold it in the zone of the feeling of where my body is. That wasn't a good description, but it is the best I can do.
I can hang a picture and make it straight, or something as well by feel.
I've always had problems with that. WhenI fill my ice cube tray and then transfer it to the freezer some water always ends up on the floor.
Wayne that makes sense. And depending on the sighted person in question, I have been told I hold things more or less level. I'm sure I was worse at it when younger. But honestly I have observed, I'll admit with some enjoyment, while two people who could see fought over whether I had something level or not.
I simply always presume to be not level, just as I always presume to be not straight, and hence make any corrections that are needed, or watch out to see if there need be any. I'll never claim to be natural about it, it's always something I at least think about when managing things. Sure, I've carried a drink container home on one arm, full of coffee drinks, while using my cane with the other, but then I had my body as an anchor, plus I was always checking it.
I've got an ice trey that has a top. It slic!
Even though I can carry things level, water sloshes. If you put a top on it it helps guide you I think.
I got mine at Containers, or the Container store.
Yes, I have that problem, too. When I'm holding a plate, I've been told that it isn't straight. On the other hand, I rarely spill stuff, so I'm not really sure what that's all about.
I have the same problem though with ice cube trays, or really full drinks, so I don't know.
Well, then use the other hand and problem solved. Lol.
That doesn't always work.
You know... when I was younger, I did want to see... but now that I've gotten older, I've learned to accept my blindness, it's part of who I am.. sure, I wish I could see even if it was for a second, or a day.. but I don't know if I'd want to see... blindness (since I was blind from birth) is all I know, and I'm quite happy with being blind... sure it might suck sometimes, but it's the way I am, and I just have to learn to adapt to this sighted world we live in.
if given a chance, yes I want to see. I'm viewing having sight as acquiring a new instrument to make my life much easyer just like learning how to use blind technology.
Speaking just for me, I hate being pushed into something I don’t want to do. I’m comfortable with my blindness; it is neither a tragedy nor something to be celebrated. I am neither a hero nor a poor unfortunate soul trapped in darkness, so given the choice, I’ll leave things as they are for me. Sure, maybe some things could be better, more efficient and easier, but I’ve been blind all my life and don’t particularly want to change that part of me at this point even though I’m not yet 50 years old. So, if a procedure were ever invented that would allow blind people to see and I were forced, either through brute physical confrontation or mental/emotional intimidation, I might learn to live with sight in the long run and even appreciate it, but I’ll never appreciate the person or people who forced me to do something I didn’t want to do. And I don’t care who that may be. Family, friends, coworkers, whatever: If you force me into something I don’t want, I’m permanently and irreparably done with you. If you couldn’t take me as I was when I couldn’t see, you won’t be a part of my life afterwards.
That said, I think there’s something missing from this equation. To wit, if there ever came a day when blind people could see, no questions asked and no possibility of side effects, we’d effectively be denied the choice of whether to see or not see. We’re such a small minority that in all likelihood, the rest of the “sighted world,” which is a term I’ve always hated, frankly, would decide that there’s no more need of all the things that now make life possible and enjoyable for those of us who cannot. You don’t need voc rehab for the blind if you can see, and you don’t need Braille if you can read print. You don’t need a screenreader if you can see to read the computer screen. I could go on all day, but I think my point has been made. In said case, you don’t even need to make the procedure mandatory; you can just let natural/societal evolution take its place, and it will. Your son or daughter is born blind? No prob. We’ll fix him/her up in just a couple shakes and he/she will be completely “normal,” which is another term I loathe. And did someone on here say that different was negative? Excuse me? So, everyone should be the same? How utterly boring!
Maybe the total eradication of blindness will be beneficial to society in the long run, and even to us as individuals. Someone mentioned the right to go about things incognito, and as a blind person, you admittedly can’t do that as easily as the average sighted person because you’re always gunna be noticed. And let’s face it: Generally speaking, many sighted people, when they notice us, see us as either truly amazing or pathetically tragic.
But there’ll be problems in the short. And one of those problems is the inability of many, many people to think critically about what a real pain in the ass sight would be, at least for a while, to those of us who’ve never had it. Many have already mentioned the sensory overload. I remember a coworker of mine, who always had to be right about everything, told me that my arguments were a crock of shit, but she used the approach that “normal” was always better.
And if you could suddenly choose to see or not see, you’d have a lot of people either climbing on your back and telling you to get in line for the next spot on the table, or others weeping with joy about what a wonderful thing this is, and how much less tragic your life’s gunna be “now that you can be normal like everyone else.” (I also hate sentimentality.) That’s why I say that if I woke up tomorrow and found that there was a possibility that I could see, I’d remain aloof for a while until I was certain I needed sight. But that has to be my choice.
Johnty, I've gone into great detail in this thread about why I would want to see and how I think sight would be a wonderful thing, but this "life without sight is a total tragedy" thing is nonsense. From what I observe, way too many sightlings seem to live in a vacuum. If it is a smell or a sound or anything other than photons they don't seem to realize it exists unless its right on top of them. I try to describe my experiences in these other sensory worlds, but they aren't understood. When they imagine blindness, it's tragic because if they don't see it it might as well not be there. So to them I live in a world of nothing. This "everything must be visual" approach spills into educational settings also. I've met professors who don't know how to explain a logical concept without drawing a picture, and I've heard others say that math is visual. No, math is mathematical. It really doesn't matter which set of working sensory organs you've got, two plus two is still gonna be four.
I don't believe the day will come when you are forced to see no matter how good the operation gets.
You have to think about it this way. Some people are over weight not because they must be, but because they don't want to do the things required to keep themselves in shape.
To over weight has complications for some people, and the solution is not life threatening to change it, but they can be as they are.
Being blind would be the exact same. You'd just be blind. Braille would be around, you could buy a screen reader just like larger people buy clothes that fit, and such things.
This is why I say it will never be a forced thing, you'll just live as you live as a blind person, and just like over weight people you'd be excepted by the people that love you just the same.
Blind is not a bad thing it is just limiting.
If you were given a lottery ticket and told, okay, you can cash this and have 10 million dollars, or you can toss it in the trash can and stay as you are, that be a choice. Me, I'm taking the 10 million even though being more wealthy has problems that go along with it.
Let's take all these hypothetical whats and whatevers away and go back to the original basic question. If you could see, wouldn't your life be easier? My answer would be no, not because I would still have the same problems I'd have as a blind person, but because everybody has problems no matter who they are or what their life is like. It's part of what makes life what it is. In the end, it's nothing more than a wish, and I'm supposed to believe as an adult that wishing does not make things so. Many people seem to believe, first of all, the most important way to measure quality of life is how many problems you have and how big they are, or at least how many you guess another person has and how big you guess they seem. The more and bigger problems you perceive another person has, the more you believe their life is harder even if you've not walked a step in their moccasins. The other flawed belief is "Oh, look how much life is just a sucky hole of nothing for me. If I were a different person, life would be better and I'd have no problems." Well, you can wish as hard as you may, but you'll never be another person than who you are, so you may as well shift your perspective, relax and enjoy the trip instead of wishing your life away over impossibilities.
Hi, this is me being a topic hog I guess, but more thoughts. I think I also dislike some of the same terms Johndy also dislikes. Sighted world? Sorry Charlie, there's just the one world, the planet Earth, which is inhabitted by both blind and sighted people. There is perhaps a blind or sighted world view or viewpoint, but we are not living on separate planets or in separate dimensions. Normal! Ugh, especially when people want to dress up normal as if it's the most desirable and ultimate way to be, some great holy grail we're all supposed to be questing after. You know what normal is? It's average, it's default, it's being a herd animal, a faceless drone. You are not an innovator, a mover or shaker, you do not question how things are, you aren't even creative, you just do whatever everyone else does and whatever authority tells you to do and that's normal. Don't it sound peachy? Nope, didn't think so.
Except that things like weight go up and down all the time. Sure, the people that love you will do so no matter how fat or thin you happen to be, but I think blindness is a whole new kettle of fish in this hypothetical world where it simply ceases to be a problem child for the rest of humanity. Blindness simply isn't seen the same way as being obese because in many respects there are cures for obesity. Namely, you lose weight. You eat right. You exercise and bring your weight down. There are those rare genetic exceptions where it might be impossible to do any of these things successfully and bring that weight down, but we're talking about a hypothetical situation where blindness just ceases to be. If blindness ceases to be, why not all the other attendant things that go along with blindness? Why do you have to teach a kid Braille if he can be "fixed?" Why do we need to make this job accessible through the installation of screenreading equipment when you could simply go to a doctor and get your sight? That's the sort of force I mean. It's not an active force; it's the sort of societal evolution I mean. In contrast, obesity simply doesn't work the same way because obese people will always have the danger of heading back down the fatty trail because everybody needs food and everybody eats. The difference between an average person and an obese one is that some people can eat Italian pastries all day long without worry while others gain fifty pounds simply by looking at them. So, if an obese person's Achilles heel is Italian pastries, he can choose not to eat them. Blindness is a lot more loaded because what average sighted parent would choose blindness for their child if sight is just naturally better and could be achieved through a hypothetically simple operation? Understand I'm not bitching here; I'm just accepting a hypothetical reality that I think may actually come to pass someday. Heart of hearts, I do think that having been born with sight would've been easier in many ways, but it didn't happen for whatever reason, so here we are, and we might as well be happy, make the most of things, get down to business, whatever you wanna call it. If that's being comfortable in our own skins, it's certainly a better way to live than constantly wishing on a star for things that might not happen. This may be too much info for some of you, but if I had a choice between sight and a steady boyfriend right now, I'd choose the boyfriend.
Well in this case a parent could choose over weightness too, but many don't, so if you could just simply see why not choose or not choose it?
If it were a choice, I think even those who chose not to see would be forced to cave in and do it because with the blind being an even smaller minority and with blindness as a choice, I think attitudes towards us would be even more hostile. People do not like to be inconvenienced and people need somebody or some group to blame why they believe their lives are so hard and bad and awful, so they will be hostile and resentful towards us for having to help us at all or accomodate us. As it is in the real world, being kind to us is a sort of social obligation to many because we have no choice. People do their little bit for us, helping us find a store or cross a street and they're seen as having done a good deed. Some folks believe doing such good deeds increase their chances of getting into heaven or perhaps having a better life when reincarnated, the whole good karma bit. In that world, we'd be yelled at for not choosing to see so they wouldn't have to put up with our blind self. So be glad it's not a choice.
The point I’m getting at is that obesity is different than blindness. You can always become obese or lose the weight, at least in most instances. Blindness at this point is seen as something rather unfortunate by the overall mass of society, and not easily fixable. If you’re blind, odds are you’re gunna stay that way. Obesity is seen as an unfortunate choice; something that can be, for lack of a better word, cured. Those who choose to be obese simply are seen as having the habit of eating too much. If you’re born blind, at this point you have no choice unless the blindness is something that can actually be cured through surgery. Most of the time it isn’t that easily dealt with.
Now again, suppose blindness can be fixed, cured, whatever you want to call it. You’ve got two pressures going on here that in my opinion create a societal shift. In the first wave, you’ve got people already blind who could see if they’d just accept the cure. So there’s pressure on them to do so because, after all, who would choose to be blind? At this point blindness is a little closer to obesity because it’s something that can be fixed. And you force people to get fixed by taking away the things that now make it possible for us to live as independently as we can right now. Why do you need Braille? That’s for blind people. Why do you want to walk with a cane like a blind person when you can get fixed and see? You don’t need a screenreader because, again, that’s for blind people. SSI/SSDI for blind people gets eliminated because there’s simply no need. After all, you don’t need these programs because if you’re blinded in a war injury or through some other accident of fate, you can get fixed. Ultimately, the theory would be that society doesn’t have to spend money constantly on you as a blind person if you don’t need to be blind. Those of us who would choose to remain blind because that’s all we know would be looked upon with increased resentment because we’re obviously a waste of societal resources. It wouldn’t matter to them that we were as fully functional as we could possibly be before a so-called cure was found, or that we were able to take care of ourselves, hold down jobs, be competent parents to our children or loving and productive mates to our significant others. I’m saying all this because the greater part of society, including many of us who are blind, believes sight is better than blindness. And that’s not necessarily a completely bad thing. If I were once sighted and suddenly lost my sight at the age of say, 35, I’d want it back. We always want what we once had and have either lost or are losing. For instance, I want that thick head of hair I used to have when I was fifteen. It’s human nature.
And then there’s the second wave. You’ve got the fact that any future children born blind can easily be fixed. No need for Braille. No need for screenreaders. No need for walking with canes or guide dogs. No need for worrying about how you’re gunna mainstream your poor little blind urchin because you won’t have a poor little blind urchin once he/she is fixed. Blindness easily becomes a thing of the past; something like smallpox that nobody gets anymore because it’s been eliminated. Well, except for those pesky little stockpiles of specimens that we and the Russians built up because we distrusted one another to destroy them. But you get the idea. I don’t necessarily see this sort of thing happening immediately, but I’d place even money on it happening within the next hundred years, and at that point I think it would be unavoidable, for good or ill.
Despite all the pop psychology talk on here about what is normal or what is being ourselves, I still stand by the following:
If being blind becomes a choice, there will be no accessibility requirements for us. They do not have those requirements for lifestyle choices. The only reason people are expected to pay taxes to support programs for the blind, the only reason people are expected to comply with ADA (when they even are), for the blind, is because we cannot change that ourselves. That is a disability. But if it ever becomes a lifestyle choice, you who would choose to remain blind, will have to choose to do so entirely at your own expense. I, for one, consider that to be fair.
Why even today, my iPhone and the Talking Goggles app helped me see a little bit. The Chick got home with grocerties, I unloaded everything and proceeded to sort everything independently including the chick products whose endless bottles and containers I cannot keep straight which is what facial thing or other stuff.
Now since I have an iPhone, I personally think it's reasonable for anyone who knows how well it works, to assume that I would at least use that and do more independently. Of course, sometimes she tells me it gets it wrong.
But for you using older technologies, or no technologies at all in this way, wouldn't you say the same thing about your own independence? When I move back to the city, for instance, that will be like being sighted, in its own way, rather than the cloistered existence I've had for 5 years for the benefit of the daughter's schooling. When we're in town like that, isn't it perfectly fair to assume I'd head out and go to the store instead of her having to all the time?
And now with GPS apps, we can even do this in lesser-known areas, all a combination with what we have from before. If I could get sight, sure I'd take it, just as an extension to what I already have. And if I refused sight, I honestly don't even think that's fair to people who depend on me like the daughter and sometimes the nieces, or to the Chick or to anyone else I'm often around. It's not about pop psychobabble be yourself and normal, like some of you make it sound: it's just an extension of what we're already doing. And, I bet, just like sometimes with the iPhone, it won't work right sometimes till we get it figured out.
Any of us with a Android or a iPhone are already, using their cameras and apps, getting more and more sighted anyway, the more stuff they let us do. Guess I should add GPS to that equation: I know someone who just went on vacation somewhere, and using a GPS app on his iPhone went outside the hotel, down a few blocks to the coffee shop, bought coffee, brought it back, something his wife would have otherwise had to do all the time. It's just nature for us to push the bounds. Nature or animal instinct, however you call it, and we're just using anything that comes along to accomplish that. Sight would be just one more extension of it.
To me the people who rail against it are like the religious nuts who claimed humans weren't meant to fly, or the "breakneck" speed of 15 miles per hour of the steam train was diabolical and against gravity. Just all superstition.
That’s why I say that when it comes down to it and blindness does become a sort of lifestyle choice, something that’s easily fixable, society will force you to do it. I say that for good or evil, it’s gunna happen that way whether we like it or not. I still say the bad part about restoration of sight later on in life when you’ve never had it to begin with is that at least some of us will find it exceedingly difficult to learn how to use it. So, if you’re gunna create a situation in which it’s gunna have to be done anyway, you better have rehabilitation proceedings in place to teach people how to see and process that information. I admit it’ll be less difficult for me because I did have a tiny bit of residual vision so that I could see colors, so I obviously know the difference between light and dark and all that. I could never see enough to read print, however, but I used to have one of those optacons, so I could probably learn to read print visually. Actually, it gives me a whole slew of ideas on how to teach blind people to read visually, because you can tactally show them what letters look like and then represent them visually on a page. And because I am a very auditory person, I used to associate color with noise. So, for some, it would be easier to learn how to see than for others. I think a slow process would be better than having it done all at once, pop psychology aside.
But I think the thing that really pisses me off, and probably the thing that makes some of us rail against the whole idea of instant sight restoration is the bullshit we get from some sighted people about it all. Can you imagine all the weepy excitement we’re gunna get from total strangers who think that sight is all we dream about in our miserable, pathetic lives? I used to know someone in school who kept on bringing it up. Constantly had to tell me about all the medical advances they were making towards this goal I was supposed to be ecstatic about. As though I had nothing else going on in my life than the hope of seeing one day. And there’s the occasional stranger who has to do the same damned thing. Never realizing that what I might actually have on my mind is how high rents are going, or gee, I’ve got a headache and I just want to get to the store so I can buy myself something, or I wonder how my mother’s or father’s health is doing, or I really hope I win the lottery because I hate my job and at least half the people I work with. In other words, I’m blind, but blindness is not the only thing that defines me. I’m white, I’m gay, I’m male, I love to read, listen to music, cross-country skiing if the snow’s right and I have a pair of skis, gambling. I hate endives, hard-boiled eggs, being in debt and people telling me what I should or shouldn’t do. And that’s not even the tip of the iceberg. But all they see is your blindness, and all they can focus on is what a terrible thing it must be. And no amount of talk is gunna persuade them otherwise.
Yes, but when that happens like smallpox blindness will be fazed out as you say, so it won't be an issue of choice anymore. We'd soon not have any blind children, only adults that are blinded for some reason, and they'd not want to remain so.
This is why I don't think it will ever get to a choice. It won't happen tomorrow, and if it does it will take a really long time before it becomes an issue.
Um, so, ultimately we agree? I'm just a little confused because in posts 254 and 258, by asking why not choose to see or not see and equating blindness with weight, you seemed to indicate it would be a choice even in the hypothetical situation that sight were instantaneously and seamlessly available. Just sayin'.
hells to the yes!
Why should you give a damn about what other people think? The only ones who should matter are the ones important to you who will accept and love you regardless of what decision you make. Obviously if such a procedure was available not everyone would have it done, and anyone who chooses to continue living without vision will have to put up with the good and bad. People with vision already give us a hard time about being blind though it may not be shown in angrer or resentment. personally if a person is going through rehabilitation to learn how to see and they get SSI or SSDI I think they should still accept it until they're functional. And if that person was using their blindness as an excuse not to work or if they simply were unable to find a job after their best efforts then there's always welfair temperary assistance shelters soup kitchens food banks and pantries that could help or support them. All that stuff about braille and mainstreaming were all created by sighted people for us for the most part anyway. If in this hypothetical world they did disappear then an individual would have to figure out how to get by on their own means. Someone on here said something to me that stuck till this day. "The world owes you nothing." I don't think one would be forced but I imagine one who decided against it might feel a tremendous amount of pressure which nobody has to give in to. Again people can do what they want but it may not be easy.
I can't deny that I've wondered what it's like to actually see things but chances are it'll probably never happen, so I don't see any point in stewing about it. THenof course there's the matter of cost. Any kind of procedure like this is bound to be expensive, certainly beyond the means of the average blind schmoe.
I wonder, though, whether the cost of blindness as a lifestyle choice will be viewed as more expensive than the cost of this hypothetical procedure to restore/give sight where there was none. I'm guessing insurance companies will certainly view it that way, and that they'll pay for the procedure because of the overall supposed benefits to society. Just sayin'.
Not if I know insurance companies. They'll probably view it as more of a cosmetic procedure since it's not strictly necessary for survival.
I agree with Bryan. I seriously doubt that insurance companies will cover such a procedure, simply because of how expensive it's going to be. If there was a "cure" for blindness tomorrow, do you know how many blind people would be there clamoring for it to be done if they thought that they wouldn't have to pay a cent? Not happening.
I disagree on a couple fronts. First, while those of us who were born blind or were blind from a very young age might view sight as unnecessary, you have to remember that those who lose their sight at a later age may have been doing something that heavily involves sight. We're talking about the war-wounded, for instance, or those who were once, say, truckdrivers, painters, etc., or in some other field where eyes were extremely necessary to them. Yes, in former times they could have chosen to be something else, but now that there's a supposedly easy fix to blindness, they can be doctors, truckdrivers, etc. again. For lack of a better word, they can be fully functional, at least in the minds of the greater masses. Blindness is already seen by the masses as inferior to sight whether we like it or not, and more sighted people means greater societal productivity. So, I don't think insurance companies are going to view sight restoration as merely cosmetic. Second, I don't think there'll be as many blind people clamoring for sight restoration as you might think. I, for one, am not the clamoring sort mostly, and I was born blind, so it doesn't mean overmuch to me. I'm betting there are plenty of others like me who either would choose to be as we are because to us sight is unnecessary, or who would stay on the sidelines until necessity forces us to get the procedure. I'm saying that the words "oppportunity to see" for me are the wrong ones to use. My decision to get the procedure would be coldly logical and utilitarian and based on my belief that blindness will one day become impractical.
Those types are another matter though. They had sight at one time in their lives and therefore remember what it was like. Nobody's arguing the fact that they would want to get their sight back if an opportunity to do so ever arose. Again though, you'd have to contend with insurance companies who would, if I know them, search for any possible means to get out of paying for the procedure. You hear stories about that happening to people injured on the job or in car accidents. A person could sustain severe burns over most of their body in some accident, leaving them not only hideously scarred but also I'd imagine in constant, excruciating pain and insurance companies will often refuse to help them pay for surgery because they view it as nothing more than cosmetic. This hypothetical sight-restoring procedure would doubtless be lumped in with the rest of those.
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. From what I hear, next to cancer, blindness is people's greatest fear because sight is such an integral part of most humans' experiences. Not saying that a lot of insurance companies won't try to get out of paying for sight restoration therapy, if that's what you want to call it, but I'd venture to say that there'll be a backlash. I'm also betting that if insurance companies won't do it, the government will at least try to step in.
I doubt it. It is the government after all. They're not known for spending money wisely.