Category: the Rant Board
I’ve seen a lot of people on here get into heated discussion about the NFB and their methods and how they compare to the ACB. As someone from the UK I find this really interesting because in all honesty we lack any advocacy organisation like that. I can’t say which is better, I don’t live in the US and neither organisation has been of benefit to me but nor has it caused me any problems. I would say though that whether you like them you do have a choice. I don’t think it’s right for any organisation to say that they represent all members of a specific group because they never will, and that’s not just the case for blindness organisations. However, whether you choose to go to conventions, attend training centres or support their campaigns is entirely your decision.
Here we have one blindness organisation, the RNIB. They are extremely different to the US organisations for a number of reasons.
Firstly, the organisation itself is not controlled by the blind. The CEO of the RNIB is fully sighted, and not all members that sit on the board are blind. I know that this is very different to the NFB, and I assume the ACB, though I know less about that organisation.
They also don’t run any training centres or independence programs. They provide services such as braille transcription, a shop, and they campaign. However their campaigns focus on the helplessness of the blind rather than independence.
They do run summer programs, currently action for blind people administrate them, however they are a member of RNIB group. These summer camps are for blind children, however only children in mainstream schools are supposed to attend, therefore if you go to a school for the blind you’re not meant to apply to one. I went when I was around 8 or 9, and they’re ok, they last a week and you go climbing, canoeing and things like that. However they run no educational programs, I know the NFB did a science summer program this year, and they also have one promoting the use of braille. I have no idea if I’d be a member of the NFB if I lived in the US, but I do think it’s good that there are blindness organisations running programs with an educational focus. There is no encouragement for children here who are learning braille, and the organisation itself won’t challenge school districts who refuse to teach blind children braille.
I’m interested to hear your thoughts and comparisons to US and other international organisations. To give you an idea about the RNIB I’ve put some links to a couple of their campaigns.
The first one is about a girl who loses her sight.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2cJLF1qVpI
And this one is targeting the government, stating what the needs of blind people are, it very much focuses on how we need support to do everything, like cleaning and washing our clothes, it was met with opposition from a lot of us.
http://www.rnib.org.uk/getinvolved/campaign/news/Pages/12days.aspx
In my opinion, the rivalry between the NFB and ACB is caused by the members, not the organization, or organizational idea.
Both are much like clubs with the exception, they do some good things for the blind.
When the say they represent the blind, I think that is a loose term, and not “we represent all blind persons living in the US.”, but I could be wrong there.
The NFB and ACB run training centers, sure, but they are not running them all, nor do are the connected to many of our schools for the blind.
I personally think schools for the blind are institutions for getting the blind out of the way. You’ve got to teach them, and you can’t say they are mentally ill, so you develop a school system. These schools also are businesses, so earn money.
I am proof they are not needed, because I’ve always attended public school with the regular society, and the money that goes in to these institutions, could be better used putting the blind child in the mainstream, and paying traveling teachers with better education, or specific education, as mine were, to teach them, or supplement their teaching.
When you talk successes, or failures, I tend to look at the successes of both NFB and ACB, because most times the failure is not lack of trying, but politics, attitudes, and other factors not related to the effort.
An example, is if you want to change the law, or create a law that states all public bathrooms must have braille labels on it, you must deal with first, how many blind persons can actually read braille?
Next, the cost, and who’s going to pay it?
Next, blind persons rebelling saying, they can figure out the men’s room from the ladies room without braille, and why do they need to be treated differently, when in fact bathrooms are labeled for the general public, but we can’t see that, so don’t know it? Smile.
So failure, I think isn’t the question, but successes are important, and I hope they continue.
But blind, like any other group are not interested in what is available, and sometimes even fight things that could be available for different reasons, so again, you can’t say in any country the groups are at fault.
Money is a large factor, and here in the US, the NFB and ACB have managed to become wealthy organizations. Other countries, this is not possible, or hasn’t been tapped.
I don’t belong to any organizations for the blind, but have supported them, and my family has from time to time.
That's interesting, I completely agree that money would be better spent improving education for blind students in public schools rather than pushing them into blind schools.
Or wasting it on hypothetical cars for us. LOL.
I'm surprised I didn't see this topic sooner. I completely agree with what Wayne said. It is the people in the organization that you encounter first that you base your judgments and thoughts about the organization off of instead of doing your research, and that is why this sort of topic gets so heated. People don't understand that the NFB itself has a purpose which is taken out of context by some Extremist members. Most of us are adults here and so we should be able to judge what good things we can gain from these organizations, and what is being over exaggerated and unrealistic. I myself have gone to two of the National Conventions of the National Federation of the Blind and I haven't encountered any extreme activities such as being forced to march and such, and I would be the first to say so if I did. And I can honestly say I don't know enough about the ACB organization. I have no beef with them. I would say 80 percent of my friends who were fellow students at the Louisiana Center of the Blind when I was there hated the ACB simply because they interpreted the things that were said about ACB as horrible and against the ideas of the NFB. Truth be told, the ACB was actually founded by NFB members who did not agree with every philosophical point of the NFB. This sort of separation from the majority happens with all sorts of groups, though, and is always interesting to watch. If only people did their research and did not believe the first thing they heard about something, these sorts of discussions wouldn't explode so harshly.
I found the NFB to be very cultlike. Like, the B stands for borg! So, I fly solo. I'm not into that whole let's all hold hands in a big community mentality.
I won't lie, the NFB can be pretty cult-like. I used to call them the National Federation of the Borg, actually. But Ryan's right too, we often make our judgments on the first people we meet who are part of an organization, rather than doing research. And that could be any organization, not just one involving blindness.
I to am part of the Federation, so I can speak to its programs. It does have three training centers around the country. It does have summer programs for blind youth that emphasize the sciences, because a lot of public schools have this misconception that blind kids can't do science. It does lots of education in Braille literacy. There's probably more, but those are what's coming to mind. And though I am a member, I have absolutely no use for the cult-like mentality that pervades the leadership. I do disagree with the NFB on several things, and have no problem voicing that.
I can't speak for the ACB, since I am not a part of them. I have said for years though that if an ACB convention were close enough to me to afford it, I would go to it just to try and get a feel for what it's like, for the people, etc. The other reason I haven't gone to an ACB convention, aside from distance, is I don't really know anyone. If I had some people I knew I could hang out with, that'd be one thing, but being at a convention by oneself would get very lonely. Still I'm not closed off to the idea of learning more.
Most of the heated discussions you get are driven by the publicity each organization puts out. They used to be one organization, then split in the early sixties, and now there's a blood feud. I truly hope that as younger leaders come to power in the next few years, that blood feud will be less crazy.
I have a lawyer friend in the ACB, and I've known several people over the years in the NFB.
I have joined neither, but if I did it would be ACB, and here is why:
The NFB has had only one change in president in 60 years. Does that not tell you anything? Also, the ACB is much more locally controlled than is the NFB. Each state has its chapter and exercises a lot more control in much the same way as the United States does. I am not, and never have been, a federalist. I understand the long political debates about federalist versus local control.
I would much rather be a part of an organization whose governing style more closely matched that of the United States.
With a federalist system like the NFB employs, the top dictates how local chapters will operate with a lot more control. And in that same system, somebody bright and articulate like Alicia or Ryan won't have near the chance to affect changes as they would where local control reigns supreme. Not pulling a military crew leader act and volunteering either of you, here, but just proving a point.
The point is, there are philosophical differences that go beyond anything to do with dogmas or trainings or any of that. Though, I will say, where the control is top-down, you are much more likely to have the types of problems people talk about. Again, there are people who argue for national control over local because of things like Texas removing science in the classroom, or some local school district out here doing some weird new ahe fruit loop "stress bingo" education. I get it, and I understand there is value in both.
I'm too much the indecendent was-once-a-libertarian to support top-down structures.
Not to hijack this thread, but wanted to point out there are real concerns people have about how some of this gets done. And I'm one of those stubborn people that thinks "Look how much good it's done," isn't reably a fair argument. The Taliban got rid of drugs in Afghanistan, and Hitler significanjly improved the German economy. But at what cost? Not. Comparing the NFB to either of those, just my answer to that argument, which I usually hear from nationalists, blind and otherwise.
Yes, Leo, you know how I said I strongly disagreed with NFB on some things? The top down structure is one of them. People like me and Ryan may not be able to make as much change as we like, but we can begin making changes in our local and state affiliates, and see where that leads. I've seen how changes in states can filter back up to the top, too. So, while I may not like the way the leadership is set up, and I hope someday that changes, for now I try to work within the structure that exists to make my own little corner of it better.
Ok... maybe I understood something when I first learned some history about the NFB, but I am 99 percent sure that we have had more than one President in the last 60 years, let alone the last 20. I can't remember what year Doctor Jurnigan died and I don't remember if anyone was a President between him and Doctor Mauer. But if this is wrong please someone tell me. Tembrooke was the first President and he was President of the NFB for a while, but the three names I mentioned are the most well known as they were the only ones I am aware of who were Presidents.
Had a typo in that last one. I meant to say maybe I understood something. But anyway, I think I kind of see why the NFB is set up the way it is, which I also disagree withl. I think they keep the same President for any extended period of time, maybe because they feel they can keep stability and organization with the same trusted person. By doing this they won't have to worry about showing several people the ropes time and time again. The person will understand how things work and the different proceedings. This can be a double sided sword, though. They could end up with someone who either does a crappy job, or doesn't put enough effort in to it. This is a set up that could either go great, or go really bad. I personally think there should be more circulation of the position to open up opportunities for the many people that have great potential. Likewise, there should be a part of this system where board members have the power to impeach the President if he/she doesn't do things right, just like checks and balances.
No no, Leo, there have been at least three different presidents in the last forty years alone in the NFB. and now Maurer is retiring, so a new one's coming in. I have no affiliation with either organization at the moment, but I used to be part of the NFB years ago, and I have to say, joining them has really opened my eyes in some respects. No pun intended. I don't really know thoroughly about all they stand for, and i don't really care to either agree with or disagree with either organization. I know some members that belong to both because each one provides some benefits the other doesn't. I say if it helps the blind in one way or another, then it's fine.
I'd be insulted by the RNIB tactics and campaigns, but I know that many sighted people would prefer that to the NFB. Many people want to pity us and help us rather than empower us to be better and to grow on our own. I'm the first to advocate that we should seek out help, but it should be on our terms, not up to some condescending, patronizing people who can decide what we can't do for ourselves as blind individuals.
I'll tell you. When I was growing up, I was raised in a well-intentioned, loving, but sheltered family. It was so bad that I wasnt' even expected to get my own glass of water by the time i was six or seven. I wasn't told I could do whatever it is I chose to do with my life. I wasn't encouraged to hope for a family of my own--it was unheard of. My family loved me and knew I was smart, and they encouraged my musical and educational endeavors, but never independence, and never anything more personal than that.
Then, I met a TVI who was affiliated with the NFB. Ironically, she was sighted, but she became great friends with some local members. So long story short, she invited me and my mom to the local NFB Chapter's summer picnic party...And boy did that change my life. I'm not kidding. I met people who had kids. I met people who were married and lived on their own, or with partners--people who supported their parents instead of the other way around. I met college students. The lady at whose house the party was hosted was an aquestrian rider, she had a three-year-old son and was married to a sighted guy. And man, did she know how to work her gas grill!! I still dream of that burger I had. lol. Her husband was a truck driver and so she had to manage at home alone with her son and her guide dog most of the time--and she held down a fulltime job at a local stable. Now, to us, today, this probably isnt' much of a big deal. Not at all. But you need to understand--put yourself in my shoes: A sheltered little blind girl who was conditioned not to even dare to hope to have the kind of life her sighted peers would have. I was expected to get good grades at school, but never to cook my own meals or even wash my own clothes. Even up till high school it was a constant battle with my family for my right to be independent.
Anyway, I met all these confident, productive, independent--normal people and I was overwhelmed with the feeling of opportunity for myself. There were people with guide dogs--which excited me so much because I've only ever heard of blind people with guide dogs from TV and I so wanted to be one of them. I was so happy that I, too, could aspire to not only have a career but a family as well. That if all these people could do it, so could I.
And my mom, who did most of the sheltering, was also able to see how these people managed just fine on their own. She became more supportive of what I needed to do to increase my likelihood of success in the future. She could see that people led normal lives while being blind--and for her, I believe, it was a relief that perhaps I, too could be one of them someday.And some people speak of the cultish attitude of the NFB...I don't know. Maybe there is one and maybe there isn't. But for me, at the time, the fact that the group was so united and the organization was so together was empowering. It boosted my confidence...Made me feel like I wasn't alone in my blindness..And that was so incredibly important to me because I barely knew anyone else personally who was blind at that point in my life. I went to several of the conventions, and I seriously felt better about my right to exist as an independent blind person in this country. I haven't really met polarizing people, except for this one guy on a list serve that is pretty high up in teh NFB and who annoys the living shit out of me, but all in all, for me personally, it was probably the single most enriching experience--my affiliation with them as a teenager--where blindness is concerned.
If only for the fact that I met people who were determined to live normal lives despite being blind. It was so drilled into me that I'd always need some sort of assistance or help, that I truly believed that blind people couldn't--or shouldn't be truly independent. So for me, personally, that was just the push I needed. I don't knwo much about ACB, but I heard they're much more relaxed, and more accepting of sighted help, etc. ACB isnt' even very active where I live right now, so I can't really say much about them. But in my case, a blindness organization like the NFB really came in handy--today, I have a job, a son, and a partner--afull life, and half my life ago I never would have even dared to dream of it.
Bernadetta's last post was right on.
I grew up similarly to the way she did, and although I've been around blind people throughout my life, they weren't people who had been brought up to be as close to sighted folks as possible.
they had everything done for them, as I did, they weren't encouraged to zip up their own jackets, tie their own shoes, make their own sandwiches, or get their own cereal, much less become truly independent in a bigger way that would benefit anyone, including themselves.
it honestly wasn't till my involvement with the NFB, that I saw successful, competent, confident people who happened to be blind, yet, lived their lives quietly, doing what they could to make things better for themselves, their families, and society as a whole.
so, to add to what Bernadetta and Alicia said, the key, here, is to learn all you can about organizations like the NFB, figure out what you like and don't like about them, yet, find ways to incorporate making better lives for yourselves, and those around you.
as cheesy as this will probably sound to some of you, I truly believe that's what the NFB is about. the organization gives people the knowledge/access to things that they might not have had before, and the freedom to pick and choose how to use such things, or not, in their lives.
Hats off to those of you who grew up in a family that did not pity you, that did not do everything for you, that did not hold your hand and keep you safe from all the dangers of the world. One thing you have to understand, or at least try to understand as I know it might be hard, is that not everyone grows up in this way. And for those of us who did not grow up with independence as a means of surviving, it isn't even a thought in our minds unless we are exposed to it. Just like being sheltered might sound foreign to you, doing the simplest things like tying your own shoes seems impossible without assistance to those of us who were sheltered. Can you imagine how much different some statistics for the blind would be if these training centers did not exist? If you heard other stories from other people who attended the Louisiana Center of the Blind, the Colorado Center for the Blind, or the one in Minnesota, that would enforce what we are saying here. I can't speak for every person who attended the centers because the truth is not everyone makes it out successfully. Just like not everyone graduates from high school or college. But I will share my experiences and recollect as much of what happened as I can. Because it will be something I carry with me forever. I'm serious. You can not judge all training centers together, because THEY ARE ALL DIFFERENT IN SOME WAY. I wish I would have done more research before attending the Louisiana Center for the Blind. Luckily it turned out fine, but when I compare it to the other options I had it just blows my mind how doing research slipped past me, and how a random stab at a choice could have went either way. If I did not attend that center, or if that center did not exist, there would have been no hope for me as far as I know. There was so much that I never considered before. Some simple things, others that were more complex. It also made me want to try more things and figure them out, taking away the fear of screwing up and making me realize that it's ok to screw up sometimes. Unless you do you can't say you got better. My set beliefs that I had from being sheltered were challenged and I realized this was not the life I wanted to live. As a runner, it is in my blood to get up off my ass and try new things. Explore the world and find things. If you want to call this a sort of Religious testimony, fine. But realize that this is not how I see it. I am not basing my opinion on a God or something that stems from the idea that consists of "what if's", or things that can not be fully proven. These are realistic experiences and things that I've gone through. Anybody can say they have heard the word of God without proving it, but not everyone can make up a story about being sheltered, attending a training center and coming out of it as a different person. You will hear horror stories about other centers. Matter of fact you might even hear some about the Louisiana Center of the Blind, as not everyone who goes there gives two shits about themselves or others. There are people who go there to get laid, party, drink, etc. just like some fools who go to college, who have parents that pay their tuition from day one. But you don't hear people saying that colleges should be done away with because there can be health hazzardous consequences in them. At least I've never heard something so silly. So what I'm saying is do your research, and don't make judgments simply from the basis of negative complaints that other people make. You are your own person and if you were in that other person's shoes, it would affect you differently.
First off, I stand corrected regarding the presidents. Also, I can really appreciate what everybody has said about the sheltered lifestyle. I don't know this is a blind person, but I have seen this among religious homeschooled kids. Kids who were physically teenagers, but me being blind and only having their behavior to go on, I mistook them for being 10 years old.
However, I believe the opposite of sheltering can have devastating consequences I'll be at different ones. What I'm talking about is being punished for appearing disabled, being punished for not doing enough, always being a failure, always having to measure of visually in ways that are near impossible. This may not have affected my career or family life, as I am fortunate enough to be at least lower middle-class in midlife earning okay living to support us. However, the internal consequences continue to resurface, and are beyond my ability to fully comprehend or manage. Whether it's the recurrent nightmares at three in the morning, or just the impending doom to sense of failure, it's pretty constant. I'm not claiming the centers would promote this, I've never been to one. Besides, they deal with adults and not kids.
However, the mantras a very similar or were. Emoji all of the folktales are terribly incompetent people, all of the middle east terrorists style activities taken. What I mean is, the use of extensive dogma, and stories about other people, to excuse the inexcusable. I don't claim that the NFB did any of this. I do justifiably stated that people used the NFB as an excuse however.
I'm not even sure of a single human can be blamed for what took place. Dogma is such a strong opiates, that if animals could be subject to it they could not resist it.
So, while I can completely appreciate what people have said about being sheltered, I think there has to be a better way than the opposite extreme. I would hate to think that the only two options were either shelter or what has ended up being me in midlife. I appreciate my freedom, more than ever, now that I'm back in the city. But the nagging components that have plagued me for my entire life, I don't think are justified as cost. Look at it like this: someone offers you a move from the slums to a really nice place to live. But the price they quote is not dollars and cents, but your kidneys and maybe a few other organs that you can technically live without. You then have these nice tools, a nice place to live, but you're artificially sustaining yourself forever. I fear that this is no way to do things. And if the NFB is not at all responsible, then they ought to be able to collect damages from people who use their philosophy that way. Because if the NFB has no responsibility for any of it, then they have been slandered to the highest degree possible.
Bernadetta, I can appreciate what you're saying about not knowing that you could turn out successful. The difference is, that being raised in an environment that I was, is the fear that you're going to let everyone down by not being successful. Instead of the prison cell that accompanies being sheltered, I had the fear of being disowned for not measuring up. And that exclusively meant not measuring up as a blind person, high above success lies everything else.
We are all human first, and I think whatever methods are employed to help people, they can't do it by destroying other people.
I don't really pity myself for how it's turned out, but I do struggle often to live with the consequences. Anymore, I don't try and shake it off, or pretend that I can get rid of it. I simply live with it and compromise where I can, and deal with the results as they are. But just like many people would try and make sure others are not sheltered, I would love to see it so that people are not destroyed from the inside out, as human beings, all for the guys of some dogma about what other blind people are or aren't.
When people destroy the buildings from the inside out, we refer to them as terrorists, and I for one am proud to stand with those who fight such people. However, many of us, myself included, have spent a lot of life justifying people who destroy other people from the inside out. This can be nothing less than the height of evil personified.
If in this case, people used to be NFB or it's publications falsely, then the NFB should be able to collect damages for slander against such people.
Anyway, I'm sorry if I hijack this thread. I wanted to provide a balanced perspective to the sheltered argument. I also realize there are probably many typos in this message. For some strange reason, I found it easier to do this from my iPad using dictation. Sitting here formulating my thoughts, in ways I've never actually put to paper before.
I feel the following is worth mentioning in light of what I said: I refuse to blame the NFB, people in it or anyone else who is innocent, for the wanton destruction carried out in the name of normalizing the blind kid that was me.
I may be quite flawed, a downright douche at times, but my whole aim in life is to be just and fair. To that end, please don't take anything I said in my last post as a slander against the NFB. I have long since accepted that I seem to be an enigma. Perhaps, in the words of Cool Hand Luke, a hard case.
But I refuse to believe that one disaster justifies another. Just, some disasters are more hidden, and internal, than others.
While I have seen some change at the state level, or at the chapter level filter back up to the top, i've seen a lot more come from the top, down, as relates to the NFB. If you play your cards right, you can really do a lot of good, but the problem really starts when you look at the reality of the situation. their is a lot of politics involved. there are a lot of levels of power you need to move up/in/threw. If they like you, or see potential in you as a person, or you as a spokes person for the organization, they'll do all they can to keep pushing you higher, and higher up the pyramid. But conversely, when people fall, they fall fast, and they fall hard. sometimes utterly stupid ideas are given a lot of weight/consideration because of the mouth they came out of, and nothing more. the organization really isn't half as democratic as one would think it is because of the afore mentioned pyramid scheme of ass kissing one must rise threw to gain influence. i've seen a lot of good and smart people propose great ideas, but because they haven't played the game, they end up ignored. that is why I became disillusioned, not because many of the ideas they preach are bad, or because they seem militant, or what have you... But because I've met those at the top, I've studied how one must ascend, i've seen how in some respects its just like any other political party, at the end of the day. I do think the NFB does a lot of good for a lot of people, I think they encourage the right qualities in people. self sufficiency, courage, strength, learning new skills and thinking critically and efficiently to solve problems. A lot of people are not really receptive to that message, because they have no interest in learning how to be self sufficient when their living situation caters to their every need. That's their choice. In my experience with the NFB and ACB, this is really how I see them, explained with 1 little point.
NFB: You're capable of learning to cut your food, or doing almost anything you want, as a blind person.
ACB: You shouldn't have to learn how to cut your food, or any skills that make you uncomfortable, because sighted people are capable of insuring your needs and wants are taken care of.
I've seen gatherings of ACB, and NFB members/chapters/meetings, and heard first hand accounts of same. the organizations really have a different vibe from one another. there are a lot of small, but key differences i've noticed. In general, much of but not all of the ACB population seems a lot less self sufficient than that of the NFB. People are incapable of cutting their food, etc.
The NFB doesn't really place any premium on those with greater levels of sight. all the blind people attending are legally blind, and that's that. Where as in subtle ways, the ACB, or some of its members portray those with more sight as more capable, less needy, etc.
The NFB seems to actually keep people around and in power long enough for anything of significance to get done, where as the turn over of people in power is so frequent in the ACB, most initiatives never really get off the ground, or get completed.
I do think the NFB is a bit to pyramid like, as far as the distribution of power goes, but I think the ACB is a bit too happy go lucky, in that respect.
Seeing a happy medium would be nice.
I'll admit, I've got a lot less experience with the ACB than NFB, but these are what I believe to be the more or less facts.
I realize my last posts are probably meaningless to those supporting the majority opinion, but I challenge the straw man that was the slander of the ACB.
I have a competent lawyer friend who is a member of them. Also, their scholarship went a long way towards paying for my study in Japan. Their awards dinner was packed with professionals. Had they operated as described, my sighted and very outspoken sister would have put on quite the magic show about "those people," for the itching ears of my family.
The ACB gave me a scholarship with no dogma, only the typical "go forth, young man," speech. 25 years later and I am still grateful.
But just as I refuse to accuse all NFB types of tyke-beating and wanton destruction, I equally argue these arguments against the ACB are equally flawed. Unbelievably so, in fact. Knowing someone cannot cut their food has not burned and destroyed part of you, and you cannot at the least be fair in your judgment? These types of things are how people wrongly see the NFB are a pack of dogmatics.
I don't think it is the organizations business to teach home skills. This is why they offer the training centers.
I was not sheltered, so all that has been said here seem wonderful to me.
If a person could learn to eat, tie shoes, cook a bit, and general task, I think that is great!
Again, I don't belong to any, but do see the work they do.
I don't believe it is humanly possible to have an organization without politics. Smile.
Where does the AFB fit into the organisational landscape? Is it on a parr with the NFB and aCB, or does it focus on different things?
I haven't heard much about the AFB to be honest.
I believe the AFB is an organization for the blind, while the others are organizations of the blind.
In my experience the AFB mainly provides services, but doesn't do any lobbying and such.
LEo, that's why I specifically mentioned that I was basing things off my own experiences, and judgements i've heard from people who have first hand accounts. I also specified i didn't believe those generalizations applied to all people.
I used cutting food as its a common example of what i've noticed. some in the ACB have asked me why I bothered to learn to cut, because people will do it for me at restaurants etc. Again, I'm not trying to type cast everyone in the organization, I'm just speaking of my own experiences. Cutting the food was also used in a more mediforical sense. Many people I've met in the organization Have expressed that they believe people should serve them/assist them. Does it apply to everyone i've met in the ACB, not really, but it applies to many.
the AFB is an organization for the blind. From what I know, it doesn't really hold mass conventions or meetings, but it access at providing accessible materials for education, particularly for the math and sciences. Some of the things they've created were extremely valuable in my education. As far as I can tell that kind of stuff is their aim. Creating products and services for the blind. they don't really have a political stance.
Unjtil I joined the Zone I never thought about task like cutting food, tying shoes, and such things as related to being a blind person. I just assumed these things were learned as a part of life.
It has been a real education for me, and I'm glad to have learned it.
The blind friend I did, and do have could cut there food, tie shoes, and whatever.
I dated a lady that couldn't, but just assumed she was a single case, not that is was a general situation.
In her case when we went out, I'd just simply cut her food up if she ordered something that required it.
I learned she couldn't when she wanted something that needed to be cut. She told me she wasn't going to order it, because she couldn't eat itin public. That was how I learned she couldn't cut her food.
She had gone to the training center here the NFB sponsors too.
I suggested exactly the same thing the ACB persons did, just ask the wait person to have the cook cut your food for you.
At my house we'd practice it, but I didn't spend enough time with her to teach her. I also probably was a bad example, because if I served her salad or something in a bowl that had to be gotten and she wasn't up to it, I'd just put her hand in the bowl and say gragb some. No, I know you can't do this in public, or at a dinner with other people, so a bad teaching tool, but between us it was just fine.
I never bothered to "learn" to cut my food, it was just something you did.
Mom served steak with a steak nife. Smile.
If it funny though, I was at my sisters house and she cut my meat up for me, said she saw it done for another blind person even thought she'd grown up with me. Made me laugh.
I sincerely thank you that have posted about these things on this board and other during my being here. It has helped me understand the other side kind of.
I'll not pretend to understand completely, but I'm learning.
Agreed with the last post, before The Zone, I hadn't heard of adults who couldn't cut food or tie shoes or similar.
As to keeping things clean, this is a teenage problem. My father used to get on us boys for having a pig pen for a room. The daughter and friends can leave a royal mess. I used to chew them out for being pigs or having a war zone till her mom in one of those talks said that was "not okay," and find another word or something, can't remember now. Anyway, I'm sure there probably are some problems associated with some of the blind exclusively, but not all.
I remember some vision teacher tried to tell my father that I was compensating, or some kinda thing, by being a general bad ass with my friends. He rightly told her it had less to do with being blind, and more to do with being a young fool. He was right, I being the only one being accused of this, among all our group, whatever compensating was supposed to mean.
Judge fairly across the board, I say, not some groups more harshly than others.
actually, leo, the NFB centers have various programs for kids. there are programs where they work with toddlers, programs where they work with kids around 8-10, maybe a little younger, and even programs where they work with teenagers.
I admit, I suck at cutting food. Always have. And spreading things like peanut butter.
Imprecator, we all suck at doing things. Even, and especially, those who criticize others.
You suck at cutting food? Well, I suck at assembling my own furniture that arrived, and caused much headache, this past week. Spent the latter part of my vacation with pieces parts all over my living room floor, and getting lost in my own house for wont of room and excess boxes, something that never used to happen to me when I was younger.
Further, there was something roundly criticized at the turn of the 20th century. It made people look awkward, and inept, and was deemed unpleasing to the eye. It was said to stigmatize the blind and limit them in many ways. Anyone guess what that was? Anyone? Anyone?
... That was Braille.
Glad those fools didn't rule me, I use that every day with no shame.
And here is another side to the food issue. If only most people who complained at food establishments would have just asked for us to cut up their food. Instead, those who are the exception ask for a whole host of things that actually cost food service establishments money. Separate portion cups for things usually put together, and the understandable gluten free and other challenges, and none of these people are blind. If they were blind you high school dropout types who make these claims would say it had to do with them being blind.
I'll say again, I only wish most people who complained in the food business, just wanted us to cut up their food. That is simply not a problem for the food service industry to do this for you. Trust me, people ask for gyrations and contusions to things you simply have not yet imagined, no matter how many recreational substances you did in college.
The only time I did have a food cutting incident was a group of nurses we catered for asked that we portion cut every piece of food we catered, no whole scones, no hole doughnuts, not even half muffins. Guess what, though: the hoot was, it all got et, by the same number of people. But because it was in smaller pieces, it was supposed to be healthier.
You'll always have people who complain about what you can or can't do. These are usually insecure people anyway. I guarantee that there are those who say I could have been a much better woodworker or handyman if only I would attend some blind wood shop course. Except, I am the son of a woodworker so I have no excuse. The only excuse being that if I get a whole box of nothing but parts, I get everything turned around, back to that dyslexic thing again. I can put it together if I took it apart first, but not if it's all piled in a box. But as you can imagine, there's been plenty of criticism for that.
The truth is, we are all limited in some ways. Dare I say helpless in some ways. How many of you can do like Wayne has done and cook over a fire? Or like I have and roast fish over a fire? Sharpening your own sticks for the job? Not unless you need to, will you learn this.
Bottom line, if you want to learn how, find someone or some article that will show you how. If you don't have the time, and have too much to do, or are burned out at the time, use your resourcefulness to get it done some other way. Trust me, I've seen people ask for modifications to food that you wouldn't believe. Again, it's at near no cost for a food service operation to make such a minor change as cut up your food.
The people who look the most helpless and insecure in life are those who point out supposed inadequacies in others. I know: I was young and dumb like this once. Not anymore.
It was pretty humbling to be a bit lost in my own house with boxes of partially constructed furniture all over. Because when I was younger this never happened: I pretty much was adaptable anywhere. But humble pie is what it takes to get a grip sometimes.
Meanwhile, humans everywhere compensate for one another's shortcomings and this is how we have thrived as a species. The idea of austere solitary independence is extremely new for homo sapiens. I mean, out of the past 50,000 years' evolution, this idea is less than 200 years old, and made up of the romantic notions posed in the Blood and Thunder stories about the Old West. That Old West time period? Lasted in reality about 30 years.
No man is an island.
Thanks all, particularly to Leo and James for pointing out the prepositional subtlety. I hadn't realised that organisations differentiated themselves along those lines. Our own rightly maligned RNIB did swap 'for' for 'of' in its acronym, but without making any organisational changes that would have legitimised the move.
Yes, an NFB person may well correct me on this. But if I'm not mistaken, one of the things they faced first and foremost was that preposition of the blind rather than for the blind. This upset a lot of state agency types, much in the same way as tribal governments upset the Bureau of Indian Affairs in the latter part of the 19th century / early part of the 20th.
I had some sight as a child as well, so that was a help.
The main thing is opportunity.
I cooked over a fire, and can, because I’ve been camping, and well, you’re going to eat, you’ve got to cook. No stove.
I’ve been taken fishing.
During the summer we BBQ on a grill with a fire, so, you learn to grill.
If a person is not given the opportunity to try or learn, or encouraged, I think even if you are sighted, you can’t do things.
Don’t get me wrong when I say this.
The simpler task, such as tying shoes, dressing, cutting food, are just things offered and taught when I was a child.
You are given shoes with laces. You are expected to tie your shoes, and everyone around you is always saying “tie your shoes boy. You’ll trip and break your neck.” And showing you how.
I am happy to learn that the NFB works with children up. That is wonderful.
I've met all kinds of blind people, hell, all kinds of people with their own set of strengths, weaknesses, etc. Everyone has a really unique set of capabilities based on a lot of factors such as experiences, life lessons, their personal motivations to learn, and the environment they grew up in.
Like many here, before I had a lot of experience with the blind world, I just assumed that all blind people learned the same stuff sighted people did, like cooking, cleaning, cutting, and the list goes on and on. though, i've learned as time goes by that a lot of normal sighted people my age, can't cook, partly because they never wanted to learn, partly because they just microwave stuff, and partly because getting cheep pre cooked food is easy. I knew a lot of people in high school who never washed their own clothes, or did any cleaning. Are these things considered basic skills by some? Yes. Could you get by with out them? Yes, depending on your environment and needs. Its a lot like a builder/manual laborer, or an artisan of any craft not being able to use a computer, fill out their taxes according to the laws and regulations, or do the marketing for their company. We all specialize in some skills as we move threw life, and exchange services or money for services. Its just how the world works. No one can be good at everything. I feel too many people have focused on the "cutting the food" part of my statements and less on what from what I can tell based on my interactions with both organizations, what their philosophies actually are. I attempted to explain things as I saw them, from a neutral standpoint. I did not interject my own opinions of the philosophy, but I did attempt to sum up what others told me they believed the organizations stood for. I apologize if I was so unclear as to make people believe I was spouting off my own "personal dogma."
I personally didn’t think you were doing anything of the sort.
Your statements, and others I have seen on other boards, and others on this board made me think as I do.
I’m not talking about skills, because, sure you are correct, everyone has weakness and such, I’m talking about basic day to day task.
You used a person that couldn’t clean or wash. If you can see, it is much easier to observe and do it. You could go to a laundry mat and watch the lady next to you and copy what she does. A blind person can’t.
Liquid soap could be difficult to pour, because you’ve not practiced doing it, but if you can see, you simply can pour the soap.
Shoe tying is the same. Cutting food.
A sighted person can cook something even if they don’t cook without burning their hands, and they can see when that food looks done. It might not be the best, but it will be cooked.
You are correct that how a person is brought up matters, and that holds true for blind persons, but if you attend a regular school, in kindergarten or first grade, they offer you a wooden boot, so you can learn to tie shoes.
I’d imagine this is now done in preschool.
Most blind children don’t get the opportunity to attend preschools.
I have learned that there are specific factors that cause many blind persons not to learn basic things. We are not talking mental slowness, just they are not given to opportunity.
A sighted person can walk out of a door, and ask directions to the nearest store.
Walk 2 blocks that way and you’ll see it. A blind person first has to learn how to walk the two blocks, cross a street, and lots of things, before they can just go to the store.
All of these basic things, I’ve learned are not offered in the course of growing up.
In short, the NFB's long term goal Is to create all blind people to fit the sighted world, while the ACB's mentality is to make the sighted world adapt to blind people..
Trying to make these groups interact on a friendly term with each other could be nothing short of impossible.. Like Republicans and Democrats, somethings can be agreed on by both sides, like braille literacy for children, but philosophically. No way..
Well, I'm glad there are some people who have experience from both sides here, because I couldn't honestly understand why these two groups absolutely hate each other. And to be completely honest I don't think I still completely get it. So what if you have opposing philosophies? Wouldn't you rather spend the time supporting your members instead of bashing the other group? It solves nothing and it doesn't promote the organization in a good way.
Wayne, regarding your comment about preschoolers learning how to tie shoes, I think you just got lucky. at least, in the public schools I went to from preschool to third grade, there was none of that.
@Ryan, welcome to America buddy, that's what competitors do, anywhere from politics, to laundry detergent, to cell phones, to soft drinks, people will bash each other to obtain higher status..
Chelsea, my sighted daughter was late to learn to tie shoes. The school told her they would neither help her learn nor tie her shoes. This is normal at least now.
I read in a parenting magazine at the time that since VELCRO and a lot of tieless shoes, parents have to work harder to see that their kids learn to tie shoes. Some of us who were kids in the 60s and 70s were lucky because nearly all our shoes, save sandals perhaps, required tying.
I still say, there must be a whole host of factors that a single-purpose one-issue group tend to miss. It reminds me of some of the Christian Right political candidates who know nothing about the economy but are running on the single issue of overthrowing abortion rights legislation.
This isn't to say sheltering isn't a problem: it is. As I've said, I've seen the tragic results among the home schooled and other religiously restrictive groups who produce the same kinds of results.
I guess that is where I would take issue with some of what these organizations may come up with. In the same way as I took issue with the Oregon Citizens' Alliance in the early 90s, whose one issue was the restrictions of gay and lesbian people, and their primary focus / explanation for everything gone wrong was sexual deviance.
I suppose I was lucky.
I have kids, and it was just something we did as well.
We purchased shoes that required tying before they could walk. When they could walk it was just something you told them, "tie your shoes." and you set down and showed them how.
Seem in pre school, things were taught along with potty training, eating, shoes, and such things.
You all have educated me, and once again, I am appreciative of this.
leo, I wasn't saying that they taught that sort of thing in preschools. I was saying that Wayne must have been lucky that his preschool taught those things, cause most preschools don't.
I remember learning how to tie my shoes at an age when most people I knew used Velcro or slip-ons. Our school never taught us how to do this. Though, its cool some teach these things.
I didn't really master it until I was like, eight.
I used to know a guy that was about 17 years old at the time who did not know how to tie his shoes. One of the staff members at the camp we were at was curious as to why the guy wore velcrow shoes, and he said that that was how shoes were made to his knowledge. This guy was so sheltered that apparently he did not realize there were other options outside of velcrow shoes. It was astounding and hard to believe. He seemed to be doing all right. He didn't have any hygienne issues, no social issues, nothing outside of not knowing how to tie his shoes and do home management things. I consider myself to have been sheltered to an extent, but my situation doesn't even compare to this.
That doesn't sound like sheltering, Ryan, just having not observed non-VELCRO shoes.
I'm old enough to remember VELCRO shoes when they first became popular in the 1980s, and a shoe fight ensued because someone nade that ripping sound putting on his VELCRO shoes early in the morning and others starting throwing theirs to make him quit. Lol. And if I wasn't the only blind guy in that pile o' hoodlums, if we were all blind, I'm sure some one-issue voting one-trick pony could claim we threw shoes at each other because we were blind and, maybe sheltered? Lol.
If the VELCRO thing wasn't an issue it would not have made it into a *mainstream* parenting mag in the 90s when my daughter was in kindygarten.
No leo. I disagree here. Velcro shoes are never really in style for people who aren't kids. At least not today. If a guy doesn't know that shoes with laces exist, I cannot see how you wouldn't call that sheltering. I know a great deal of things that I dont' experience--this guy didnt' even know about something he didnt' experience. In this day and age, if you aren't even aware that something basic like shoes with laces exist, you're definitely sheltered.
I think you have a very different view of what it means to be sheltered and not sheltered because you've never experienced this particular circumstance first hand. You say you were made to adhere to higher expectations despite your disability, if I'm reading your posts correctly, and you claim that it's dammaging and traumatic. I can see that, but being sheltered, being made to think that something isn't possible or doesn't exist when it most certainly is, or does, is just as painful or traumatic--and certainly limiting.
I'm not sure where you heard about the NFB using cruel tactics to get people to conform to independence or do things they aren't ready for, but I honestly haven't ever seen that be the case. The NFB doesn't force you to become a member or to subscribe to their filosophies. If you go to one of their training centers, it's no secret that they have a certain way of doing things to challenge you and make you see your potential--and you can, and should, always research that before you enter.
See, the problem with a lot of blind people--and those who have other disabilities--is that they are indeed very sheltered. They are seriously MADE to believe that they can't do this or that. Oh, you're blind. You cant' go outside and play. you cant' go ride a bike--you'll hurt yourself. You cant' balance a checkbook or cook--therefore, you cant' live alone--and by god, you can't have a family--what, are you nuts? You think you can have sex as a blind person? No, no, no, no, no. What if you get pregnant? What if you end up with a kid you can't take care of...
My mom, , who I mentioned has learned a great deal about independence as it pertains to blindness, still had this exact reaction when she found out I was pregnant with my son:
Oh my god!! How could you do this to me? Don't you know I can't take care of a child right now? How could you? I don't have the energy to help you--do you realize how much help you're going to need every day?
Then, when she cooled down a bit, she try to insist that I drop everything, including the relationship with my baby's father, and move back home, into my old room, because she didn't see any other way of me being able to keep my baby. She tried to say that I'd need help every step of the way, that the dad would be of no help--that it would be dangerous for us to raise a child together on our own because we're blind. By this time, obviously, I knew much better and did things my own way and proved her wrong--she's still very much in the picture and she's backed off to an appropriate Grandma's role, but it took a lot of showing and telling to get that to happen.
My partner's mom offered to take the baby and keep him--that was her first response--because we're blind. It's impossible for us to care for this kid. That' obviously didnt' happen either.
But my point is, Leo, Your upbringing may have been the exact opposite of most blind people's. Same to you, wayne. I was not taught to tie my shoes, at school or at home, till I was eight and a particularly strict TVI took the bull by the balls, so to speak, and really got me up to speed on a lot of things. When I was at home, there was no talk of chores, no talk of going to ride a bike, and my god, all hell would break loose if I even suggested that I go to a theater with friends to see a movie or go shopping...That's when I was a teenager. I learned to believe I was somehow undeserving or ineligible to partake in such activities because I'm blind. I honestly thought teh idea was nuts by that point. My family just didnt' see the point of it for me, though my cousins who were sighted were encouraged to do those things. My family chose to close their eyes to the possibilities and to focus on the possible--and irrational--risks instead--all of which descended down to me and shaped my early expectations of myself. And the truth is,, many more families with blind or disabled children are this way than the opposite. I've been around enough blind kids and teens to know that by now.
So with this said, I think it's fair to say that in some cases the NFB pushes blind members for a reason. Some really do need that extra push. What's wrong with a bit of a challenge anyway. Some people are so clouded, believe it or not, that they literally need to be manipulated into understanding that if there's nothing wrong with them other than being blind, they can actually cook a meal for twenty. Nothing's stopping them. If you try and find out you indeed cant' do it, then at least you know you tried. But if you've been told all your life that you must be crazy for even entertaining certain ideas, you won't even think of trying. So there has to be someone out there to chalenge these sorts of individuals. Maybe you wont' be hosting a dinner party at your home for twenty people ever in your life. But if you do it successfully at a training center, even if you'll never use it again, wouldnt' that boost your confidence quite a bit?
Just a thought. I know it's hard for some of you to believe, but many of us were loved to the point of being smothered as blind and disabled people. I think people like wayne are very lucky that blindness was rarely an issue when it came to learning about how to take care of oneself as a kid--you were just expected to do it. I was not even able to cut an apple for myself till I was twelve because my family hyperventalated if I even contemplated touching a knife. I wasnt' trusted to take a shower alone till I was nine--and that's only after I insisted to be able to do that, in tears, because I felt my privacy was being violated...by that point I had already began puberty and I felt aweful that either my mom or my grandma felt they needed to help me wash or to stand over me as I did it myself.
It's a battle for many sheltered people to try to gain their independence. it's a real struggle...And to be honest, the saddest thing is that a lot of those who have been sheltered forever dont' even bother to fight for their independence--so groups like the NFB attempt to do it for them.
That's all.
All very well stated Bernadetta.
So sheltering as you describe it breaks the human spirit and takes the fight out of most peple. And beating also breaks the spirit and takes the fight out of most peple. So, then, what Wayne ended up with is actually the best balance, in my opinion.
I may not have been sheltered, and so cannot truly empathize exactly, but I do sympathize. After all, if it is all done in reverse, you are more often than not set up for failure and ridiculed for your efforts or claimed to be an embarrassment.
This creates a lukewarm relationship between the parties later on, and in some cases also takes the fight out of people. I know of one case where that did. Though in my case, I guess the religious would say I was simply rebellious enough. Not so much outwardly, more like the snake who lies in wait for opportunity and then strikes with all he's got. But this is not how it worked for others I have known who were dealt this kind of thing.
So yes, I understand all that you have said. I would say, rather than respond to sheltering ideas with extreme and abusive tactics the other way, why not respond as a human being instead and be normal and balanced about things?
Again, if the NFB had never had any part in such things, they ought to be able to sue those who claimed them as a source, for slander.
Catholics burned Protestants, yes, but afterwards Protestants also burned Catholics, so we can see nothing was learned.
I have, since childhood, always wished that we could put the authors of each extreme view, either sheltering or abusive, into a steel cage and force them to fight each other to the death before a howling crowd. They want it rough? They got it.
What you took was stridently unfair, and I fully assimilate that. You got the same as being beat.
Beautiful post.
Knowing about sheltered people and actually experiencing or meeting someone that has been are totally different things.
I wasn’t sheltered, but have been told I wasn’t going to be able to do this or that because I was blind.
The difference was, that with most things I was challenged to do them, so when you are told you can’t do something it is like the flag got tossed down, and you want to prove you can.
“You can’t tune up that car, because it is a new car and…” Yeah, yeah, yeah, where’s the tool box!
You’d be right about shoes, even a sheltered person will come across them at some point.
You might now have to learn to tie them, but you will know they are available.
On the bath thing, my mother would have told me she didn’t have time to be bathing me, so get in the tub boy! She’d have pitch a fit if I didn’t bath daily, and sent me back if I did it half assed until I got drowned or learned. Smile.
So, yes, a different experience.
Lol Wayne I can totally agree with this.
To me, from the descriptions on here plus what I have seen in real life, sheltering is often the same as being beat, and at least for the homeschooled kiddos, often goes hand in hand. So a bit of irony to try and solve this problem by being extra hard on / beating up others. Guitmo is too good for such people, on either extreme.