Category: the Rant Board
Hi, all. I'm feeling the need to vent, so here it goes.
Yesterday here in Denver, there was a tragic accident. Three students of the Colorado Center for the Blind were standing at a bus stop, waiting for their bus to head into the Center as usual. I'm told that this bus stop is set right on the corner of two major streets, and also very close to the curb. The roads were icy. A SUV driven by a 21-year-old woman spun out of control on the ice as she made the turn, jumped the curb onto the sidewalk, and struck all three students. All were dragged by the car. One man was killed, two women were severely injured. Both women are in the hospital with multiple broken bones, but it is said they're in stable condition and will recover.
Here's where my venting comes in. It is being said by many sighted bloggers on the Internet that this accident happened specifically because these three were blind. Some have even gone so far as to say that blind people should not be out in traffic, should not be traveling around alone. One blogger asked where there guide dogs were at, who could have seen the car coming and pushed them out of the way.
What utter foolishness and ignorance! this did not happen because these folks were blind. It could have happened to any pedestrian using public transportation. No sighted person would have had time to see the car, process the danger, and react quicly enough to move out of the way in time. Often, I am told, when someone sees something like that, they automatically freeze up because of the shock and fear of it. And I really don't think guide dogs would have made a difference here either. Like a sighted human, the dog would not have been able to see that car in time and push the humans out of its path. If that car was moving at any kind of speed whatsoever, and I imagine it was to have spun out of control, then it would have been all over with for anyone.
Sorry for the rant, but I just get angry that whenever something happens, blindness is immediately blamed, and then we get people saying we shouldn't travel alone, basically meaning we shouldn't be independent! *Severe scowl*
wow. that's awfull. i never heard word of this til now. alicia, i totally understand where you're coming from on this. people just never get the concept of blind indipendence. *severe scowl in agreement*
I just saw the story as well, and figured you'd be first to post about it here.
I'm in complete agreement with you; as a graduate of the Louisiana center, I feel I'm even more empathetic than I might otherwise be.
Truth is, Fighter, I probably would not have posted about it here at all, except for my outrage over the sighted publics reaction to it. Before I was just sad that it had happened, and likely would not have posted about that. But when I started getting angry, I felt the need to vent ,about it, and here seemed an appropriate place.
Link to the Reuters piece for those interested.
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6BG6BD20101217
It could have happened to anyone, and I'm sure this isn't the only incident. If a fire gets started in a house or apartment, and the occupant is blind, the fire was started simply because they were blind, right? Well, that's what some sighted people seem to think. If the child of a blind parent dies, for whatever reason, I'm sure there would be people who jump to conclusions by saying it was somehow the parent's fault because they were blind. and of course, if the same thing happens to a sighted people, it was just an accident, or the person was stupid, but it's never because they're sighted.
I'm sorry, but this subject really pisses me off. A while back I told my aunt about a case where a blind couple had their baby taken from them, and then when they finally got her back I also mentioned it to her. Her reaction was, "Oh, well somebody in her family must have stepped up and taken on the responsibility of caring for the child, because I don't believe they would have given the child to her alone."
Then when my daughter was born she and everybody else thought they were going to step in and raise her for me because I'm too incompetent and helpless to do it myself. I finally snatched her after getting sick of everyone's bullshit and moved away, and now they don't know what to think because they thought I'd never even think of doing such a thing. Guess they thought I would always depend on them to take care of me and my daughter, and now I just feel so satisfied that their ego got busted.
Alicia, I don't blame you for being mad. I've read about plenty of accidents where a motorist runs down sighted people at bus stops and intersections due to careless or drunk driving. Those sighted people were just as dead after the accidents as that poor blind man in Denver. It is truly a shame that the ignorant public wants to think blind people shouldn't be independent because they might get injured.
I'm so angry...! I think everyone has said what I want to say, but I want to add my condolences to the blind man killed and also my prayers go out to the surviving women and all the families involved. That woman who hit them must feel terrible. As far as the public views go, the sad thing is that that's about 90% of the sighted viewpoint; that we are "handicapped" and should be treated as such and cared for like little children and not allowed to live our lives.
Exactly. My wife's mother seems tot hink along those lines. Whenever we go over there to visit she always fees the need to tell Maria to ask me if I want something rather than doing it herself and that Maria should stay home all the time to cook and clean for me. I'll grant that I'm in no way perfect at either cooking or cleaning and nor do I particularly enjoy either activity, but I can get by even if my apartment isn't absolutely spotless. But my mother-in-law seems to feel that Maria shouldn't have a job or that she should get one that will let her cook and clean for me and also that her car isn't good enough for my needs. Where that comes from I don't know. Sure Maria's car has some dens from the two accidents she was in but it runs reasonably well. And anyways it's not like 'm taking daily trips of thirty miles or more. And while Maria herself can sometimes be a bit overprotective of me she's far, far better about that than some others I've known. She at least lets me do most things for myself or at least make a fair try at it before stepping in to help me and nor does she see it as wrong that I want to find a job or perhaps get a guide dog at some point. If I know her she'd be pissed at that driver rather than the three blind students at the bus stop.
Both of my grandparents were blind from macular degeneration. There were no guide dogs. Are we really supposed to believe a dog can stand up on two legs and push a human being out of the way? Guide dogs are a personal and financial responsibility some don't want, hence white cane laws. What are the blind expected to do if they don't get out on public transportation, sit at home all day? And if so how are they to pay for said home? There are religious scriptures that talk about most of mankind being ignorant & knowing not. Some folks seem determined to prove them right.
it could have happened to anyone, and it has. This is not the first story such as this, nor I fear will it be the last. Blindness has little to do with it. Perhaps they could ahve seen the car coming, perhaps not. The whole idea of this being the fault of the blind is rediculous. But what do you expect? THese are internet forum commenters. People who, more times than not do not thin,.
I hate the ignorance as well. It truly disgusts me to no end that people would blame the accident solely on blindness. I've taught my sighted friends that blindness shouldn't hinder anyone from traveling anywhere, and I've emphasized it so much that they treat me like a normal person. If I can convince my friends that I'm normal and I can go anywhere I want and do what I want, then I see no problem in convincing those sighted bloggers.
At the end of the day, it really is up to us to crush those stereotypes, but at the same time, it still pisses me off that after hearing an accident such as this, the only thing they can say is that it was because of blindness? No, I don't think so.
I guess the trick is, not to let my anger over this kind of thing get too much control. We see it so much as blind people, that it is easy to become angry, and bitter toward a lot of the sighted public. I've struggled with it, as have blind friends of mine, for reasons precisely like this. I mean, with these kinds of views, is it any wonder most blind people are unemployed? But, I keep reminding myself that all I can do is educate my own little sphere of people who I come into contact with. Maybe, if a lot of us educate a few people, things will slowly get better.
it's unfortunate that such things happen, but being angry doesn't help.
some times anger can be a tool. the fact they are blind should not matter, like it was said, could of happen to anybody.
Yes, it could have happened to anyone. This blogging is not the first sign of ignorance in the world and it will not be the last. People have such a piss poor atitude about other groups.
I echo margorp's last post completely. very, very well said.
Alicia, I have struggled with the same thing as you have, so I can totally see why you're angry over it. But I think Margorp's right, it could have happened to anybody. I think the reason we get angry is because this ignorance that was displayed on that blog came from sighted people who knew nothing at all about blindness, and thus needed to be educated, so I think it's best to watch out for things like that, because as I basically said, some sighted people have never been around a blind person in their lives, and instead of getting angry about the ignorance, we need to educate them. That just shows that we as blind people aren't rude idiots who love to get angry. If we want to be treated like normal people, then let's act like normal people.
And I was talking about myself in that last post as well because I have that same problem. I overreact to things like that, so I need to learn to calm down about stuff like that, as well as others.
I see your point, Michael, but I also know that if said people had thought outside the box, they would have realized that there could have been other reasons for that accident besides blindness. You don't need to know other blind people to at least come to that conclusion.
my thoughts exactly, Jess.
I know anger will not solve anything. As I think I said earlier, all we can do is educate those people we come into contact with. That's why I try not to hold on to the anger I feel over stuff like this, but I can't make myself not feel it at all.
I understand. It's one of those things where the anger never lasts long, but it's hard not to feel it when you first see something like that.
Yeah, but Jessica and Chelsea, there are those people who don't think outside the box, unfortunately.
When i'd first heard this story. I'd expected to hear of typical reactions from the sighted public. As a graduate of the Louisiana center, I'm in total agreement with your position, and do understand your frustrations. Unfortunately, this type of ignorance/intolerance is very commonplace. *shrug*
I wasn't surprised by the public's reaction either, but it still saddens and angers me when I see things like it.
there are indeed people who don't think outside the box, and that's unfortunate. however, we can't and shouldn't allow that to stand in our way; that's all Jess and I are trying to say.
I might have agreed with the sighted, had it been a different situation. There are some cases in which being able to see really could help prevent certain things from occurring. But as was said, there was no way that anyone could have escaped this, even if they saw the car coming. The fact that the bus stop is close to the kerb and is in between two busy streets certainly doesn't help things either. I think some people just don't apply logic. I'm not angered by it but I do think they should use more common sense.
Okay, we have two kinds of ignorance. Just regular old ignorance--we are all ignorant on some level. The second is ignorant by choice--the person does not care to open their mind to other's logic and reason. We are looking at the second type.
Exactly, Margorp. that's exactly what I've been trying to say this whole time. thank you.
I think some are like that but others really are of the first type. It's alot easier to talk with them and they catch on pretty quickly. I think that, in some cases, we blind people overstereotype the sighted just as they do with us.
and this, my friend, is obviously not one of those cases you speak of.
Thank you, Margorp. This time, we're in absolute agreement. Rare, but it happens. Smile.
Yes, Eleni, sometimes we are guilty of stereotyping the sighted, and we need to be mindful of that. I grant you that. I get guilty of it myself, But as Fighter said, in this case, that's not what's happening.
I'm coming into this a bit late—but oddly enough, the Reuters article now:
Tallin,
I can’t accurately speak to your first point regarding comments or rather the lack thereof given I didn’t originally make a conscious effort to look for or at comments, if in fact any existed when first the article appeared. With respect to your second point, the Reuters article has not been edited or amended since it was originally published on December 17th so yes, I would concur with your evaluation that this is an “ignorance by choice” scenario. I should also add that while a number of other news outlets carried coverage of this incident, I tend to be fond of Reuters and as such included their article as a point of reference at the exclusion of others, perhaps a reflection of my bias!
C.
So forgive me if I'm going too far with this, but I believe that some people who don't think logically do it just so they can be defensive. In other words, they don't have the slightest idea of what they're talking about when it comes to things like this, but they'd rather have a say-so and try to make us blind people look like fools because they think they know it all.
... which then begs the question, what do they have to gain? I mean, if someone is going to cling tenaciously to an opinion, one can make the assumption that either scientific evidence lends credence to it, and/or the person has a vested interest in the opinion. So, if we assume for a moment that the facts in evidence speak against the idea that the accident was directly attributable to the pedestrians' blindness, why the deuce bother holding the opinion that blind people shouldn't be out by themselves? I mean, I'll grant you I could probably find an example or seven that really shouldn't, and I fully expect I can find reasons not to do with blindness (environmental factors, other cognitive difficulties, recent hearing loss) that might explain the situation. What does J. Random Sighty have to lose by learning that we can be their equals, particularly if J. Random Sighty has no experience with blind people outside of the media?
This is all speculation. But maybe they're trying to gain feeling better about themselves, feeling superior that they have all their senses intact. Maybe they're trying to feel intelligent. Or a sense of control. And, so many times, people don't like to being open to changing long-held beliefs. So, if they opened their minds, my guess is that they perceive they'd lose all those things I just mentioned earlier.
I know that this is completely unrelated to the topic at hand, so forgive me. To E vestigio and tallin32, it's rare and refreshing to find such impeccable diction and grammar on an internet forum. Thank you both for making me smile..
I must, however, disagree with the idea that sighted individuals are purposefully being ignorant or illogical strictly so that they may be defensive. I think many honestly don't know any better. There are those who refuse to learn or to listen when things are explained or even shown to them. They, of course, fit that mould of purposeful ignorance quite nicely. But I think there is a third group, those who might like to learn the truth but simply can't except it. For them, the only way to truly understand these things is to meet with a blind person and see him/her in action. Having a sighted friend tell him/her about a blind person's accomplishments, or reading them in a book, simply won't satisfy this type of person. I'm unsure as to why that one group clings to their beliefs, having never been in that situation. It's probably something so subconscious that they won't even admit it to themselves.
I don't think we'll ever know exactly what those people in question said what they said, but I tend to agree with those who believe they just don't see the need to learn unless they come in direct with a blind person who wants to educate them. It's not that they refuse to learn, but that the opportunity to learn hasn't presented itself, and they don't feel the need to go looking for one before making such assumptions.
I agree with Jessica as well on that, but I still wonder if there are some people (and I'm sure there are) that tend to cling to their belief that they should not be out walking by themselves, even though they have come across a blind person, and that person has done their best to educate them about their blindness. But I agree that there are those who would like to be educated about blindness, but since they have never come across a blind person, they don't know how to react to accidents like that. And that brings me back to the point that I made a while back that while we do struggle with getting angry when it comes to that, we need to be careful about those who haven't come across a blind person ever in their lives. Those who have been educated about blindness have absolutely no excuse for saying things like that. That, right there, is what makes me angry.
I've met sighted people who have admitted to me that they've never even had an interested in meeting other blind people. That tells me that they wish to remain ignorant.
Not necessarily. Just because they're not seeking us out doesn't mean that they wouldn't talk to us or be our friend. It just means that they weren't going out of their way to meet a blind person. I know people with various disabilities that I never even considered before meeting them.
Eleni does have a point here. I can think of two other disabilities that I technically knew were out there. However, I didn't take the time to really learn about them till I got to know people who had them. Difference is that once I got to know those people, I did try to take that time, and to learn as much as I could, etc. This is where the public often fails us, and probably people with all kinds of other disabilities, when they meet us. They may know a blind person, but still hold on to their misconceptions.
Eleni—
As regards post ... 41? ... I'm specifically refering to instances in the Blogosphere that I've run across that, when situations are put across where blind people are either shown as just as capable as their sighted counterparts or shown as able to be made as capable as their sighted counterparts, they actively elect not to take what they're shown at face value. There was one specific instance on another blog, where Web accessibility was being discussed, where I'd taken a situation where I'd done some work for a company to make their employee applications accessible. In so doing, I enabled ... maybe ten? ... people nationally to keep their jobs. The numbers I'd given them were a comparison of how uch the company spent and got back as a return, vs. how much those same ten people would have drawn in SSI. I was accused of "making up" an "overly optimistic scenario". My apologies if I was unclear—I was more curious why those that held on to ... well, any belief, really ... in the face of evidence to the contrary did so to the point of being hostile, to contrast with those that didn't. By no means did I mean to imply that all sighted people held onto unreasonable beliefs vis à vis the capabilities of the blind—which in and of itself is a fallacy, as one may as well say "the capabilities of the American" or "the capabilities of the male"—merely that there exists those that refuse to lose them, even when the evidence is standing in front of them that their beliefs, which they apply across a wide swath of population, aren't true.
Well yes people will always hold on to prejudicial notions.
that is fucked up, but i'll travel by myself, I do not want someone up my ass all the time you know?
I agree with you alicia
Yeah, there are always going to be those who'll continue to cling to a belief, however inaccurate it may be, even after they're presented with concrete evidence of that inaccuracy. My grandmother's the same way, usually more regarding political issues than with ones related to blindness, but she does have her share of those as well. She's not one of those who feels blind people shouldn't travel alone (in fact quite the contrary), but at the same time she does believe they shouldn't attend public school an doesn't understand why it can sometimes be hard for a blind person to make friends in the sighted community.
oy.
The only difficulties I could see in making sighted friends are that we're less aware who is in a room. So we can't just go up to a friendly face, or even a friend whom we know, and start talking, unless we know that they're there.
Unless it's completely silent in a room, you'll probably hear the people, and you can talk to whomever sounds like a friendly person. so, there are alternatives. the real challenge comes from how willing we, as the blind people, are to educate without seeming forceful, and how willing the sighted person in question is to look beyond the stereotypes. I don't have many sighted friends, but the ones I do know have been friends with me for years, and most likely will be for years to come.
I have sighted friends whom I have known for several years as well, and you guys are right, it isn't hard to make friends with sighted people.
It can be.
It's only recently that I started really making blind friends. Most of my friends, up until a few years ago, were sighted.
I find it also becomes easier to make friends with sighted people during adulthood, because most of them are not so caught up with what's cool/popular.
Most of my friends are sighted..
Same here...but as a kid it was difficult to have sighted friends as Ocean Dream stated.
I agree with margorp's last post.
It all really comes down to self asteem. If you are unsure of yourself you may find it difficult to branch out and have sighted friends.
yes, I definitely agree with that, too. very true.
I wonder if some people hold onto prejudiced ideas because they develop a particular world view that's like a sort of ranking system, with themselves and anybody like themselves at the top of the heap and everyone who is not so average or otherwise not easy to figure out on the lower levels. So when a being considered lesser suggests they want equal treatment, such folks get very defensive and threatened for fear the aliens will take over and push them off the top of the heap. Everybody wants to be a king and nobody wants to be a peasant. LOL!
One point that has not been brought up here is the survival reactions of people and animals. I've explained this to several sighted people to their benefit, even though it does help (hopefully) with their perception of us.
Basically, I don't care how well you can see, or how good a traveller you are, your hardware isn't equipped to respond to oncoming vehicles moving faster than any living creature can move. Ironically, this is why so many struggle to learn driving concepts as well. In short, just because you can see an oncoming train or car, doesn't mean you'll react in time. You may not, and in fact if you do, you may react badly. You're entirely dependent at that point upon your emotional and reactive capabilities which haven't evolved that much since your ancestors responded to giant predators, and were frequently eaten.
When they work, they work really really well, such as when you can sense the danger before it's upon you. You duck in time to evade a flying object, you jump out of the way when a horn blows (when it blows in time). Until recently, the deer-in-headlights response was rather a mystery. They've now found that it had a purpose: real predators are less likely to attack already-dead prey.
Unfortunately, inanimate objects under the direction of massive amounts of kinetic energy have no such compunctions and so it looks like we all evolved wrong, when in fact we are presented with an environment for which the hardware isn't suited.
In short, your, or my, lack of eyesight is the least of anyone's concern (or should be) when an oncoming vehicle is about to crush you. It's all in the autonomic responses at that point. Funny stories and blog comments aside, they have no greater chance of escape than you do. The only people who have an advantage are those who've been severely desensitized to oncoming vehicles to the point they know how and when to react.
The woman I explained this to spent a few minutes in pouty indignation, but finally relented some. The problem was that she desperately wanted the situation to be one of sight versus blind, when in fact, it's just a matter of biological evolution and environment.
I understand being upset, and frankly those things used to upset me a lot more. Try and console yourself with the thought they're not so much insulting you as their idea of you. They believe what they want to believe, whether or not it's running in parallel with reality.
you're exactly right, Leo.
This is very true. thank you.
Thanks for the extremely interesting and educational post. I never thought of it like that and I've learned a few new things today. *smile*
Indeed, I never thought of it that way.
that's how I always think of it, but I forgot to say so.
Post 63 and 64 are amazing! :)