Excellent post on "inspiration".
Brilliantly articulated analysis posted by 
esireth in Dis_Rage recently, that I had to repost: http://community.livejournal.com/disabled_rage/10864.html
"Disabled authors/characters and perceptions of them
When a disabled person publishes an autobiography, there's usually several patronising pity-dripping reviews going on about "what makes us human", dissecting the author's "abnormalities" in loving detail, medicalising EVERY life experience/movement/thought/etc. mentioned by the author, waxing poetic about the author "overcoming" hir impairments, and, invariably, referring to non-disabled people as "us" and disabled people as "them". I came across another one of these today, and it brought on a rant.
Let's make some things clear, society-at-large: I am NOT your bloody inspiration. I am NOT your fascinating pet freak who you can coo over and tokenise and then toss back on the dung-heap when you get bored. I am NOT a mystical Other Being who will show you how to live with grace and answer your questions on the meaning of existence just by existing. I have my own life to live, my own self to be. And there are a lot of facets to my life and self, too, not just the ones that you find "interesting" and want to know about.
It's interesting that the disability-related books, fiction and non-fiction, that become most popular tend to be the ones that play up to these stereotypes and pathologise everything that the author/character does. Anything that dares to diverge from this in any way barely has a chance. Because it's all about the "abnormalities", and the non-disabled gaze."
Hell, yeah! If I had a big enough forehead, I'd tattoo this on it, word for word.
esireth in Dis_Rage recently, that I had to repost: http://community.livejournal.com/disabled_rage/10864.html
"Disabled authors/characters and perceptions of them
When a disabled person publishes an autobiography, there's usually several patronising pity-dripping reviews going on about "what makes us human", dissecting the author's "abnormalities" in loving detail, medicalising EVERY life experience/movement/thought/etc. mentioned by the author, waxing poetic about the author "overcoming" hir impairments, and, invariably, referring to non-disabled people as "us" and disabled people as "them". I came across another one of these today, and it brought on a rant.
Let's make some things clear, society-at-large: I am NOT your bloody inspiration. I am NOT your fascinating pet freak who you can coo over and tokenise and then toss back on the dung-heap when you get bored. I am NOT a mystical Other Being who will show you how to live with grace and answer your questions on the meaning of existence just by existing. I have my own life to live, my own self to be. And there are a lot of facets to my life and self, too, not just the ones that you find "interesting" and want to know about.
It's interesting that the disability-related books, fiction and non-fiction, that become most popular tend to be the ones that play up to these stereotypes and pathologise everything that the author/character does. Anything that dares to diverge from this in any way barely has a chance. Because it's all about the "abnormalities", and the non-disabled gaze."
Hell, yeah! If I had a big enough forehead, I'd tattoo this on it, word for word.