writing2changetheworld

[writing2changetheworld]

There is no polite or respectful way for a stranger to ask someone to disclose potentially traumatic information

[writing2changetheworld]

I just figured out another way to explain why Smosh not consistently adding captions on YouTube is a problem:

Many people love Summer Games. Many people have been so excited to watch the ones currently happening. As someone who has never seen any, I've definitely been intrigued...except I can't watch it yet. I don't even have the opportunity to be excited because the captions are still auto-generated. And I don't even have an idea if I'll get that opportunity.

[writing2changetheworld]

Preview of my Disabled Cuties Series which will soon be available as both digital downloads and printed coloring book pages in my shop once I make it public so be on the lookout!! https://ogrefairy.com

[ID: a series of 10 images featuring linearts of disabled people with diverse bodies and disabilities, mostly in lingerie with their assisting devices looking confident and hot as themselves]

This series is now offered on my website here: https://www.ogrefairy.com/disabled-cuties

[writing2changetheworld]

Bare Minimum or Less Than?

Something I've realized recently: captions not saying who is speaking is completely less than. Especially when the camera is not on the person speaking.

Many people who use captions are not able to "just hear" who is talking. Not including that information is excluding human beings.

Every other Wednesday I'll post a new "Bare Minimum or Less Than" and it'll be "Is It Welcome Wednesday" (name is TBD lol).

[writing2changetheworld]

One cuss word once ⬇️

I've always known disabled people can be ableist but FUCK.

I just blocked someone who

1.) Tried to excuse something they themself acknowledged was eugenics by saying it's not as bad as other examples

2.) Reblogged another one of my posts (the Blair Imani one) just to yell and complain about it...even though they used to follow me???

[writing2changetheworld]

Hi, I've seen you talking a lot about disabled characters in films. I know you feel that disabled characters should be played by disabled people and I agree, in fact I feel like most films where that is not the case seem to veer towards inspiration porn a lot of the time.

A lot of them seeing disability as a tool in their storytelling and not as a part of the human condition. Music is one that comes to mind where Sia pretty much made a film to say 'look at this autistic girl who has a lot of meltdowns but she has a very creative love for music, isn't that amazing'. Sia also didn't want an autistic actor because she didn't want to accommodate them on set (they 'wouldnt be able to handle the role' apparently). Making films about us without us usually just ends up objectifying the disabled character for the audiences pity or general enjoyment without giving them agency in the narrative. Like the amount of 'sympathy' films cause people feel that disability is this inherently miserable existence so having a disabled character is a great way to make it a sad movie. And that is the entire purpose of that character (though there's some occasional inspiration porn sprinkled in when they do literally anything other than wallow in misery). Disabled actors being a part of the process usually ensures that is not happening, them being hired demonstrating that the producers actually hold some care towards the people they want to portray and them having the ability to question and correct weird things in the script.

Also not having disabled actors in those roles shuns us out of acting altogether because even for those with invisible disabilities you usually can't play non disabled roles. Like I use a cane and there is no way I could put that down and pretend to be able bodied for more than a minute if I'm lucky, and the regular schedules for actors in general would be taxing. It honestly just feels like they want to ensure they can spread their idea of what disability looks like for the sympathy of the masses but not have to spend the extra money to accommodate an actor who is disabled. (Sadly abelism often comes back to capitalism cause if we can't provide cheap labour then why do we exist)

Xxx (you've probs made these points before but I've been thinking abt it)

One mention of suicide ⬇️

Very inspiration porn a lot! There's actually a movie I want to watch at some point for research to talk about the ableism in it. It's "Me Before You". The physically disabled main character is played by an able-bodied actor and that character apparently kills himself at the end. (I don't have an issue with nondisabled people writing disabled characters but that's where I'm like "leave stories like that to us".)

Hi 👋🏻

I couldn't agree with all of this more!!!

Yea...I heard about that movie. (I don't know if i want to watch it. I've watched multiple movies where nondisabled people play disabled characters but even just thinking about the movie angers and disgusts me.) I stopped supporting Sia then.

10 times out of 10 I fully believe if a disabled character is played by an able-bodied or nondisabled person that role was written and casted with nondisabled viewers in mind.

"Sympathy" is just as bad as inspiration porn (in my opinion)! Also, disabled characters who are clearly just there to move the nondisabled character's story along. Like "CODA" (another movie I haven't seen and probably won't). The deaf characters are obviously just there to support the hearing character. 🙄 (That one actually has disabled people though.) I also believe there's a level of exploitation that happens when a nondisabled actor plays a disabled character.

I FULLY believe that's what it is. I like to say they want to include us without actually including us.

Mentioning the connection between ableism and capitalism is SO IMPORTANT!! IT'S SO TRUE!

I have yet to talk about almost all of this actually. It's been very surface level "I believe disabled people should play disabled characters" "I disagree" so far.

I do want to say something you might disagree with: you mentioned you use a cane when you talked about invisible disabilities. You can obviously identify however but I see using a mobility device as physically disabled. I personally feel if your disability or disabilities present externally (are physical) at all in any way, shape, or form, you're physically disabled.

Also, able-bodied does not automatically equal nondisabled. An able-bodied Autistic person, for example, is still disabled.

[writing2changetheworld]

Mention of suicide ⬇️

I'm answering an ask and I thought I would share this:

There's a book (turned movie) ("Me Before You") written by an able-bodied or nondisabled person where the quadriplegic main character apparently kills himself at the end (I have yet to read the book and/or watch the movie).

That's where I draw the line. I don't have an issue with nondisabled people writing disabled characters but when it comes to storylines like that, leave it to us.

[writing2changetheworld]

Mention of Nazis ⬇️

It bothers me a lot (and has for a long time) when people don't acknowledge this and I'm done waiting:

Nazis went after and killed disabled people before going after and killing Jewish people.

I think that's a fact worth knowing.

[writing2changetheworld]

Typos

Something I learned a while ago is making fum of people's typos and/or spelling mistakes without consent is ableist and I want to talk about it.

I just recently witnessed someone comment "you're" instead of "your" on a post of mine. I ignored it and didn't focus on the mistake because

1.) That wasn't the point of their comment

2.) I still understood their comment regardless

3.) It was just that. A mistake.

If I made a joke regarding their mistake I would have been ignoring the rest of their comment, assuming they knew and remembered the difference (not everyone does), and/or assuming it wasn't just an accident - a singular mess up (possibly made by autocorrect).

Something else I see a lot is people being shamed, put down, and/or made fun of for is commenting "dead" instead of "deaf"

This bothers me because disabilities and human beings with disabilities exist.

Someone could be using voice to text (as a result of not being able to use their hands, not having hands, being blind, and/or anything else) and it could misinterpret what they said and type the wrong word.

Someone's finger could twitch and they could hit the wrong letter. (The "d" and the "f" being right next to each other on the American English language keyboard makes this entirely possible.)

Someone could have one eye or 2 eyes could be crossed and they think they're hitting the "f" when they're actually hitting the "d" (because, again, those letters are literally right next to each other).

Humans - as well as anything with autocorrect - make mistakes. (Many people with disabilities use autocorrect.) Someone could type the word "deaf" and autocorrect could change it at the last second to "dead". And because those two words share most of the same letters, the person commenting could easily not clock the error.

Automatically assuming someone meant to type the wrong word is also fatphobic. What if a bigger person with bigger fingers is typing and they hit "f" but their device picks up them touching "d" first (because, again, they're each right there)?

Yes, some people type the wrong word on purpose. But some don't. And (depending on the contents of the comment) you can't automatically tell which is which from one misspelled comment.

I've made the mistake of assuming someone meant ill will when they didn't. It happens. But that doesn’t mean you shouldn't acknowledge your mistake and perhaps apologize. And maybe don't assume someone's intentions based off a typo.

I (and many other people) have made the mistake of making jokes about someone’s mistake without consent. Let's all consciously do better going forward.

[writing2changetheworld]

"Healthy" is most often used in reference to infection, disease, and illness, not disability. Wishing for your baby to be born with no life threatening symptoms isn't ableist. Not everything that can endanger a fetus or infant's life counts as a disability, not even remotely. Saying "Oh but people usually mean this or that" is putting words in people's mouths and isn't polite or constructive.

Maybe in your experience that's how it's most often used.

It isn't putting words in people's mouths when I've been told that's what people mean MANY times in my life.

Many able-bodied and nondisabled people (and some physically disabled people) have A LOT of audacity when it comes to ableist shit they say to physically disabled people.

[writing2changetheworld]

You are well within your right to be angry about the help you didn't get and should have gotten.

You are well within your right to be angry about having your needs neglected.

You are well within your right to be angry.

[writing2changetheworld]

I'm working on a post and I realized something: Along with authentic representation of disabled people, I also believe it's important for parents of those characters be played by people who are parents of disabled people. I'm not saying the characters' parents absolutely have to be played by the actors' parents, but if a character's parent(s) is shown, it just seems so obvious to me that that actor(s) should have a kid(s) with the same disability or disabilities as the disabled character and actor.

[writing2changetheworld]

this has nothing to do with any of the current topics you’re talking about, I was just wondering if you have any idea how many of these asks are from the same people? you get so many there’s definitely some level of repeat, but also with them all anonymous, there’s not much way to know without them saying

Honestly, I assume a lot of them are the same people. Like some months ago I got someone who said I misunderstood them JUST LIKE today's. I literally would not be surprised at all if they were the same person. But if they want to keep sending asks, let them.

[writing2changetheworld]

Hi, different anon, I’m not going to say where I stand on the current discussion because I don’t intend to get involved past this, but I just wanted to come and say that I DO see where the misunderstanding happened, or at least, I see the part where you read one thing when they wrote another.

“if only disabled authors are allowed to write disabled characters, the result would be dull character casts where disabled characters are excluded and sensitivity writers lose their jobs” in this, anon wasn’t saying that disabled people are only able to write dull characters, they were saying that if non-disabled authors were UNable to write those characters, then the lack of disabled characters in works by non-disabled authors would lead to dull characters due to the lack of diversity they’re able to write. That’s where the meaning was lost, which is understandable, because it was worded somewhat confusingly.

"If only disabled authors are allowed to write disabled characters..."

I told them (multiple times) I do not believe that but after I stated that they sent another ask saying "only disabled authors can write disabled characters = books written by nondisabled authors can only have casts of nondisabled characters".

I'm done with this I "misunderstood and twisted words" conversation.

[writing2changetheworld]

“Patau Syndrome is literally a disability (the only difference between Patau Syndrome and Down Syndrome is Patau Syndrome involves an extra copy of chromosome 13, while Down Syndrome involves an extra copy of chromosome 21).”

Confused about this statement you made. What does the fact that Patau syndrome is defined by trisomy (extra copy of a chromosome) have to do with it being a disability? The “only difference” being that it’s an entirely different chromosome makes it a completely different disorder… Many trisomies are invariably fatal and/or result in miscarriage (trisomy 9, for instance). Not saying Patau isn’t a disability, but that conclusion doesn’t logically follow from the substantiation you’re using here.

You're about to get more of an insight to how my brain works. 😂 If this doesn't completely help and/or confuses you more, let me know.

I first explicitly mentioned it's a disability because the person I was responding to said they don't consider people with disabilities unhealthy but they consider people with Patau Syndrome unhealthy. Those two things can't both be completely true at once.

Then I just thought it'd be good to define it.

Both people with Patau Syndrome and people with Down Syndrome simply have an extra of a chromosome (and have physical disabilities as a result). Down Syndrome is a disability so Patau Syndrome also definitely is.

[writing2changetheworld]

you keep misunderstanding me. only disabled authors can write disabled characters = books written by nondisabled authors can only have casts of nondisabled characters which are exclusionary and dull. that is what i said. never once did i say disabled characters make stories dull, or that disabled authors can't write entertaining stories. i said the opposite very clearly, twice. you keep repeating "Disabled people exist" in your answers to me which i haven't seen you do in anyone else's answers recently and i don't understand why when i never implied the opposite. i have more things to ask and say on this topic but you've misunderstood my words and twisted them to be ableist two times now which makes me uncomfortable, have a nice day

I'm not misunderstanding you. I do not believe only disabled people can write disabled characters. I already said that. I believe what makes a book dull is someone not writing it well. If you disagree, fine.

I asked you questions. I didn't say you said or implied anything.

I say it a lot. Because it's a basic fact which lack of representation and many people ignore. I never said you said or implied otherwise.

First ask: "in cases of media where there're only writers creating characters and no one who actually plays them, such as books and comics, should disabled people never ever be included? because if the input of disabled people during character creation doesn't guarantee good enough representation for a movie, surely it wouldn't be enough for a book either. personally i believe this is what sensitivity readers are for and this kind of black and white thinking would put several people out of a job and create dull, exclusionary character casts where even if the writer is disabled only a handful of disabilities can be included"

Second ask: "i believe you may have misunderstood me. what i said is that if only disabled authors are allowed to write disabled characters, the result would be dull character casts where disabled characters are excluded and sensitivity writers lose their jobs. i'm not too sure what you understood instead, sorry. i'm glad you agree that sensitivity readers are the solution in this case, but i have to ask, where is the line drawn? why are sensitivity readers adequate for a book but consultants are not enough for a movie? either disabled consultants should allow non-disabled actors to play disabled characters, or non-disabled authors should never write disabled characters under any circumstance, because even with the help of a sensitivity reader they cannot adequately portray a disability they've never experienced. there is a logical discrepancy otherwise"

What words have I twisted exactly?

[writing2changetheworld]

i believe you may have misunderstood me. what i said is that if only disabled authors are allowed to write disabled characters, the result would be dull character casts where disabled characters are excluded and sensitivity writers lose their jobs. i'm not too sure what you understood instead, sorry. i'm glad you agree that sensitivity readers are the solution in this case, but i have to ask, where is the line drawn? why are sensitivity readers adequate for a book but consultants are not enough for a movie? either disabled consultants should allow non-disabled actors to play disabled characters, or non-disabled authors should never write disabled characters under any circumstance, because even with the help of a sensitivity reader they cannot adequately portray a disability they've never experienced. there is a logical discrepancy otherwise

I went back. You didn't say anything about "only disabled authors writing disabled characters". Only about authors in general writing disabled characters. (At the end you literally said "...even if the writer is disabled...")

Except it wouldn't automatically result in dull anything. Do you think books with only nondisabled characters written by nondisabled people are dull? Do you think disabled people can't write entertaining books?

Do you not believe sensitivity readers are needed if an author is not the same race, sex, gender identity, sexuality, etc as any of their characters? Why would they all suddenly be out of a job?

I didn't even say only disabled authors should be the ones writing disabled characters. I don't believe that. I don't even believe if a show or movie has multiple writers they should all be disabled (I believe at least some should be though).

Let's say all movies and shows with "representation" have consultants (because I'm pretty sure they don't).

Consultants for a disabled person that's on screen being played by a nondisabled actor and sensitivity readers for a fictional character that can't be played by a nondisabled person and is just words on a page and/or being read aloud are not the same.

A basic level is: a movie, by hiring disabled consultants and a nondisabled actor, is saying "We didn't actually care enough to hire a disabled actor so you're needed so hopefully people get less angry".

An author (disabled or not), by hiring sensitivity readers, is saying "I care enough about getting this character(s) right to ask for help".

On a level I actually feel is even more basic than that: since movies and shows have characters that are actually portrayed, why not hire actual disabled people? We actually exist. We're actually in the world.

Why do you believe it's only one way or the other? It isn't just logic (logically, having good, accurate representation would actually bring in more loyal fans - readers and viewers). It's also caring about other humans.