The Power of Perception
Ah, the power of perception. How two people can read the same exact book (or, say, news article) and have very different interpretations of it. Interpretations that are worth explaining and learning from, even when you don’t agree with them.
It’s a concept I spent considerable time teaching and reiterating each year – with John Green‘s help, of course. How not every student is going to enjoy every story we read and that’s OK, so long as you have a reason for your opinion.
And who would’ve thought it’s an important issue in real life, too? (What? There’s more to adulting than knowing how to do taxes!?)
You see, I recently came across a survey where Non-Americans were asked to name some “positives” they see in the US. It really is a great, moral-boosting read, especially since our country is in a bit of a rough patch right now. But here was the #1 response:
That seems lovely, right? Besides their lack of people-first language… How could I have gotten angry reading that? Shouldn’t I be happy that foreigners recognize America accommodating people with disabilities? Must be my liberal millennial snowflake easily-triggered mindset…
But what if it said America is great because…
Women are often paid as much as men in some careers!
or There are many places that will accommodate gay weddings!
or There is even a whole school system where anyone can learn more about their future job, if they can afford it.
Yeah. These all sound good. But every job should have equal pay. All marriages should be able to be celebrated everywhere. Money shouldn’t regulate college attendance. And every public building with stairs should have a ramp.
When I taught, some students genuinely thought (and told me, repeatedly) they deserved praise for turning in homework, or not talking during a test, or being on time for class. You know, things they were supposed to do.
Yes, it was great they did all that, but their normal, expected actions don’t deserve special recognition. A place being wheelchair accessible should just be normal, not some awesome thing America does.
To me, it’s sad how accommodating someone with a disability is seen as so impressive. Our society’s standards really shouldn’t be so low.
When I read it, it was like someone saying, “I can’t believe you can sometimes get your wheelchair out of the car! And then get into almost any building in this country! Lucky! There’s even one place you can travel to to experience amusement parks as if you were normal! Wow, America is awesome.”
But I do understand their intentions. Like I said, most people would interpret that praise as wonderful and inclusive…
But do you see why I took immediate offense to those same exact words? How two people can read the same thing but interpret it differently? And how you probably would never see how that statement could be negative if you never listened to me?
And guess who else felt the urge to also write about differing interpretations this week? Oh, about 150 authors, that’s who.
In an open letter published this week, a very differentiated group of academics from around the world teamed together to draw attention to the “restriction of debate” in modern culture. Granted, they took my thoughts a step further, saying
“The free exchange of information and ideas … is daily becoming more constricted,” citing “an intolerance of opposing views, a vogue for public shaming and ostracism and the tendency to dissolve complex policy issues in a blinding moral certainty.”
They go on to say, “We uphold the value of robust and even caustic counter-speech from all quarters. But it is now all too common to hear calls for swift and severe retribution in response to perceived transgressions of speech and thought.”
And finally, “The restriction of debate, whether by a repressive government or an intolerant society, invariably hurts those who lack power and makes everyone less capable of democratic participation. The way to defeat bad ideas is by exposure, argument, and persuasion, not by trying to silence or wish them away.”
Basically, both sides of any controversial issue need to acknowledge the opinions and interpretations of others without immediately dismissing or “canceling” them just because they are different.
Click on the picture to read the whole letter. I love it, but it’s ok if you don’t; that’s kind of the point.
Excellent way to present your points on such a relevant topic. Well said, as always!!
I’m assuming ableds were the ones who answered this, because from what I hear from my disabled American friends, there’s no way the US could be considered accomodating.
Also, I gather from this article you like person-first language? I hate it, as do a lot of disabled people I know, because it implies we have to use the word “people” first to remind others that we are, in fact, people. Disabled is just an adjective like any other to describe an aspect of us. We don’t say “a person with blackness” or “a person with bilingualism,” we say “a Black person” and “a bilingual person.” So why should “disabled people” be a bad word?