Did these people [in academia who claim that they are not exposed to disabled people] realize that when they encountered the work of Rosa Luxemburg (who limped), Antonio Gramsci (a crippled, dwarfed hunchback), John Milton (blind), Alexander Pope (dwarfed hunchback), George Gordon Brown (club foot), [Jorge] Luis Borges, James Joyce, and James Thurber (all blind), Harriet Martineau (deaf), Toulouse-Lautrec (spinal deformity), Frida Kahlo (osteomyelitis), Virginia Woolf (lupus), they were meeting people with disabilities? Do filmgoers realize when they watch the films of James Ford, Raoul Walsh, André de Toth, Nicholas Ray, Tay Garnett and William Wyler that these directors were all physically impaired? Why is it when one looks these figures in dictionaries of biography or encyclopedias that their physical disabilities are usually not mentioned – unless the disability is seen as related to creativity, as in the case of the blind bard Milton or the deaf Beethoven? There is an ableist notion at work here that anyone who creates a canonical work must be physically able. Likewise, why do we not know that Helen Keller was a socialist, a member of the Wobblies, the International Workers of the World, and an advocate of free love? We assume that our ‘official’ mascots of disability are nothing else but their disability.

Lennard J. Davis, Enforcing Normalcy: Disability, Deafness, and the Body (via irwonder)

Writing Deaf Characters | Speech is Speech

artattemptswriting:

Before I get going, I’m 75% deaf, as some of you know, semi-reliant on hearing aids and lip reading. My first languages were Makaton sign and then BSL. I now use spoken English.

There are a lot of issues I find with how deaf people are represented in books, when represented at all. I would love to see more deaf and hard of hearing characters in the books I read- without having to read books specifically about deaf/HoH people- but when I find them, they’re grossly undercharacterized or stereotyped. Authors write them in a way that sets signing language characters apart from speaking characters as if they are inferior, and this makes my blood boil.

Some technicalties

I’ll keep this brief.

  • You may have heard that “deaf” is a slur and you should use “hearing impaired”. Don’t. I’ve never met a deaf or hard of hearing person who believed that. Use deaf for people who are deaf, and Hard of Hearing (HoH) for people who lack hearing. These can be interchangeable depending on the person. This is why sensitivity readers are a useful part of the beta process.
  • Sign language is incredibly varied. It developes in the same way as spoken language. Fun fact: in BSL there are at least half a dozen ways to say bullshit, my favourite of which is laying your arms across one another with one hand making a bull’s head sign and the other hand going flat, like a cowpat. It’s beautifully crude, and the face makes the exclamation mark. Wonderful.
  • There are different sign languages. Knowing more than one would make a character multi or bi-lingual, even if they are non-speaking.
  • Makaton is basic sign language used by children, and it mirrors the very simple language used by toddlers.
  • Yes, we swear and talk shit about people around us in sign language sometimes, and no, it isn’t disrespectful to have signing characters do this. Just remember that we also say nice things, and random things, and talk about fandoms and TV shows and what we’re having for dinner, too.
  • Each signed language is different from another. ASL and BSL? Nothing alike. Just google the two different signs for horse.

Remember that sign language is a language, equal to the spoken word

Therefore, treat it as such. Use quotation speech marks and dialogue
tags. You only need to explicitly state that this character uses signed language once, and then let your modifiers and description do the rest.

 It isn’t a form of “sub-speech" or “making hand actions”- sign language is a language all on its own: it has its own grammar rules, syntactical structures, punctuation, patterns, idioms and colloquialisms. For example, “what is your name?” becomes “Your name what?” with the facial expression forming punctuation in the same way that spoken English uses alterations of prosodic tone (inflections). There is even pidgin sign; a language phenomenon usually associated with spoken language.

In the same way that you would describe a spoken-English character’s tone of voice, you would describe a signed-English speaker’s facial expressions and the way that they sign- keeping in mind that these things are our language’s equivalent of verbal inflection.

So please, none of that use of “special speech marks” or italicised
speech for sign.
If your viewpoint character doesn’t understand signed
speech, then you take the same approach that would be used for any other
language they don’t understand, like French or Thai. E.g “He said something
in rapid sign language, face wrinkling in obvious disgust.” is a good
way of conveying this. The proof that you’ve done this well is in whether or not you can switch “sign language” for French or something else, and it would read the same.

Don’t be afraid to describe how things are said, either.
Sign language is such a beautiful and expressive way of talking, and to
see a writer do it justice would be truly fabulous. Putting this into practise:

“Oh, I love maths!” She said, fingers sharp and wide with sarcasm. She raised her eyebrows.

“I’m sorry.” He replied and made his face small, but could not keep the grin forming. She was starting to laugh, too.

This is part one of two, for the sake of readability and keeping the information simple as I can. Part two- writing the deaf characters themselves- is coming up over the weekend. See you then and best luck with your writing until that point 😀


This is part of my weekly advice theme. Each week I look at what you’ve asked me to help with, and write a post or series of posts for it. Next week: settings and character development (including heroes, anti-heroes, villains, and every other kind of character).

allthecanadianpolitics:

tigressjasper:

Lisa Macleod the minster of child services and social services laughed when told about how ontario citizens on ontario disability support program and ontario works felt heightened in their anxiety and depression and suicidal thoughts when waiting to hear what the progressive conservatives were going to do with these programs. Then called the second part of Lisa Gretzky’s question a joke. 

It is great to know as a canadian living with mental illness, my illness is seen as funny and a question about my livelihood is a joke. 

Link to video:

https://twitter.com/LGretzky/status/1065729837594226688

Ontario NDP: Ford redefining disability means vulnerable Ontarians will be turned away from ODSP benefits

allthecanadianpolitics:

The Ford government has announced it’s changing how it defines a disability — a move that means many more Ontarians will be turned away when they apply for the Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP).

“For people in Ontario living with a disability or serious illness, this change is going to make them more destitute, and more desperate,” said NDP Social Services critic Lisa Gretzky.“ This is a callous way to deliver a cut on the backs of the most vulnerable people in Ontario. It’s taking Ontario’s social services from bad to worse.”

Conservative Minister of Children, Community and Social Services Lisa MacLeod announced Thursday that the province will change the definition of disability to match the federal definition. The most common federal definition applies to Canada Pension Plan Disability (CPPD) applicants, who can only get support if their illness is likely to prevent them from ever working. If Ford applies this definition to ODSP recipients, Ontarians whose disabilities allow them to work occasionally, or those who may one day be able to work, will be denied support. This could include people with cancer, common forms of diseases like MS, and certain mental illnesses.

The move enables the Ford Conservatives and Lisa MacLeod to make a deep cut to social service programs. Her ministry, which includes Children, Community and Social Services, is budgeted at about $1 billion less than the 2018 budget allocated for those ministries when they were separate.

“The Conservatives have already made deep cuts to a social assistance system that gives much-needed support to nearly one million Ontarians,” said Gretzky. “Doug Ford has already cut in half a planned increase to social assistance from three per cent to 1.5 per cent. He killed the Liberals’ three-year basic income pilot, a project that has been helping 4,000 low-income earners across Ontario.”

These cuts are causing serious anxiety for Ontarians struggling to make ends meet on the existing social assistance payments provided by Ontario Works (OW) and ODSP.

“The Conservatives are taking things from bad to worse,” Gretzky said. “In Windsor, one in four women and one in four children live in poverty – the highest poverty rates in Canada. For MacLeod to pass this change off as anything but cuts to Ontario’s most vulnerable people is disgusting.”

In Toronto, the Daily Bread Food Bank recently reported that over 60 per cent of its users rely on social assistance to make ends meet. Last year, the food bank had 914,000 visits. Doug Ford’s own riding of Etobicoke saw the largest surge – 170 per cent – in food bank users. Daily Bread Food Bank CEO Neil Hetherington warned that Ford’s cuts to social assistance will only drive these numbers up.

Ontarians, and Ontario’s most vulnerable, deserve better.

Ontario NDP: Ford redefining disability means vulnerable Ontarians will be turned away from ODSP benefits

There are danger signs in Ford government plans to reform welfare

nrh61:

allthecanadianpolitics:

As political tactics go, it’s not a bad one.

Drum up fears that the social assistance program than sustains nearly 1 million Ontarians might be gutted. Do this by talking about how it costs taxpayers $10 billion a year, isn’t sustainable, and doesn’t encourage people to work.

In short, terrify the people who can barely survive on what they’re getting now that something much worse is coming their way. Then deliver a series of changes that, at first glance anyway, aren’t as bad as expected, and even include the potential for improvements down the line.

To be sure, Ontario’s social assistance system does not work as well as it should for anybody. But where the rubber always meets the proverbial road is figuring out how to fix it.

Doug Ford’s government unveiled its plan this week to “restore dignity, independence and empowerment” to those on social assistance.

The biggest change is redefining disability to more closely align with federal guidelines. Lisa MacLeod, the minister of children, community and social services, says this will provide “clarity.”

Perhaps it will. But the government isn’t doing this to make paper-pushing easier. This change will make it harder for new people to qualify for the Ontario Disability Support Program. And the obvious underlying suggestion is that there are people on the program now who shouldn’t be.

People with “severe disabilities” who can’t work will be treated with “compassion and dignity in our new system,” MacLeod promised. Those who can work will also be treated with dignity and better supported to find jobs, she went on. “If you can work, or if you can’t, we have a plan to help you.”

But part of the plan, clearly, is to move people from one group to another by ruling more injured workers or those suffering mental issues ineligible for disability support. That leaves them with no option but the Ontario Works program, which provides substantially less support. The monthly maximum for a single person on disability is $1,169 compared to just $733 on welfare.

Continue Reading.

I just can’t with these fuckers. Is everyone taking that in? $733. Where in Ontario can you pay basic rent for 700 bucks, let alone eat or meet any other expenses? But that’s what you’re going to survive on if you’re only 95% disabled in Ontario now. Ontario works is already a joke and now we’re going to expect people who are disabled to live on it too.

There are danger signs in Ford government plans to reform welfare

Hey so I have a family friend who use to work in the social services and still had connections in there. She says that the cuts and changes are mostly focused on Ontario Works not on ODSP. I wasn’t given any specific information, so take what I say with a grain of salt, but I know that a lot of your are probably anxiously wondering what could possibly in store for us, and I hope that knowing this information helps some of you or get’s you a leg up preparing for the future. Stay safe everyone 💚

allthecanadianpolitics:

~~~~

Ontario welfare reforms to be unveiled Nov. 22

allthecanadianpolitics:

An overhaul of Ontario’s welfare system, expected Nov. 8 has been delayed until Nov. 22, causing more anxiety for those who rely on it.

Social Services Minister Lisa MacLeod announced the 100-day review on July 31 when she scrapped the previous Liberal government’s basic income pilot project, “paused” 19 regulatory reforms, and halved a planned 3-per-cent rate increase to 1.5 per cent. But instead of unveiling the reforms Nov. 8, as promised, MacLeod issued a statement Wednesday afternoon saying she looks forward to “sharing our plan” on Nov. 22.

Submitted by mywitfailsme.

Ontario welfare reforms to be unveiled Nov. 22

Welfare reform is the Ford government’s next big project

allthecanadianpolitics:

Premier Doug Ford’s government is about to reform social assistance in Ontario, raising fears of the kind of sweeping cuts to welfare made the last time the Progressive Conservatives took power in the province.

More than 960,000 men, women and children receive social assistance from the province’s two welfare programs, Ontario Works and the Ontario Disability Support Program, according to the latest provincial figures. The annual social assistance tab, including drug benefits, now tops $10 billion.

Continue Reading.

Welfare reform is the Ford government’s next big project