Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!spool.mu.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!emory!ox.com!yale!bunker!wtm From: cmfaltz@phoenix.princeton.edu (Christine Marie Faltz) Newsgroups: misc.handicap Subject: why blink? Message-ID: <15048@handicap.news> Date: 19 Apr 91 20:16:32 GMT Sender: wtm@bunker.isc-br.com Reply-To: cmfaltz@phoenix.princeton.edu (Christine Marie Faltz) Organization: Princeton University Lines: 29 Approved: wtm@hnews.fidonet.org Fidonet: Blink Talk Conference Index Number: 15048 I am relatively new to this news group, and I may be reopening an issue without knowing it, but I would appreciate responses. I am ot happy with the names "blinklink" or "blinktalk" since I have, along with most of my blind friends (and enemies!) always viewed "blink" as a pejorative term, analogous to "nigger" for African-Americans or "kike" for Jews. Such terms offend me to a great extent. The names of the cmoputer nets are not the real problem; I can accept it, with a little trouble. But I have been noticing that many of the blind members of the conference use the word "blink" interchangeably with "blind people," "blind person/man/woman/child". I find this offensive, insulting,--and, if anyone does, orhas, argued that it is a "bonding" word,--I feel it is infantile. We share enough negativity; let's respect each other enough to beproud of what we are--people who justhappen to be blind. There is no reason to hide behind a cute, colloquial term that offends many people. I am a blind person--a capable, independent, attractive, intelligent blind person. I am not a "blink" any more than I am a broad. Christine Please excuse the typos; I'm being called to the phone! ------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Poor is the person | Christine Faltz | | whose permission | 33 Prospect Ave. | | depends upon the | Princeton, NJ 08540 | | perceptions of others. | "Who is John Galt?" | -------------------------------------------------------------------------