Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!samsung!olivea!oliveb!bunker!hcap!hnews!261!1089.0!Mary.Otten
From: Mary.Otten@p0.f1089.n261.z1.fidonet.org (Mary Otten)
Newsgroups: misc.handicap
Subject: Re: accommodation
Message-ID: <16539@handicap.news>
Date: 28 Jun 91 14:47:46 GMT
Sender: wtm@bunker.isc-br.com
Reply-To: Mary.Otten@p0.f1089.n261.z1.fidonet.org
Organization: FidoNet node 1:261/1089.0 - Braille Inn Speakou, Street MD
Lines: 21
Approved: wtm@bunker.hcap.fidonet.org

Index Number: 16539

[This is from the Blink Talk Conference]

I think the question comes down to what is considered to be special
treatment. Not that long ago, a blind person with a guidedog couldn't
get into a store, restaurant etc. And there were those blind people who
thought the guidedogs were not necessary, and why didn't people just use
other methods that were accepted by the sighted folks. All technology
etc that we use that is not normally used by the sighted is special. It
helps us compete, but it is special, read different, from the norm. So
the argument boils down to the question of how much special
accommodations are needed and also, does one group or individual have
the right to tell another group or individual that the things they want
are special treatment, whereas the things the first group is using are
just aids to help us compete on an equal footing. That was a long
sentence, but I think you get the point.

--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!261!1089.0!Mary.Otten
Internet: Mary.Otten@p0.f1089.n261.z1.fidonet.org