For the last three years I have been documenting a series of events within United Teachers Los Angeles (UTLA), around disability rights, Palestinian rights, union democracy and blacklisting, which started as a strange power play within the Human Rights Committee apparently around disability rights, but in my estimation, may have merely been the utilization of (my) disability as the socially acceptable way of attacking when no legitimate means was available. 

Just as that controversy seemed to be resolving itself,  the Jewish Zionist Establishment (the ADL, The Simon Wiesenthal Center, the Jewish National Congress, Stand With Us, the Progressive Jewish Alliance–them too!, as well as others) launched a campaign against the Union, the Human Rights Committee, the AFSC, Café Intifada, and….. me, focusing particularly on an upcoming meeting to discuss boycotts, sanctions and divestiture (BDS) from Israel.  Thisresulted in an unholy alliance between the Zionist lobby, the “progressive” UTLA leadership, bent on protecting themselves and their positions, and the members of the Committee who now had a (pro-imperialist) arsenal of accusations to use against me, resulting in my removal from any position of leadership within the Committee and the destruction of the Committee infrastructure I had played a  large role in creating. 

Due to the (ongoing)  blacklisting, death threats, personal attacks, humiliations and the limitations of my health,  as well as, more recently a “tip” to a hot line,  an early morning service of a search warrant  of our home, complete with 14 armed police officers, a news camera, the seizure of our property, which included a thorough three month investigation  of every computer,  hard drive, zip drive, digital camera, thumb drive, back up disc and memory card, the result of which determined NO EVIDENCE OF CRIMINALITY  (no arrests, no charges, case closed!.  All of this, leaving us with  legal bills and other expenses,  PTSD (!) and (for all teachers under police investigation) the removal of my partner from the classroom.    (More on the police action later. )

Over the course of this time,  I retreated into a period of deep self reflection, depression, study and creativity. I sold my house, moved in with my partner and fellow activist, went back to school to learn new skills and  with him, bought and restored  an old house that promises to be a vehicle for our vision of local and global struggles for social justice.   The pressure on our marriage has been considerable as we have both needed to take time to work on our most basic support system: each other.  Only now am I  attempting to emerge, increasing my personal security, finding out who my real allies are, breaking the silence, speaking out,  healing deep wounds, initiating new dialogue with some of those who committed betrayals of silence, and enjoying the emergence of new, younger movements for social justice within Los Angeles. 

In the interest of disclosure:  During this same span of time the original home of my blogs shut down, so I had to repost each blog entry piece by piece, photo by photo to the new server. Emotionally, there were periods where I couldn’t look at this any more.  It just hurt too much.  And life had its own demands.  Our  larger adversaries are paid to bring us down.  We must work for justice in our spare time.  Emergencies come up, work gets put to the side. So, I have contributed to this thread on and off,  and while material is provided in chronological order, some of the entries have recently been updated or contextualized, drafts written at the time may have been recently completed and posted.  

And I doubt we have seen the end of this.  I invite my detractors to feel free to post comments as they see fit.  If their positions have the validity they claim, there should be no reason for their ongoing anonymity and stealth.  As long as they don’t obscure their identity, I will approve their posts. And it is quite possible that some events have been misrepresented.  I am open to critique and will be issuing corrections in that event. 

Finally, a word about my union ( UTLA), and the progressive slate, whose members include activists with whom I have worked for decades.  I submit this documentation, in the spirit of critical support.  I believe that dissent is essential for the life of this organization that I first joined over 25 years ago.  I was involved in the early recruiting campaign that brought UTLA membership from  30% of teachers and support staff,  to greater than 90% going into the 89 strike. I was active in the fight for bi-lingual education and against the English only movement. I was a cluster leader during the 1989 strike, rising at 4 am and not getting home until after 9:30, all the time carrying my 2 month old son.  (nicknamed “el huelgito)! I have helped plan several conferences, served on the House of Representatives, participated in the School Community Relations Committee, the Human Rights Committee and the Chicano Latino Education Committee.  I have been a delegate to the NEA RA, served as a Chapter Chair (shop steward) before I had permanent status, and filed and won over 30 grievances.   I chose at several junctures not to file harassment or discrimination lawsuits against the union, though I would have been in very good standing, especially when targeted by a member of the Board of Directors and Vice Presidents.  I also chose at the time of the entire controversy regarding BDS, not to present the matter as a an attack on my person, or use the matter to promote my own agenda within the larger community. While the L.A. Times originally accused us of planning for a rally inside (!?)  of UTLA , we very well could have, without union permission, held a protest outside the hall on the day of and at the time the canceled meeting was to be held.  We did not.  We attempted to address these matters internally, except for a call for letters to the broader community when President Duffy made a similar request to only members of the Jewish community.  It is only with considered reflection and after years of continued marginalization, harassment, innuendo and humiliation  along with increase attacks on other activists by these same forces,  that I have decided to fully address myself to this compilation and  broadcast these events more publicly.   

 To follow the complete dialogue on the issue,  please start by reading the statement: Enough is Enough- Who’s Who and Why it Matters, where  I provide a summary of events and  list the real names of the people (formerly given pseudonyms)  who have carried out this campaign against me within the Union.  As I make changes, adjustments or additions, I will post updates and links.  For those who chose to follow this closely, you may subscribe to the blog and will be alerted to newer posts.

 

The beginning of the thread, regarding disability discrimination is chronicled on my blog:  In Bed With Frida Kahlo- daily indignities, small insurrections and honest musings for a life of infirmity and rebellion 

The documentation pertaining to the Zionist lobby continues on my other blog: Cafe Intifada which is the web page of the organization of the same name.  

1,  Go to:  Enough Said… Whose Wbo and Why it Matters :  http://inbedwithfridakahlo.wordpress.com/2009/06/28/enough-is-enou…why-it-matters/

2, Then start the tread at the beginning at:  http://inbedwithfridakahlo.wordpress.com/category/utla-human-rights-committee/page/4/    and read the posts in reverse chronological order, starting with the link at the bottom of each page.  

3From there, within the thread,  you should be directed to the sister blog; Cafe Intifada, but should that link fail, return here, and follow this link to the continued thread:

 http://cafeintifada.wordpress.com/category/anatomy-of-a-blacklisting/page/3/   and read the posts in reverse chronological order, starting with the link at the bottom of each page.)

Peace with Justice, 

Emma Rosenthal

In covering blacklisting  within the  my union, United Teachers Los Angeles, and specifically within the Human Rights Committee, which has been documented within this blog and then later in the blog of Café Intifada, I initially chose to use pseudonyms in quoting or discussing the actions of those with whom I did not agree.  (In the Café Intifada blog,  I used initials.)  I can’t do that anymore, and listed at the foot of this post, are the real names of the public figures who had important roles in these events. 

At the time I felt that while it was important to document what was happening  in the Union, with teachers, activists on the issue of human rights, disability rights; that the names of individuals was more sensitive.  I was still under the illusion that dialogue could, in this situation allow for transformation and that differences could be ironed out with further discussion.  But many of my opponents have influential positions and public images that they have continued to use to wage a campaign of defamation and character assassination against me, well beyond the confines of the Committee, or even the Union hall, with no consequence to their own reputation, and because of their prestige, they have credibility.  As long as the words and actions,  are not attributed to them, they can hide behind their own justifications and misrepresentations, which they have continued to do.  

Their renown, without any evidence to the contrary, gives credence to their campaign, which has been ruthless and relentless.  While I don’t doubt that many of their supporters share their hostile indifference to disability  or Palestinian rights, I hope that others will be horrified to know the depravity of their attacks and the history of dishonesty and abuse.  I continue to endure humiliating and marginalizing responses to even the most passive appearances within the Union hall or at progressive events, having discontinued activity within the Committee since October of 2006. Often phone calls and emails go unanswered, old allies, also close to these detractors,  took themselves off of the Café Intifada listserve without context.  I am constantly barraged with strange accusations.  (For example: that I had falsely sent out Don White’s notice regarding the situation at UTLA in the BDS uproar, or I had fooled both he and Andy into positions that they would not have taken without my guile and manipulations.—as if these two men couldn’t think for themselves on such a vital issue!)

I was finally blacklisted within the Union, as a result of an unholy alliance among  members of the HRC, who are also some of L.A.’s most respected activists,  the “progressive” leadership of UTLA and the very powerful Zionist establishment.

What became clear to both Andy and myself, was that disability had been only the pretext for an attempt to wrestle power within the committee and that the fallout, including capitulation to the Jewish Zionist establishment over the BDS controversy, necessitated these prominent activists continue their lies and accusations beyond the Union hall into the larger progressive community, labor community and the left.   Additionally, the hatred and bitter disregard for disability rights, that would allow these activists to use that bigotry as a means to an end, also provided motivation for what has continued to be a campaign to limit my expression and participation in the larger movement.

It’s not about policy, politics or program. Otherwise we could simply live and let live.  Our paths don’t cross that often, and even when they do, they could extend to me the same courtesy they have had the gaul to demand of me.  (Nod, smile, move on.)   I do think it’s about power, initially within the Committee structure,  in some case, ego; in others, that I dared to write about what happened to me, even not naming names.

These bullies are so  effective, one wonders what other lives have been damaged.  How dare I speak up!

At one point, Greg Sotir brought copies of my writings to the HRC and demanded that the Committee shut down my blog!!!!  I think, in the case of what happened in Berlin, it’s about power.  It’s the school girl thrill of being able to manipulate and instigate hostility and ostracism while taking no action of one’s own.   Rosemary Lee has behind the scenes, been campaigning against me for years, insisting that I don’t have a disability, that I only use it as a pretext to get attention, inspiring others to openly ostracize me, forcing or attempting to force divisions between me and anyone close to me.  The problem with gossip is that it never bears scrutiny of the light of day.  Those who go along, take the heat for their public expression of the silent provocation, or with the power of numbers– the mob mentality of the bullies have the justification of majority.   (We tell the target of bullies, to ignore, when in reality it is not possible to ignore those who seek one out– it is the bully that should be given that directive.)  The others, who might even disagree with the perpetrator, do so in one on one conversation, not understanding that beyond that “private” conversation, is a very public  and essentially political campaign.  There are people who reportedly stood up to Rosemary, but only in the intimate context of the accusation. 

We say “the personal is political”  but this entire mess is a failure to really understand how personal the political really is. Illness is very personal. An attack on one’s disability is an attack on her body, on its statement, presence and place in the world.  Gossip, though apparently private; the ancient preserve of ladylike  discourse; the subtle current under the apparently calm sea, has always been political.  It speaks volumes to the role or women. Beyond that, it provides obscurity for a very public agenda. Repeated over and over again,  privacy is only an illusion; the shear volume, over time, distance and the number of people involved.  Whatever the reason for this campaign: hatred of disability, hatred of me, power within the Union around conference planning, resentment of attention being offered to assist access, we’ll never know.  We’ll never know.  That so many went along with it is astounding.  That picking on “the cripple” is still acceptable (among teachers!!!) speaks  to a larger depravity.  Whatever the reason, there is no excuse for the use of bigotry to forward that agenda. 

And something must be said about the controversy around Palestine and how it played out in the Union hall.  The progressive slate, consisting of activists of several leftist tendencies, including Solidarity, ISO, etc, all anti-Zionist;  as well as more “moderate” members of the slate, totally capitulated to Zionist pressure, both from the membership of the union, and from the  larger, Jewish Zionist establishment who launched the campaign to shut down a small, open meeting to discuss (discuss!!!) boycott, sanctions and divestiture of Israeli apartheid.  Gossip became extremely essential in explaining this capitulation, especially from the clique within the HRC, who used this nexus of disdain, the two step children of human rights activism: Palestinian and Disability Human Rights,  to further their own personal political agenda.  To cover their duplicity, they told their friends within the L.A. left they had been mislead either by me and Andy (Griggs)  or by the SDS/MDS, or they didn’t understand the issue, or the HRC never really took a position on the matter, and a few people, acting on their own, plummeted the entire Committee and Union into this controversy.  To their more moderate friends, mostly those within the Union,  they could parrot the point of view asserted by the Jewish Zionist establishment, (that any support of Palestinian human rights –even non-violent actions, such as boycotts, sanctions and divestiture) was the work of a few extremists who had steered the committee away from a real human rights agenda, supporting terrorism and violence, had failed to back up the leadership of the Union (!) had a one issue agenda, were divisive during contract negotiations (Unions are always involved in contract negotiations.)  

What followed over a period of several years, were a series of hate mail, anonymous phone calls,  death threats and an extensive police investigation based on a “tip” to a hotline, resulting in the serving of a search warrant at gun point, the presence of a news crew, the seizure of our property and an extensive 3 month investigation that found no NO NO NO NO evidence of criminality.  Despite these very real dangers, these individuals continued their personal campaign,  making it clear that the simplest appearance by me, at the funeral of a close friend or simply as Andy’s partner at a Union breakfast, I would be subjected to continued harassment, marginalization and humiliation.   They have even taken to sending (traceable) anonymous emails to me, knowing that I have been subjected to hate mail and death threats.  (That was the final straw!) 

I don’t know what will come of finally exposing these names to the light of day, of holding these prestigious activists accountable for their actions.  It may bring on more wrath, though I doubt the situation could get much worse for me, in terms of what has already been dished out, in terms of the damage that has already been done. Their skill and lack of remorse assures that there are other bodies (so to speak) and I hope that by speaking out we can begin a dialogue on solidarity, revolutionary discipline, human rights and group process. 

I do hope that this will illuminate for people that they need to speak  against this stealthy, relentless campaign.  It hasn’t been just one statement or a few small opinions. It has been an ugly operation, conducted over the course of over 4 years, utilizing commonly held hostilities towards people with disabilities, which regardless of anything I may or may not have done, or may or may not be, is cause alone, for public outcry and denunciation. 

IF YOU HEAR SOMEONE MAKING STATEMENTS THAT ARE ROOTED IN BIGOTRY,  SPEAK UP. LET THEM AND THOSE AROUND THEM KNOW THAT THESE ATTITUDES ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE.  IF IT IS PART OF A LARGER CAMPAIGN, OR THEY HOLD SIGNIFICANT POSITION AND PRESTIGE,  SPEAK UP PUBLICLY.  MAKE THEM ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE DAMAGE THEY DO, FOR WHILE YOU MIGHT CHOOSE TO DISREGARD THEIR ALLEGATIONS, THERE ARE MANY THAT DON’T,  AS EVIDENCED BY THE FOLLOWERS THESE ACCUSATIONS ATTRACTED.  THIS SEEMINGLY INNOCENT, CHILDISH GOSSIP IS PART OF A LARGER BODY POLITIC, HAS REAL CONSEQUENCES, LIMITS REAL ACTIVISM, ISOLATES, MARGINALIZES AND DESTROYS.   

The fact is, there has been no negative social consequence for their behavior. 

We who fight for social justice are up against a brutal and ruthless machine. There are those among us who agents of that machine, though with the complexity of the human animal, determining motives can be quite difficult.  When we let our petty differences, egos, status and pride rule our priorities, people will get very hurt.  As one Iranian friend of mine stated; “In a time of extreme repression, this is the behavior that gets people killed.” These actions lacks collective vision or revolutionary discipline.  

 I do not reveal the identity of these  individuals casually, but with the  measured reflection of several years.  We have a huge battle in front of us, and I want, I need to be a part of it.  This gossip has gone on for so long, that my silence lends to my own marginalization and limits my own contribution, as well as the contributions of others whose voices have been similarly stifled.  

I’m not asking that these individuals be ostracized or treated as they have treated me.  They too have important work to do (though don’t expect me to serve on a committee with them any time soon!)  But I do insist that a serious left will be less tolerant of this behavior and will work to draw our circle as wide as is possible, so that we can all bring our skills, our heart, our love and our strengths to the battle, this enormous battle that looms ahead of us. 

Peace with Justice,

Emma  Rosenthal

Within the Human Rights Committee

Gilroy:  Greg Sotir, Multimedia Director, Coalition Against Militarism in the Schools (CAMS)  also known as Coalition for Alternatives to Militarism in the Schools, Teacher, LAUSD, UTLA House of Representatives

Ethel or “W” :  Arlene Innouye  General Coordinator, (CAMS)  also known as Coalition for Alternatives to Militarism in the Schools, Speech and Language Therapist, Special Education, Roosevelt High School (speech and language.) LAUSD, UTLA House of Representatives

Mildred: Roselva Ungar, Retired teacher LAUSD, Past Board member, and Vice President Unitarian Univeralists L. A. UTLA House of Representatives.

Camile: Rosemary Lee  Chair, Trinational Conference, Retired teacher- LAUSD,  UTLA House of Representatives

Clarence:  Howard Bransky   Director, UTLA Board of Directors  2005-2008, UTLA House of Representatives, Teacher LAUSD

Tammy: Theresa Sams, UTLA House of Representatives

Other key players:

A.J. Duffy, President UTLA

Joel Jordan, Director of Special Projects, UTLA

Josh Pechtalt, UTLA Vice President AFT,

Dan Barnhart, Director, UTLA Board of Directors, UTLA North Area Chair

Steve Seal, UTLA Human Rights Committee Chair. UTLA House of Representatives and later, UTLA Board of Directors

Julie Washington, UTLA Elementary Education Vice President

To follow the entire thread, go to: http://inbedwithfridakahlo.wordpress.com/2009/06/28/anatomy-of-a-blacklist-a-thread-on-two-blogs/

©2007 Maine Humanities Council Literature & Medicine Humanities at the Heart of Health Care® Synapse ::: Spring 2007 :::

Volume 3, Number 1 Literature & Medicine:

From the Inside Out Interview with Rita Charon :::

bio, by Lizz Sinclair :::

iterature & Medicine: From the Inside Out
Interview with Rita Charon ::: bio, by Lizz Sinclair ::: bio

In Narrative Medicine: Honoring the Stories of Illness, Rita Charon defines narrative medicine as “medicine practiced with… narrative skills of recognition, absorbing, interpreting, and being moved by the stories of illness.” (p.4) As she explains in her writings, it is about listening to another’s stories skillfully and carefully—bearing witness and being present to both another’s experience and one’s own.

Because this is not as easy as it may seem, Charon and her colleagues share their approaches to teaching and developing narrative skills such as close reading, reflective writing and bearing witness in her book, classes and workshops. It was at one of her Narrative Medicine workshops that I had the great privilege to meet Dr. Charon and learn about narrative medicine first hand.

Nourishing Ourselves and Bearing Witness
An Interview with Rita Charon

LS: In your book you write that narrative medicine provides hope that our health care system can become more effective by “recognizing and respecting those afflicted [by disease] and in nourishing those who care for the sick.” Would you elaborate on this?

RC: This is the hope of the entire discipline—that by equipping health care professionals and patients and family care-givers with the wherewithal to meet in discourse, to recognize one another and oneself as one goes through illness, and to be open to one another’s lived experience, we can bridge the divides now separating us and get down to the challenge of either healing or living with illness. It is a far-flung hope that there be, eventually, some sort of equivalence or commonality among us all, sick and well; that we become partners and wayfarers together. See what I mean by positing recognition as the central event? The recognition has to pierce through the differences that currently segregate us away from real contact.

LS: An essay of yours mentioned that by writing narratives, health care professionals can better imagine not only what their patients might be experiencing, but also understand “what they themselves endure in the care of the sick.” I was struck by that sentence. Would you talk a little about how writing can help health care professionals in this way, and how it can (as you say in your recent book), nourish them?

RC: Writing is one of the easiest and most cost-effective methods of exposing the “unthought known,” a brilliant phrase from the work of psychoanalyst Christopher Bollas. We know things that we don’t know we know. We need specialized methods—psychoanalysis, dreaming, and, I suggest, writing—in order to rescue this known from falling prey to boredom, fear, censure, or simply being overlooked. Invariably, when doctors and nurses and social workers write about their patients, they have “aha” moments—“oh, I didn’t know I was afraid of his disease,” or “I want to be like her when I’m dying.” These insights accumulate in the course of sustained writing about practice to let the writer understand the complexity of this interior life as a clinician, to appreciate the bonds formed between us and our patients, and to simply take stock of the magnitude of what it is we do. This is, I think, nourishing, whereas practice without reflection becomes automatic and not unlike starvation.

LS: I was surprised at the willingness of people at the narrative medicine workshop I attended to write about their experiences—do you find that this is generally the case? It seems that writing could be pretty intimidating to those who are not in the habit of writing regularly, especially when writing about one’s feelings and experiences with patients.

RC: When clinicians do this kind of writing in groups and near spontaneously (take out some paper and write, right now, about a patient in your practice whose suffering moves you), writing becomes not a chore or a test but a far more “owned” act. There need not be private stage fright (yes, many persons get anxious with the blank page) when done this way without premeditation and postponement and the like. Something comforting happens when heads bow around a table, and a characteristic silence of plenitude drops upon us. I think we derive some kind of momentum by watching others scribbling away, and no one expects anything polished and finished if you simply dash it off right here. These factors help to explain some of the ease that we typically see in these writing workshops. The other part of the ease is the urge to tell of these meaningful and grave clinical situations that build up inside us, plucking at the sleeves of our attention, queued up to be brooded about.

LS: Are these writings ever shared with colleagues?

RC: We typically ask persons to read aloud what they have written. In our writing seminars that continue over time, many will submit things they have written to various clinical journals and the like. I don’t think the power of the writing exists in the publishing of them, myself, but rather in the doing of them. I have found myself sharing things I or my colleagues write about my patients with either other clinicians caring for that patient or with the patient himself or herself. I think there are vast therapeutic potentials for these texts that we have yet to conceptualize and test.

LS: You sometimes suggest that health care professionals write about an experience from the imagined perspective of a particular patient. How do you know if you’ve gotten it right? What if what you imagined is not the patient’s experience? Do you or any of your students share these with the patients?

RC: The imagining is hypothesis-generating, not hypothesis-testing. That is to say, the act of imagining from a patient’s perspective is done not to find answers, heavens, but to find questions. The next time you see that patient, you will approach him or her with a fresh set of curiosities, hypotheses, ideas about what might have been behind some behavior or comment. And so you will ask. You will enter perhaps a more complex and sustained conversation with the patient than you would have without having imagined and written. I would never think that what I made up was actually true! Oh, dear, no, simply that imagining another is a way of nearing that other.

LS: In your writing and workshops you talk a lot about the importance of bearing witness. Would you explain what you mean by this, and why this is important for health care professionals?

RC: Bearing witness means letting another’s suffering register on you. You recognize the suffering not, right now, for instrumental reasons of fixing it or doing something yourself in response to it. This will come, perhaps, but the fixer or the doer thereby becomes the agent while the sufferer becomes the passive recipient of the fixing or the doing. In bearing witness, we invite the sufferer to be the active agent while we, simply, behold that active one. Our witness does not diminish or replace the active one. Our witness, instead, recognizes the magnitude of what the patient does and lives through. Our witness takes account of the gravity of that other person’s lived experience. I don’t mean to sound mystical, but it is indeed a matter of some awe in the presence of profound human experience. This is important for the health care professional because the posture conveys to the patient that the doctor or nurse grasps the gravity of the patient’s situation and respects the magnitude of his or her plight.

LS: Time is such a commodity for those involved in health care—it takes time to listen attentively to people’s stories. Can this really be done in a busy clinical setting?

RC: We have no choice. We will simply have to learn how to do these things more efficiently and we will have to change office routines to guarantee that the time for these essential parts of health care get done.

LS: Is there anything that you would like to add in closing?

RC: There is so much to do. Thanks for your very thoughtful questions.

LS: Thank you very much for your time, Dr. Charon, and for the important work that you are doing. We are very excited to have you speak and lead a workshop in narrative medicine at our upcoming conference!

Greetings Poets,

This year’s annual Inglis House Poetry Contest began this on April 1. As in the past, there is no fee for entering. You can find the guidelines for the contest at http://www.geocities.com/IHPoetry/contest.htm. They are also available in the latest issue of Wordgathering, our online journal, at www.wordgathering.com. Simply click on poetry contest guidelines. A contest flyer is also attached for those of you who prefer attachments. We hope to be seeing your work. Please let us know if you have any questions.

Michael Northen, Inglis House Poetry Workshop

INGLIS HOUSE POETRY CONTEST
Category 1 – Open to All
Subject: Disabilities

First Place: $50
Second Place: $30
Third Place: $20

Contest Rules – 
• Any style poetry
• Two Poem Limit
• Each poem on separate page
• Poem length – 75 lines or less
• Name, address & category on each page
• Poem must relate to disabilities

Deadline: June 1, 2009

INGLIS HOUSE POETRY CONTEST
Category 2
Open Only to Writers With Disabilities

First Place: $50
Second Place: $30
Third Place: $20

Contest Rules – 
• Any subject, any style
• Three Poem Limit
• Each poem on separate page
• Poem length – 75 lines or less
• Name, address and category on each page
• Indicate disability in cover letter

Deadline: June 1, 2008
Mail entries to:
Inglis House Poetry Contest
2600 Belmont Ave.
Philadelphia, PA 19131
or 
Email to inglispoetry@hotmail.com

Sorry. Poems cannot be returned.

 http://media-dis-n-dat.blogspot.com/2009/04/little-people-of-america-protests.html

This is a statement from Little People of America (LPA) regarding the episode of the "Celebrity Apprentice" that aired on April 5, 2009. 

Little People of America is a national non-profit support organization for people with dwarfism and their families. As a membership organization representing thousands of people with dwarfism around the country, we are deeply disappointed with the episode of "Celebrity Apprentice" that NBC aired on April 5, 2009. Over the past few decades, representation of people of short stature on television, in print and on film has made significant progress. In years past, people with dwarfism were most often portrayed no better than a side show attraction at a traveling carnival or the court jester. 

Today, television, print and film often portray people of short stature as fully developed characters, not defined by their appearance. In addition, increased awareness has challenged and limited use of language such as the word "midget," considered highly offensive by the dwarfism community.

Working against efforts to create a more tolerant, inclusive community, the April 5 episode of "Celebrity Apprentice" repeatedly used the word "midget" and portrayed people with dwarfism more as objects than as individuals. Some of the cast members saw nothing wrong with portraying people with dwarfism as items of ridicule to make people laugh and create a "buzz" for a "viral video" project. Even though, on more than one occasion, contestants recognized that people with dwarfism find the word "midget" highly offensive (Donald Trump, Jr. even raised the question of terminology), the word continued to be used, including by celebrity role members and a mother of four. 

The word was also included in the title of the final product created by one "Celebrity Apprentice" team (the Athena Team). More than eighty percent of people with dwarfism have average height parents and siblings. Like other disabilities, dwarfism can impact any family, making the behavior of contestants on "Celebrity Apprentice" all the more upsetting and disappointing.

As part of the disabled population, people with dwarfism have worked hard to navigate social and physical barriers in order to become full participants and contributors to their communities. Today, people with dwarfism are employed as teachers, social workers, entertainers, lawyers, doctors and scores of other professions. In addition to working these professions, through the work of Little People of America and beyond, thousands of people with dwarfism are striving to
positively impact all communities in accepting and embracing difference. 

In order to reach this goal, the community of people of dwarfism has been challenged with scores of social and physical barriers. We applaud the work of actors with dwarfism whose diligent work to advocate for better roles is helping the community navigate those barriers. Though we recognize the right of all actors to pursue employment, we are saddened that roles demeaning people of short stature continue to be created as a gimmick to gain attention.

On April 5, rather than use an opportunity to present a positive portrayal of people with dwarfism, "Celebrity Apprentice" added another barrier through which the dwarfism community will be forced to navigate. It is the hope of Little People of America that, in the future, NBC, Mark Burnett Productions, Donald Trump and "Celebrity Apprentice" tear down walls of ignorance and discrimination rather than build new walls. We call on "Celebrity Apprentice" to partner with Little People of America, the dwarfism and the disability community in order to create a more inclusive community where all people are allowed to pursue opportunity without prejudice or discrimination.

About Little People of America: LPA is a non-profit organization dedicated to advocacy and support for individuals of short stature. LPA strives to enhance the lives of its members and their families by providing services and programs that meet their needs. LPA provides information and support to individuals whose short stature is generally caused by one of the more than 200 medical conditions known as dwarfism.

For more information, contact Gary Arnold, VP of Public Relations for Little People of America at 312-640-2199 or Joanna Campbell, Executive Director, at 714-862-4247. 

LPA National Office:
Little People of America, Inc.,
250 El Camino
Real, Suite 201,
Tustin, CA 92780
http://www.lpaonline.org/

 

The latest Jack in the Box commercial, for their new mini sirloin burgers, features mini cowboys on mini horses, herding mini cattle, to country western style music, (a corrido in the Spanish commercial– someone is working overtime on cultural sensitivity and awareness!)  

The mini cattle of course, are simply scaled down, the mini horses are miniature horses, but the mini people are little people, with munchkin voices.  

While dwarfs,  arguably, aren’t disabled, this type of ridicule is indicative of and consistent with attitudes toward pwds, and  the attitudes toward anyone who does not conform to the specific physical norm.  Discriminatory attitudes have more to do with social constructs and values, then real differences.  (Got wings?)  Apparently laughing at non-normative bodies is good for business!  I doubt that they went to all this effort to reach out the little people market!

you can see it here, in English or Spanish, then contact the company at that link, and let them know what you think of this insulting exploitation of the human condition. 

(Scroll over, Spanish is the las commercial, English is the penultimate one. )

http://www.jackinthebox.com/

“ Did they ever worry, when they “reacted to Emma” that if they were they wrong, their behavior was cruel and oppressive?” ****

_____________________________________________________________

One of my union sisters* has for years, spent much time and energy attacking me and my disability; using my impairment for her own amusement and ambition.  Recently just days after I posted a comment regarding the marginalization of disability within education, and referenced my own case within the union, (without mentioning names),  to the thread on the facebook wall of a mutual friend of ours,  I received two hateful “anonymous” comments  to the opening message of my blog* * (I have, in response set up a criteria for posting of comments, and have offered other insights in a previous post)***

The header,  IP address, as well as other indications are that the sender, and one of the authors of these latest hate rants is no other than the daughter of my union sister, writing from Portugal where she is a PhD student. 

The depravity of sending anonymous messages to someone whose receipt of death threats and hate mail is well known, is a small example of the cruelty that has gone into this multi-year campaign.

The first statement appears, based on writing styles and content, to have been a collaborative effort, mimicking the accusations of my union sister and members of her clique.  The second post with what appears to be this young woman’s own statement, revealed something very new. 

While my detractors, using my disability to attack me, through gossip and innuendo, instead of  addressing real differences, or finding legitimate avenues of disagreement,  have refused to even recognize or respond to the issue of disability as a human right,  this latest communication states:

“Your blog effectually mocks the causes of people who are in the situation you imagine yourself to be in.”

So!  We, people with disabilities,  do exist, even if I am not one of us!?

Hm! Why the change in discourse?

It has come to my attention that my union sister recently, has been complaining of vertigo, and at times has taken up the use of a cane. Vertigo is but one of the many symptoms of fibromyalgia, and in my experience, one of the most devastating.  It is extreme dizziness and imbalance. When hit with it (it comes and goes,)  I can barely walk across the room to the bathroom.  I am limited to bed rest for the duration.

Is it possible, that after years of using disability discrimination to advance her own aggrandizement, my union sister is now stricken?  That those close to her, like the “anonymous” commentator,  are witnessing the howling limitations imposed by this condition, even though when in public, she doesn’t appear to be ill.  Are they,  and she, experiencing the frustration of good and bad days;  having to miss meetings, forced into the isolation of bed rest when one lives alone, or not alone, when the rest of the world goes off to work, or activities or life in general?

Does she suffer the bitterness of people who don’t believe her because she doesn’t look sick or because when they do see her, when she can get out and about, she seems quite capable?  Do they, as she has done, question her intermittent use of ambulatory devices, claiming that her disuse one day indicates a dishonestly on the days that she claims to be in greater need?

Is she struggling with the decision to use ambulatory devices, considering deeply the stigma, and the limitations they impose as well?

And what of the shame and humiliation she herself contributed to, so aggressively?  Will people now accuse her of lying, of trying to get attention? Can she be believed after lying about my condition for her own benefit, for so long? 

Regardless of whether or not she is truly sick, she will probably find that there is nothing to be gained from “faking” disability.  Beyond parking placards, it carries very little privilege.  Will her previous lies now blow up in her face, both because of the stigma she perpetuated, and because her duplicity will now be laid out for all to see?  “But you accused Emma of faking her illness when you yourself embody all of the evidence of this “deceit”.”

Perhaps she will be a more convincing victim, that is, play the victim much better than I could.  She is by far more delicate and more feminine in presentation than I.  And femininity by definition and historically has always been linked to weakness and infirmity.  Her stealthy wiles used to attack me, never publicly, and her ability to use others to wage her wars, may make her claims more convincing, than my direct insistence at participation, my own assertive testimony of my daily struggles and my assertion that my personal experience be linked to the greater body politic demanding solidarity and justice, not pity or charity. 

When this union sister in vertigo, approaches you with her sad new situation, please respond with compassion.  Regardless of her dishonesty, she probably is really sick. Admitting it, all the more difficult because of the corner she has painted herself into.

But by all means, learn from the errors of her ways.  The corner you paint, when you dis-dis-ability, may be your own, for it is the one marginalized group, if you live long enough, I promise you, you will join.

And gently (gently) remind her , of her own cruel words;  that you were listening closely, perhaps even believed her, even were complicit with her. How deep they must have stung, how lonely indeed it is to experience what those around one negate and ridicule.  How wrong she was, how wrong, either in silence or in deed were those who supported her in her campaign against another union sister, a sister in struggle, illness and determination, a would be ally had she only allowed for the possibility in the first place.

_________________________

*She is the UTLA member with the pseudonym, “Camile” under the thread UTLA Human Rights Committee

 

http://inbedwithfridakahlo.wordpress.com/2008/03/14/suddenly-last-summer-part-1/

http://inbedwithfridakahlo.wordpress.com/2008/03/16/suddenly-last-summer-part-3/

http://inbedwithfridakahlo.wordpress.com/2008/03/18/suddenly-last-summer-part-4/

http://inbedwithfridakahlo.wordpress.com/2006/09/14/ableism-in-the-human-rights-committee/

** A Message to the World both Big and Small http://inbedwithfridakahlo.wordpress.com/about/

 

***Policy on Comments

http://inbedwithfridakahlo.wordpress.com/policy-on-comments/

Why The Hostility Toward  Victims

http://inbedwithfridakahlo.wordpress.com/2009/04/05/why-the-hostility-toward-victims-by-alyson-m-cole/

**** http://inbedwithfridakahlo.wordpress.com/2006/08/30/ableism-in-the-human-rights-committee-ix/

What Is Ailing Black America?

 

---

October 21, 2007

LETTERS

To the Editor:

Re “Tough, Sad and Smart,” by Bob Herbert (column, Oct. 16):

Mr. Herbert says a joint venture by Bill Cosby and Dr. Alvin Poussaint “is nothing less than an effort to save the soul of black America.” In fact, it is a tired recycling of an argument that reaches back to Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s “Negro Family” and runs through the pledge last year by Bruce S. Gordon, then the president of the N.A.A.C.P., to end “victimlike thinking” by African-Americans.

In casting victimhood as “the enemy,” we mistake a condition for a state of mind (that dreaded “victim mentality”) and end up blaming the victim. Would Mr. Cosby and Dr. Poussaint have us believe that it is not structured inequality and racism that leave droves jobless, but rather a matter of self-esteem and individual character?

While Mr. Moynihan pathologized the urban poor, he still sought national action. In our neoliberal era of personal responsibility and workfare, we leave victims to battle their victimization on their own.

What black men and women need are jobs, not another pep talk. This applies to disconnected youth, who are out of school and out of work, and, sadly, out of favor among policy makers as well.

Alyson M. Cole
Flushing, Queens, Oct. 16, 2007

The writer is a professor of political science at Queens College, CUNY.

Emma’s Commentary:

(Statements in italics are direct quotes from two messages sent to me this week in response to my blog; In Bed With Frida Kahlo. For more information about these comments, go to:  http://inbedwithfridakahlo.wordpress.com/policy-on-comments/)

One of the most astounding experiences with disability, has been the aggressive manner in which (among others) human rights activists, 1. find that attacking my disability is more effective than engaging in real discourse, that it is strategically better to pick on the “cripple” then argue merit, and 2.  assert that I do not really have a disability, that I am faking it, “begging for attention”, mocking people “who are in the situation you imagine yourself to be in”, offering no proof of this assertion, assuming (with surprising accuracy) that others will join in their mockery, on the face value of the accusation itself.

These are strange accusations from activists, who one would assume had spent a lifetime fighting this very set of assumptions, more aligned with right wing conservative posits than any radical challenge to the status quo.  

One wonders, who else “plays victim” in their book: welfare “queens”, members of the labor aristocracy who demand higher wages?  teachers who complain about class size?  women who accuse their dates, husbands, fathers of rape?  the growing number of people incarcerated who claim their innocence? 

Who are these arbiters of merit?  On what credentials do they base their assertions?

What are the dangers to movements for social change if activists perpetuate these stereotypes, these images of people who speak out, who dare to define our own experience, who dare to demand an equal place in the world?

-Emma Rosenthal

____________________________________

Why the hostility toward victims?

Alyson M. Cole

Monday, November 27, 2006

IN HIS election-night tribute to the defeated senator from Pennsylvania, Rick Santorum, Republican pundit William Bennett waxed eloquent about the senator’s concern for victims — of AIDS, autism, partial-birth abortion, and those in Darfur.

“The poor, the dispossessed, the helpless, the unborn, whether it be here in the United States or abroad,” he proclaimed, “have lost a champion in losing Rick Santorum.”

This assemblage of the weak and vulnerable is rather remarkable in and of itself, but the real irony is that William Bennett delivered this encomium. For more than a decade, Bennett has been at the forefront of the campaign against the “victims’ revolution.” He even blamed “the victimology mongers” for rendering the United States susceptible to evil-doers on 9/11. Indeed, Bennett, among others, is responsible for the doublespeak that warped how Americans have come to think about suffering and sufferers.

Without precedent or much public notice, “victim” has become a term of derision, deployed to dismiss, ridicule and condemn. This sentiment congealed in the early 1990s, when politicians and analysts — like Bennett — instigated an alarmist crusade alerting Americans that an excess of grievances imperiled the nation. Anti-victimists cast those who allege to be victims as shamefully passive or as cynically manipulative. As a result, seeking recognition of one’s injury indicates a deficient character, or even symptoms of a pathology (the dreaded “victim mentality”). Individuals now must use other designations to avoid stigma. The brutalized Central Park jogger accordingly emerged from seclusion to insist that she is not a “victim” but a “survivor.” Similarly, those who died on Sept. 11, 2001 are not “victims” in our collective vocabulary as much as “heroes,” posthumously conscripted as soldiers in the “war for freedom.”

The language of victimization has not so much disappeared from public discourse as recirculated, for it is now routinely invoked to drive attacks on affirmative action, welfare, and even terrorism. Welfare programs, for example, supposedly present a punishing burden on national resources and constrict American freedoms. In this way, victimism injures, indeed victimizes, American society. Though this rhetoric was forged during debates over domestic policies, President Bush applies it to characterize America’s enemies abroad. He postulates that a “culture of victimization” in the Muslim world causes terrorism. Others have gone further, comparing Islamist radicals in Europe to the American “welfare queens.”

Even though conservatives attack racial politics, feminism, and similar movements as “victim politics,” the anti-victim sentiment is not unique to the Right. The Democratic Leadership Council devoted an entire issue of “The New Democrat” to the theme of “Getting Beyond Victimization” in 1993. More recently, in the summer 2006, Bruce Gordon used his inaugural address as the new head of the NAACP to denounce “victim-like thinking” among African Americans.

Paradoxically, critics of the “culture of complaint” also exalt ideal types of absolute innocence and sacrificial suffering — a veritable cult of true victimhood. Like those connected to Santorum’s revered causes, true victims may include the terminally ill, individuals harmed by violent crimes or atrocities enacted by other nations, and, especially, fetuses. The criteria for inclusion have less to do with the veracity of claims or the facts of injury, than with the sufferer’s personal qualities, her character and purity.

The ultimate purpose of the cult of true victimhood is to suppress most victim claims. It implies that the good victim is one who refuses to be a victim. So when in the wake of the midterm elections Republicans resurrect “compassionate conservatism,” it is important to understand how an anti-victim rhetoric scripts public deliberations about suffering, injury, and injustice, and in doing so, preempts these debates altogether.

Alyson M. Cole is a professor of political science at Queens College of the City University of New York. She is author of “The Cult of True Victimhood: From the War on Welfare to the War on Terror.”

 

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/11/27/EDGK0MJD2V1.DTL

I just discovered Amanda Baggs on youtube.  Also the blogger, at,  http://ballastexistenz.autistics.org/  

Her writing and videos are creative, human and speak to the experience of people with disabilities in general, people with autisism specifically.  

She dedicates an entire page to her medical documentation, for those arrogant members of “normal” society, who can’t believe that someone can be disabled and also extremely brilliant and articulate.  

 

This speaks to my own thesis; that we all benefit from full inclusion, the insistence that each human being has value and her existence and work (paid or otherwise) contributes to our greater humanity.

This is a very important utube film about language, humanity, communication.  Please note, that this film maker chose to close caption her video so more people could have access to the information.  Few youtube videos provide this service, denying this service to people who don’t fit within the  auditory or cognitive  norms  of society.