So -- the big television news for the coming season, here in the States, is that Michael J. Fox is coming back to television in a sitcom which is also writing for (I think), as a fictionalized account of his life since leaving television due to having Parkinson's.

On the one hand: yay! Disability as portrayed by someone who lives it, rather than fantasizes about it. On the other hand, I've been apprehensive, because the network it's airing on (NBC) has done some terrible shows, like The Apprentice and Biggest Loser.

But I saw the official trailer for the show last night, and I'm now more hopeful. For one thing, it looks like at least some of the jokes will be about "TABs say the darnedest things, don't they?" It also looks like it's both set, and filmed in NYC (Hollywood versions of New York are faker than Dick van Dyke's cockney accent).

Here's the trailer from YouTube:

Over at Rolling Around in my Head, Dave Hingsburger is asking a question that tickles that special lexicography geek place in my heart (It's another "What's a lexical gap in English that you would like to see filled?" discussion). And since I have people in my circles that identify with various forms of queer- and/or Disability Pride, I thought I'd share it here:

Begin Quote:

Several years ago George Hislop, who was a close friend, told me the difference between someone who was 'gay' and someone who was 'homosexual.' He said that a 'homosexual' was someone who had sex with others of the same gender but who did not identify with their sexuality, denied it as often and as loudly as they could and who did nothing to support the political movement regarding the rights for sexual minorities. A gay person, on the other hand, was someone who also had sex with others of the same gender but had an affiliation to the movement to the rights of others to love as they will that went beyond sex. Gay people, he said, identified with their sexuality and with their community. He saw the difference as the same as the difference between shade and sun.

[Snip]

Begin Quote:

Like the woman I spoke to in Maryland who wanted to talk to me about accessibility in Toronto. When this happened it reminded me of being in a gay bar in Milwaukee and being asked how safe it was to be gay in Toronto. In both cases, it was more than strangers asking strangers tourist advice ... both were experiences of the best of community. Where strangers aren't so strange, and where questions are understood at the deepest level of their asking. Community is community but community requires an entrance fee - identity.

So... while I'll be working on other things, today, this question will be running in the background of my thoughts... I'll probably have more to say about it later.

[ETA: Oops! forgot the link to the full post -- here: http://davehingsburger.blogspot.com/2013/04/take-notes-theres-quiz-at-end.html ]

The other day, dharma_slut posted this link to a TEDx Talk by Colin Stokes, about the correlation between our modern rape culture and the lack of movies that pass the Bechdel Test:

http://youtu.be/Nx8RRIiP53Q

Quick summary of his thesis:

A) It's not enough that we empower girls to protect themselves against the Patriarchy; we have to teach boys to fight the Patriarchy, too.

B) Adventure movies aimed at young male audiences that Don't pass the Bechdel Test have the following subtext: "The role of the True Man is to go out Alone and Kill the Bad Guys, and then come home and collect his reward: a woman who has no friends, and doesn't speak."

So:

C) It's time for fathers to teach their sons that it's a good thing to want to be on Team with the goal of helping others, instead of being a Solo Renegade, even if the leader of that team is a woman, and that Real Men trust their sisters.

And part of his talk was a strong endorsement, by name, of Pixar's new Movie "Brave."

Based on that recommendation, I did something I'd never planned on doing: Gave Google my credit card number, and rented "Brave" for 48 hours of watching over the Internet. I just finished watching the first time through tonight... May watch it again before time's up tomorrow.

Anyway: I wanted to report: not only does it pass the Bechdel Test (the whole movie is basically a long conversation between Mother and Daughter about How to Lead your King Queendom), it also passes the Disability Test I came up with a couple of weeks ago.

The King loses half his leg in the first act (before the tenth minute), in a fight with a demon bear. And for the rest of the film, his peg leg is treated as proof that he Survived, rather than a reason to be pitied.

So it has a disabled character. And while he boasts about getting revenge against the demon, that's clearly for the sake of a good story; he spends all his actual energy trying to maintain the peace in his kingdom (mainly between his wife and teenage daughter), so it's clear that that's his real motivation. And the movie has a happy ending, even though (*gasp*) he still has a peg leg at the end.

Anyway, the movie's page on YouTube has snippets of reviews from Rotten Tomatoes, and while the majority were positive (overall 78% positive), even the good reviews were kind of lukewarm. Now that I've seen the movie, I think a big reason for that is what I call: "Mashed potatoes Vs. Vanilla ice cream Syndrome;" they may be the best mashed potatoes ever to come out of any chef's kitchen, but if you gobble down a mouthful expecting ice cream, you're going to hate them.

The number one thing that I noticed about this film, in comparison with all the other Pixar movies I've seen is that it is so much darker.

First, it's literally darker. Every other movie from them has been "candy-colored:" the worlds of children's toys, and tropical fish in coral reefs, and crayon-colored monsters in closets. This movie was set in the Scottish Highlands, in the Middle Ages, and its color palette is dominated by fog, and stone, and deep, dark forests (still image from the film of the heroine riding her black horse through a fog-shrouded ring of standing stones). I, on the other hand, love those forest/earth tones. But I still recommend watching the 2-D version, and turning the brightness on your screen all the way up.

Second, it's thematically darker (and that may be what dampened reviewers' enthusiasm most of all). Usually, these kinds of "kids' movies" get their happy ending from the moral: "Free spirits just have to be Free!!. But this movie gets its happy ending from the moral: "Free Spirits must learn to temper their Hearts' Desires with Responsibility Toward Their Community." The soaring ballad during the closing credits is "Learn me Right," and it's all about owning up to your mistakes: needing, seeking, and earning, forgiveness.

According to Box Office Stats (unfortunately powerful), this was the first Pixar movie to fail to come in the Top Ten of the Year (it came in #11). I can't help but wonder if it would have done better as an autumn movie-- it certainly had an autumn feel, rather than summer vacation and cotton candy... you know?

Anyway, I liked it.

A link to Dave Hingsburger's post in honor of today: International Day of Persons with Disabilities: Three Stairs

(Begin Quote)
Later, much later. I stepped into a 'special school' for kids with physical disabilities. There was noise, noise, noise, kids laughing, kids fighting, kids racing pell mell down hallways. The noise was so distracting that it was hard to notice as you walked through the school, even from the old part into the new part that there weren't three steps. The school was accessible to itself, but closed off from the world up three steps.

No one ever asked me to consider.

Where they were.

Why they weren't there.

Who decided that they could be disposed of in other towns, other places.
(End Quote)

Here's the reply I left on that post:

Thank you, Dave. I will post this on my personal journals to signal-boost within my circle.

But I find myself asking:

"Why didn't I know this date was coming up (or that it even existed)?"

If I had, I would have planned, in advance, for ways to spread the word, and celebrate.

But I guess, in many ways, we are still not considered.

Another cross-post from naarmamo:

---

Two, today, to start catching up on my missed days -- both done free-hand in ballpoint, because I couldn't quickly find a pencil that wasn't a stub.
And today's theme is "Disability Pride."

Ever since Na'Ar'Ma'Mo '10, I've adopted monsters as my personal metaphor for disability -- as I explain in this post from February of last year: On Monsters: Stigma, Shame, and the Medical Model of Disability. But the problem with making any and all monsters a symbol of disability, is that it still reduces "Disability" to a symbolic lesson for the "normals" (Irony quotes).

And then I remembered an aphorism in Disability Culture: "If you're lucky to live long enough, sooner or later, you will be disabled." And, remembering all those stories where dragons defeat hundreds of knights before finally being defeated, themselves (only the dragons that get killed make it into the human stories), it occurred to me that it would be very unlikely that they live their entire lives unscathed. So I give you "Survivor" -- the one-eyed, amputee, dragon:


(not exactly happy with the empty eye socket)

---
ETA: Oooh! Just had an idea: When a Fire-breathing dragon "licks its wounds," would that instantly sterilize and cauterize said wounds -- thus making it less likely to die from infection and blood loss? Thus, making it more likely that a dragon could survive in a prolonged, disabled, state, than, say, a wounded stag (or even human)?
---

This second one is a sketch for how I wish pitchers and jugs where designed, to make them easier to pour out of with greater control, and less strain on the wrist and forearm:


(I drew the side view twice, because I wasn't happy with my first attempt at the handle -- the dots are where the ink bled through from yesterday's heart)

Has it really been over a month since I last posted for this mini, two person, meme? Eeep! I've not given up on it. Really, here's proof:

( Monster Poem #1 (revised from its first posting here, on March 31st) )

( Monster Poem #2 (Slightly revised from when it was first posted here April 4th) )

And finally (for now), poem #3 (\o/):

THE MONSTERS' ANXIETY

"The Campus Registry for 'Special Needs'"
(Protected from the mainstream's quickened pace):
We're gathered here like flotsom in the weeds
United, simply, by coming to this place.
As different from each other as from those
Who tell us where to sign, and where to go.

Some Deaf, some blind, "mobility impaired" --
No two needs the same for getting by.
We know the pain, and try hard not to stare
But in the face of Difference, we are shy.
We know that we are lucky to be here,
And neither locked away, nor even dead.
And yet, in spite of Love, we still have Fear:
The knowledge: "I'm a monster" in our heads.
For we, as well, have learned what elders taught
About what makes a Man, and makes a Beast,
And our identities, in Limbo caught --
Put us on shaky ground, to say the least.
But we are here, and will be here again --
Perhaps becoming allies -- even friends.

-------------
(I'd decidedly "Meh..." about the closing couplet -- it's bordering on the too-cozy-sentimental. But I can't think of any better conclusion at the moment)

For now: Dinner Time!

( Transcript )

I love this ad because A) the Grandmother is shown as cool and strong, regardless of the wheelchair, and B) the wheelchair is shown for what it actually is: an effective tool for getting access to what you want.

Unfortunately, it did not get enough fan votes to actually get aired during the Superbowl -- the one that did win centered around mocking the concept of identity disorder, and laughing when the person got hurt. But considering the self-selecting group of people who did the voting, maybe that's not surprising.

Still, this one is being shown now, and it's out there in the cultural cloud.

---
Also, in playing and pausing this ad for the transcript write-up, I noticed a continuity error: in the opening shot, the Grandmother has one of those folding portable tea-trays with a tea-cup and doily on it, that's missing for the rest of the spot. I suppose it was there in the first place to push all the "hopeless old lady" buttons in people's minds, even though they had to get rid of it for all the action shots to follow.

hmf.

It's been in the back of my head to signal boost and promote this idea for the last couple of weeks, but, well... I kept putting it off, in part because I wasn't sure what I wanted to say about it, if anything. And now the date is tomorrow, and there's no more room for putting it off.

Dave Hingsburger (and many of his blog readers, Yours Truly included) want to have an "International Day of Mourning and Memory" for those people who have been sent away to live Institutional Lives because their minds and/or their bodies are different. And when they die in these places, they have no family to mourn or remember them* ...

Dave Hingsburger explains his reason for the date in this post: http://davehingsburger.blogspot.com/2012/01/january-23-international-day-of.html and his reasoning is pretty compelling, imnsho.

He has also posted links to a video & song that tells the true story of one such person who was sent away to live in one of the more "progressive" institutions, back in the 1930s. Here: She Never Knew (She Never Knew) [trigger warning for hate speech graffiti]. This song was running through my head yesterday, as I was writing up my post on "The Steadfast Tin Soldier", and I have THOUGHTS about it. But I think there are enough of those to make their own post. So maybe I'll post about it on Tuesday (Tomorrow, I'll post about remembering those who've been locked away, as my means of observing the day).


*In doing Google searchers for images for my Monsters In Town! song, I learned that institutional "homes" in Minnesota wouldn't even put family names on the grave markers on their grounds, because being connected by name to someone so defective would be too shameful for the survivors... So the grave markers would only have the patient's case file number.

( lyrics (and brief video description )

On YouTube, this video has a link to "Oh No they Didn't!" -- LiveJournal's premier "let's make fun of people" community, which makes me sad. But I do like the video, anyway...

(And now I'll share what I said to myself)

The first-cuppa-coffee chat started rolling, because just the evening before, spiralsheep sent me this link to a BBC story about a pterosaur fossil fragment that turns out to be from the largest toothed pterosaur ever (yet discovered): http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/15150591

And that reminded me of a podcast I listened to this past summer about pterosaurs and their mobility in the air and on the ground (here: To Err is Human. To Rawr is Dinosaur) where the visiting experts point out that the only way a human could get even close to walking like a pterosaur is to use crutches.

And as I was toodling around the next morning, I glimpsed my crutches propped up in the corner, and was instantly tickled by the thought that, within my circle of friends, I alone could pull off the most accurate pterosaur costume, and make it look the least cheesy.

And that triggered the perennial self-debate about why should crutches or wheelchair be even a consideration in deciding on a costume? Why can't you just dress up as a character that happens to use a wheelchair or crutches?

And this is the answer I told myself:

It's not so much an issue with crutches. But a wheelchair user is surrounded on three sides by a cookie-cutter machine (especially if it's motorized). So the only clear view anyone would have of your costume is face-to-face. And how often does that view come up when you're at a party (or convention, or out trick-or-treating)?

If you're going to put an effort into making a costume in the first place, you want to be noticed and appreciated from all sides. And that means covering your chair. Not out of shame, but using what you've got: a rigid scaffolding with a motor and wheels -- in short: turning yourself into a one-person parade float. :-D

( Here are some ideas I've come up with in the past, but have never gotten around to doing: )