Freaks, Redux
Back in the day, people were so squicked out by disability
that governments felt compelled to make ordinances preventing citizens who had
disabilities from being in public places. They were called "ugly
laws," not referring to the laws themselves, but to the state of
appearance which they were intended to curtail:
"No person who is diseased, maimed, mutilated or in
any way deformed so as to be an unsightly or disgusting object or improper
person to be allowed in or on the public ways or other public places in this
city, or shall therein or thereon expose himself to public view, under a
penalty of not less than one dollar nor more than fifty dollars for each
offense."
- Chicago Municipal Code, sec. 36034, repealed 1974
- Chicago Municipal Code, sec. 36034, repealed 1974
I've written about the freak label before and at that time,
it was in connection to a story about how a BBC
children's show host with a disability prompted a number of formal complaints
from the public. Today's post is a bit different. It's prompted by a complaint
from a disabled member of the public against CNN.
The story in a nutshell: CNN posted a photo gallery
"showcasing disfigured children and stillborn babies affected by Agent
Orange in Vietnam," as they say. ('showcasing"??)
This came with a warning:
"Warning: the following photographs contain graphic
content of severely deformed children. Viewer discretion is advised."
This made Penny Loker of Waterloo,
Ontario angry. Born with — in her words — "a
facial difference," she thought that warning people that they were about
to see someone with a disability and it might be icky was wrong. (As you may be
able to tell, I agree wholeheartedly with her). She e-mailed CNN and they
changed the warning. It now reads:
"The following photos depict the devastating effects on
humans believed to be caused by Agent Orange. Please be aware that the story of
these innocent children contains images that some may find unsettling."
Really, CNN? This is the exact same thing, just using nicer
language!
We may not have Ugly Laws anymore, but have we really progressed
that far? Now we have warnings that people are about to see a human being who
does not conform to the image of perfection and therefore might be "unsettling."
Wouldn’t it be nice — even mature and reasonable — if CNN had issued a
statement that went something like this:
“CNN believes that placing a warning on photos of children –
or indeed anyone – who lives with a disability is misplaced and sends the wrong
message. We recognize that people come in all shapes, sizes and levels of
ability. To assume that seeing someone with a disability could be offensive or
distressing is, in fact, offensive. We are therefore discontinuing the practice
of placing warnings on content related to disability with immediate effect."
They didn't, though.
CNN did step up in terms of bringing attention to the story
and in inviting Penny to host a CNN chat. However, as I'm already not
completely embracing their response, I'd like to point out an additional moment
of "WTF?" Because CNN went on to perpetuate the offense when they
wrote their story about Penny. Compare this story on the Canadian CTV
with the CNN story. Only halfway through the CTV’s
video of the story — and towards the end of the written story — is there a mention of Penny never having had a boyfriend;
instead, they focus on her interests, her being bright, funny, and gainfully
employed and oh yes, the story itself. CNN, on the other hand, commits the
first four paragraphs of their story to her romantic status. Because
this is, apparently, the most important measure of a woman's normalcy? But
that's a post for another day…
You get used to being a freak. To being someone who gets
stared at when you're out in public. You may even get to a point where you
understand, in a way. Humans are hardwired to notice differences, it's part of
how we interact with the world. Noticing the difference is not offensive. What
is offensive is when that difference gets labeled as something negative,
disgusting, distressing or unsettling. In this day and age, working to remove
unnecessary emotional labeling is something that media should aspire to. Not
perpetuating the stereotype.
Thank you, Penny, for calling CNN on their crap. I'm
sorry they didn't completely get it, but I hope your story will go a long way to
others challenging their own preconceived ideas.
Comments
I like to look to my 11 year old brother, who does happen to have a developmental disability, as inspiration. He saw a man who had an amputee arm. My brother thought this was the coolest thing EVER, he actually said that this man was a super hero. He was also pretty jealous of my wheelchair and crutches when I got them. I don't know if it's exposure to me and my disability, or his unique mind inventing cool stories to go along with disabilities, but I love his outlook!
I have been recently struggling with the attention of the public and medical anomolies. This is kvery difficult to get used to. I try very hard to remember that people are just curious and mean no harm, but is is hard to be under the microscope when you prefer to be a wall flower.