quote:

---

Because any thread about feminism that doesn't happen in the feminism forum quickly becomes about some other cause is far more important issue that feminists are clearly just too self-obsessed to give a rat's ass about

---

I feel that the situation of disabled women in Canada or anywhere is a feminist issue and if it isnt it should be - perhaps some are too self obsessed to realize disabled women are feminists too and should be welcomed as such ?

quote:

---

Or just assume that feminist discussion must always remain solely focussed on white, able bodied, western heterosexual women - that worked really well for the movement.

---

quote:

---

The situation is actually worse for women with disabilities than for men too. We are still expected to be able to do "women's work" such as housework and caregiving for others. We are less likely to qualify for in-home assistance than men who are not traditionally expected to do those things. Schooling is also a more difficult thing for us to attain as well. There's more. Our sexual rights are abused, we're assumed to be assexual and also assumed to be unable to be mothers. The medical profession is lax in ensuring that we have proper access to female health programs and, this applies to all people with disabilities, additional health problems are often ignored or written off to be disability related.

---

As for sexist media? When do you ever see a disabled person in a romantic role or relationship role in the media? "The Other Side of the Mountain" comes to mind - or a few shows on the rights of the disabled to be parents - ever seen a woman in a wheelchair selling shampoo or makeup that makes you the perfect beautiful woman?

However if the focus isnt the disabled to you ever see them? How many of your fav sitcoms or movies have supporting roles played by a disabled person? There was one where a hearing impaired woman played a lawyer or something for awhile, I havent seen her for a long time. I guess they did their bit for affirmative action and then dropped her ?

quote:

---

especially for women with a cognitive disability, the rates of sexual abuse are huge, and they are often painted as sexually available (often by predators).

---

I said I was going to volunteer for Habitat for Humanity, even my partner said to me "What could you do?" Dont box us with little labels, all of them misconceptions about us and who we are and what we can do -- I can paint something dammit it. I can go pick up things that the workers need, I can make the phone calls - just because I cant lift heavy things or work on construction doesnt make me useless ! Dont side line me when I want to do something for others .. just because I cant always do everything for myself (like lifting, moving furniture, working fulltime)

DisAbled Women's Network - Ontario

One of the best women and disability advocacy and information groups out there.

This is their fact sheet on women and disability, in Canada and in less developed countries. Many of the stats will be familiar to those who read Kindred's post under the Media Sexism thread. And of course a lovely section highlighting the NDP's stance on (disability) issues (which includes things like poverty, health care, public power, etc.)

There's also
DAWN Canada.

Furthermore a fair number of seniors with reasonable incomes from private pension plans have moved into these housing complexes. When my parents retired, my mother had never worked and had no CPP but between the 2 of them they were receiving around $1850.00 a month from CPP and OAS. Where as I previously stated a disabled single person receives about $700.00 a month if they didnt have a private disability plan at work and are on Social Assistance or Canada Disability. They also wont have any CPP to fall back on,

WCB disability works the same way, you are cut off at age 65 and havent contributed to CPP for most of your working years so you have no CPP to support yourself with either.

Women who have disabilities and are in a relationship are put in a position of having to be supported by their partners, often not having any other financial assistance at all. This leaves these women prone to abuse of various kinds.

We could easily get into the additional problems that disabled Aboriginal women face, but that's a very large volume of its own.

I was divorced AFTER my accident, my choice, but the truth was my exe refused to care for the kids, or do anything around the house, became verbally abusive when he realized I wouldnt be working for awhile, and maybe never. He would go straight to his mothers after work to eat dinner, rather than come home and cook for his own children.

During the course of the divorce he tried to sue me for half my WCB pension - big whopping 444.00 which would have meant 222.00 a month for him and he makes in excess of $100,000.00. WCB pensions are NOT community property, Young vs Young - Supreme Court of Canada --

quote:

---

which doesnt say much for the majority of men in this country.

---

Are you suggesting that the majority of men in Canada have divorced their newly disabled wives?

quote:

---

Are you suggesting that the majority of men in Canada have divorced their newly disabled wives?

---

I see your point Mr. Magoo. However, if you could consider the husbands of recently/unexpectedly disabled women a SAMPLE of the general male population (and I can't think why it wouldn't be a valid sample right now...) than Kindred's statements could be seen as statistically relevant.

Kindred and Aviator, when I made my statements in the Sexist Media thread I fell into the misconception that disabled people are all in wheelchairs. (Or that disabilities are always physically apparent.)

While I'm not a fan of stats myself (I mean, numbers can be made to agree with anything,) I apologize for my insensitivity.

[ 07 April 2003: Message edited by: skadie ]

quote:

---

However, if you could consider the husbands of recently/unexpectedly disabled women a SAMPLE of the general male population (and I can't think why it wouldn't be a valid sample right now...) than Kindred's statements could be seen as statistically relevant.

---

quote:

---

Likewise, if we consider the women who kill their children to be a SAMPLE of the general female population, it says some terrible things about women too.

---

First of all, Magoo, you're in the feminism forum. Your anti-progressive snipings aren't welcome.

quote:

---

First of all, Magoo, you're in the feminism forum. Your anti-progressive snipings aren't welcome.

---

And did I criticize, or question the need for, feminism? My understanding is that that's the only ground rule in this forum.

quote:

---

Get a real argument, or get out.

---

Can I see your badge, officer?

Could it possibly be that women tend to stay with their newly disabled husbands for reasons other than altruism or moral superiority?

I'm really not arguing with the stat, or whether it does or does not represent an accurate sample of men in the general population, but rather with the quick and knee-jerk assumption that it must mean that men are selfish or uncaring. You wanna be progressive? Then try thinking a little further than that.

Edited to add - From the Canadian Medical Association Journal:

quote:

---

Data on the stability of relationships of women with and without disabilities are scant. Investigators in the US have found that overall divorce rates for women with spinal cord injuries are a little lower than those for the general female population and that divorce rates are lower for those married after as opposed to before the injury.

---

[ 07 April 2003: Message edited by: Mr. Magoo ]

quote:

---

Likewise, if we consider the women who kill their children to be a SAMPLE of the general female population, it says some terrible things about women too.

---

quote:

---

Can you see the problem?

---

Yes, and I'm smacking myself as I realize that this diversion is my fault for not choosing a better analogy. However, I stand by the balance of what I've said, namely that women who stay with their husbands after the husbands become disabled may or may not be acting on altruism or a moral superiority on the part of women.

To use a stat like this to suggest that men are somehow more selfish or morally bankrupt than women is a very shoddy use of statistics.

quote:

---

And did I criticize, or question the need for, feminism? My understanding is that that's the only ground rule in this forum.

---

Check the front page - it says:

quote:

---

Discuss feminist issues from a pro-feminist point of view.

---

Somehow, I don't think I'm the only one who sees you're petty griping as not fitting in with the above.

quote:

---

I'm really not arguing with the stat, or whether it does or does not represent an accurate sample of men in the general population, but rather with the quick and knee-jerk assumption that it must mean that men are selfish or uncaring.

---

Whatever. I'm not even going to bother going into a discussion of "knee jerk" assumptions, because I'm not going to let you control this thread, which is obviously your goal (disrupt the discussion with accusations so we can all fall over ourselves praising men in order not to be called "reactionary" - well, I for one would like to continue the discussion and explore ideas; contradictory ideas are welcome, but not in my eyes, ill informed, "knee jerk" ranting).

With regards to your stat though, SCI is not representative of disability as a whole (and SCI can have incredibly differing effects on functionality, mobility, etc. - generalizing within that group is difficult). That said, I am pleased to see you posting excerpts of things you have read on this issue - though a link to the whole article would be nice.

Fine if there isn't a great bulk of study on divorce and disability - general societal attitudes can still be assessed, individual cases can be discussed, and trends noted by people in the disability community can be noted and analyzed for a greater applicability. Myself, working with people with disabilities, I know that the diagnosis of one of the disorders I deal with often strains a marriage to the breaking point (not just for spouses, but for children as well). I've heard dozens of times about husbands leaving, and several about wives. My impressions as a whole jive with what Trisha and Kindred posted, though I've also met incredible husbands who stayed and continued to build a life with their spouse after a diagnosis - they've just been a lot more rare than the women I've met who've made the same choice.

quote:

---

Could it possibly be that women tend to stay with their newly disabled husbands for reasons other than altruism or moral superiority?

---

I believe that IF statistics on spousal abuse was divided into categories representing able bodied and disabled women the incidence for able bodied women would be much lower than as reported for "women".

Studies on Disabilites have been "gender blind" and also failed to identify the differences that exist between women and men, in terms of employment, poverty, abuse, health and divorce.

For example the number of women placed in homes, not living within a family structure has been reported in one study as being 18% men needing special care and 82% women.

quote:

---

When a disability was acquired or worsened during marriage, 42% of the women felt that their partner became emotionally distant, they were no longer compatible (35%), the partner stopped treating them with respect (31%), or the partner stopped wanting them sexually (30%). Some of the partners became overprotective and tried to do too much for them when they became disabled or more disabled (18%). Women with disabilities were significantly more likely than those without disabilities to stay in a bad marriage for fear of losing custody of their children.

---

Women with disabilites are more likey to lose their children in a divorce. Therefore women with disabilities are more likely to stay in abusive marriages. This fear of losing their children also skews the divorce statistics, or statistics on quality of relationships and marriage for disabled women.

Many are not only afraid they will not be able to support themselves, a fear that is heightened when they want custoday of their children, they KNOW they wont be able to support themselves given the employment discrimination against the disabled - (higher for disabled women). They are also faced with the double whammy of requiring the ability physcially, to be able to both work and be the sole care taker of the children and the home.

Men are more likely to receive home care and the help of friends when they are disabled single parents than are women. Women are for some reason expected to carry on - somehow -- IF a woman requests home care for her children Social Services has always been more likely to remove the children from the home rather than provide home care.

quote:

---

Non-disabled women often feel trapped in unfulfilling or abusive relationships because they cannot imagine how they will survive economically on their own. Hannaford (1989) suggests that this may be even more true of women with disabilities who often may have to put up with abusive or exploitative relationships because of their limited social and economical means or because the only other alternative may be a life in an institution. In addition, Asch and Fine (1988) report that women with disabilities may return to abusive relationships because it may be the only intimate relationship they ever had and they may judge it better to have a bad relationship than no relationship at all.

---

In no way are my statements on the statistics of divorce of disabled people meant to say that ALL men are heartless and selfish; however you cannot argue with statistics and all you have to do is visit an extended care facility or assisted living facility to see how the proportion of women to men is represented.

In all countries, a woman’s physical image determines her value and her chances of getting married or forming a sexual partnership. Whether she can bear children, in particular non-disabled children, and be judged a capable parent also determines her value as a woman.

Disabled women are not viewed as a "good deal" whether it is before marriage of if the woman becomes disabled after marriage. Sadly a large proportion of married men are not prepared to take on the care of a disabled spouse, as well care of any children, the house hold chores, in addition to being the only bread winner. It is extremely difficult for a family and there is almost NO assistance available for these families. Therefore spouses become burdened financially, emotionally and physically. It is harder on them (able bodied spouse) than being "just a single parent".

A disabled partner can require a great deal of care and the role of Care Giver has traditionally been seen to be that of the woman and a lot of men are just not prepared to take it on. And often when they do the burden and frusteration leads to abuse.

Because of the strong emphasis on physical appearance in every society, disabled women are made to feel less worthy than non-disabled women. This negative self-image, along with the silencing or non- belief of victims and the lack of prosecutions of alleged abusers, increases the risk of sexual abuse.

quote:

---

Comparison of divorce rates of women and men with disabilities seem to suggest that women with disabilities are more likely to be left alone than men (Fine & Asch, 1981) and when disability occurs after marriage men are much more likely to divorce their wives who become disabled, while the marriage rarely breaks down if it is the man who becomes disabled (Hannaford, 1989). These realities are reflected in the writings where women with disabilities describe their lives. For example, only five of the forty-five women interviewed by Matthews (1983) were married and there is hardly a mention of marriage in a collection of first-person accounts written by more than sixty women (Browne, Connors, & Stern, 1985). Asch and Fine (1988: 15) report only one group of women with disabilities that is more likely to be married than men of the same disability group. This group is women with mental retardation.

---

The Feminist Movement has also been found to have neglected or ignored Disabled Women. Their studies have focused on race, sexual orientation, employment, and other social dimensions, but not on incidence of disability discrimination. The movement has been criticized for being inaccessible to women with disabilities, meetings are often held in places that are inaccessible.

quote:

---

Fine and Asch (1988), in their essay, "Beyond Pedestals" summarise best most of the existing statistical information. They state that disabled women are less likely than non-disabled women to be married, more likely to marry later, and more likely to be divorced. Their figures cite that 37 percent of severely disabled women as compared to 22 percent of severely disabled men who were once married, are no longer married for reasons other than death of a spouse

---

quote:

---

Of the twenty women interviewed, eighteen had been involved in intimate relationships at the onset of disability. These relationships ended for twelve of the women.....The relationships of the women interviewed usually dissolved within three years after the onset of the disabling condition. Some women were served divorce papers while still in the hospital.

---

Further more when dealing with WCB or whomever women are seen as "less important" as not the major bread winner and have less access to rehabilitation and other services. They are nore likely to not receive rehab training that would enable them to be employed, even if marginally.

quote:

---

For a woman with a disability, however, rehabilitation is not often seen as important. With the emphasis on rehabilitation being to enable the person to return to gainful employment, women are often seen as low priority (Rehabilitation International, 1980). This not only denies the woman her natural right to choose the role of a mother or housewife, but also denies her the right to the opportunity of becoming economically sufficient by regaining paid employment. With the resulting lack of independence, women with disability have little hope of becoming economically sufficient after acquiring a disability.

---

As to your post Mango I wonder what is WRONG with you? This is a thread about disabled women and the difficulties they encounter. What on earth would make you disregard not only the issues, but the topic itself and ATTACK the way you did?

quote:

---

Likewise, if we consider the women who kill their children to be a SAMPLE of the general female population, it says some terrible things about women too

---

The purpose of the thread was the very REAL issues facing women with disabilites, not a she/he fight about who is the worst gender. I fail to see how your comment applies.

quote:

---

However, I stand by the balance of what I've said, namely that women who stay with their husbands after the husbands become disabled may or may not be acting on altruism or a moral superiority on the part of women.

---

What other reasons would they have? Other than caring enough for their partner to stand by them even though they are disabled and not employable? If you equate disability with sudden wealth due to law suits or whatever, let me remind you that in Canada this is seldom a reality.

Having a partner who becomes disabled, especially a male because they generally earn more than women do, means an instant reduction in family income. And an increase in family expenses.It generally means falling into the poverty bracket.

quote:

---

To use a stat like this to suggest that men are somehow more selfish or morally bankrupt than women is a very shoddy use of statistics.

---

Are you also going to argue with the statistics that show wage inequality, employment inequality, and poverty inequality in Canada and other countries?

I repeat, this is not a thread about gender superiority and if you want to argue over whether men or women are better it only affirms my position that the issue of DISABLED WOMEN is gnerally ignored. And many people feel threatened when the issue is even raised. "How dare those "uppity" women think they have an issue?" What if they somehow got the upper hand?

What is it about this discussion that threatens you so much? That women might have a voice about something that pertains to them - and that just might involve some statistics that show inequality between men and women? Is it that we dare to say we deserve something better than the present situation and it might end up costing you something?

quote:

---

On the other hand, particularly in the United States (Gill, Carol J, 1996), people with disability who do marry (or live de facto) are seemingly penalized by the government. Funding for such essentials as health coverage, adaptive equipment, and personal assistance is reduced, thereby putting the economic responsibility onto the partner. For women with disability, this can be a particular disadvantage, leaving them vulnerable to abusive relationships; not only may they be dependent on their partner for personal assistance, but also economically dependent. For any woman to leave a relationship is difficult, but being physically and economically dependent, combined with a lack of accessible venues and services to turn to for help, it is particularly difficult for women with disability to take control over their lives and become economically sufficient

---

And from my daughters neurologist "I am so impressed with your daughters BF, I may be speaking out of turn here, I dont know how you feel about him yourself, but almost always when a boyfriend is told his GF has epilepsy thats the last she ever sees of him."

quote:

---

As to your post Mango I wonder what is WRONG with you?

---

I thought I had made it reasonably clear that I took issue with the following statement and its inference:

quote:

---

... which doesnt say much for the majority of men in this country.

---

Reading posts on babble, it increasingly seems that it's "ok" to toss a quick dig in like this, so long as the target of it is either a male, males in general (white preferred), or people (assumed male) who don't share one's political points of view.

If I wished, I could easily post some statistics demonstrating that black men in the U.S. account for much more than their per capita share of crime. If I followed this by casually and uncritically adding "which doesnt say much for the majority of black in the U.S." then I guarantee you that within the hour, one (or more) babblers would be all over me like a cheap suit - and rightly so.

Such moral generalization - based on one little unconfirmed stat - has no place in intelligent discourse. And if you think that language or accuracy are "trivial" or "petty", remember all the hard work that went into changing chairman to chairperson, and why that kind of accurate and inclusive language is necessary.

quote:

---

What other reasons would they have?

---

I'd prefer to let some rigorous study tell me, rather than speculating. Meanwhile though, I'm not going to simply assume that it's because men are selfish or thoughtless in general.

quote:

---

Are you also going to argue with the statistics that show wage inequality, employment inequality, and poverty inequality in Canada and other countries?

---

No, because those are simply facts, not moral judgements.

quote:

---

What is it about this discussion that threatens you so much? That women might have a voice about something that pertains to them - and that just might involve some statistics that show inequality between men and women?

---

I trust I've clarified my position in this. I'm not arguing with the stats... I'm arguing about how they're spun.

Anyway, since you've thrown me the following bone...

quote:

---

In no way are my statements on the statistics of divorce of disabled people meant to say that ALL men are heartless and selfish.

---

quote:

---

I feel that the situation of disabled women in Canada or anywhere is a feminist issue and if it isnt it should be - perhaps some are too self obsessed to realize disabled women are feminists too and should be welcomed as such ?

---

The original thread drift was started by a man, who went on about "political correctness" and "false memory syndrome."

You're right about TV and its treatment of disabled people. There is a really good article about it in Bitch Magazine this month. I'm kind of excited about Christy, the Deaf girl on Survivor. There is also a new show about a Deaf FBI agent, but it's pretty bad.

Ever notice how the disabled characters on television are always desparately seeking a way out of their disabilities? And sometimes miracles even happen and previous parapalegics start to walk again, or the blind see, or the deaf hear.

I often wonder how these portrayals seem to disabled people. (In particular, physically disabled people, since on TV disabilities ARE always apparent.)

After my accident everyone kept saying "Stop wasting so much energy looking for a "cure" and hoping for one, this is IT, it isnt getting any better .." and they were right ...

The frusterations I have with looking for work that I can actually do, phsycially, is immeasurable. There are time when I think I should do myself and my kids and the world a favour and drive in front of a semi and be done with this never ending bullshit of trying to fit in, find work, just find SOMETHING that works for me, that I can do, support myself adequately and not be forced to watch my financial situation steadily going downhill .. What I had from before my accident is being depleted at an alarming rate and soon I may be one of the statistics - a disabled person living under a bridge somewhere.