Personal attacks on Brown highlight the engrained level of disability discrimination in society

There is no wonder that Greg Stone’s discriminatory comments found their way onto Guido Fawkes’s blog, when you consider the level of discrimination Fawkes’ distributes himself. For example, his blog on Gordon Brown where the words ‘madness’, ‘bonkers’ and ‘prime mentalist’ are used when talking about Brown. Furthermore, this very offensive image of Brown is also included:

Fair enough, he doesn’t like Brown politically. However, the personal comments that Guido is levelling at Brown are examples of outright discrimination, and are unhelpful in the context of the ongoing disability activism in society, which is trying to improve the conditions and decrease the level of discrimination of disabled people in society. Guido’s disregard for the offence he is causing to the disabled community is highlighted by his support of Greg Stone’s comments around Hazel Blears, likening her to having a stroke. On one blog, he can be seen as telling those offended by the comments made by Greg Stone to:

“Get a life. He mocked people’s choice of ties, dress sense etc.”

Well actually, he didn’t just mock that, and mocking that is bad enough anyway, if you want to be a serious MP fighting for a party that represents equality. I am not going to rehash my views around Greg Stone, but when someone who is seen as an established blogger, can support levels of discrimination that should not be tolerated within political circles, it is hard not to feel the need to comment. I respect he is allowed his own opinion, however, equally I am too, and I do not think that personal attacks on Brown, or supporting discriminatory comments around how people look and so on, is fair or right. Brown politically as I have stated has problems, however, fueling the view he has mental illness is not fair. Even if he does have a mental illness, is Guido saying that Brown should leave office? Well if he is, and I am sure he and many others are, then they are just systematic of the high level of discrimination in society towards those with disabilities. Even if Brown did have mental health issues, and I am not for a second saying he does, as I don’t think he does, however, even if he did, that is his own personal issue and we should not force him out of office if he does. Churchill had a mental illness and did quite a good job, there are many famous people who have had mental illnesses and carried on competently. Furthermore, it is important to recognise that mental illness is a social construction in itself, and what may be seen as a mental illness in Brown may actually just be a reaction to the high level of stress Brown is under every day. Who wouldn’t feel stressed if you had to deal with what Brown had to deal with. I am not arguing that Brown is in somehow treat differently to other MPs, but everyone responds differently, and we have to remember that MPs are humans too. Acting as though they are some type of robot is wrong, and the public can often be partly to blame for the level of acceptance around discriminatory comments such as Guido’s as they often don’t like to see their MPs as humans.

The prevalent use of Guido as a credible source in newspaper reports for example, highlights how there is still a long way to go to tackle disability discrimination. There needs to be more recognition of how supporting arguments such as Brown being mentally ill, or just not saying anything in response to them, encourages the view that those who are constructed and labeled as being mentally ill should be segregated and hounded in society. Instead, there needs to be more recognition of how this engrained attitude in society is reinforcing the stigma around mental illness, and thus, to achieve equality more people have to stand up and make it clear that this form of discrimination is not right, hence why I have argued for Greg Stone to be removed from being a Liberal Democrat candidate. We cannot fight for equality and then support a PPC who reinforces the discrimination around those with disabilities and so forth, hopefully the local party meetings around his selection, which are apparently near to occur, may think contra to Clegg’s decision to support him.

Brown’s handwriting highlights the ingrained disability discrimination in society

I want to take a different angle to the Sun’s disgusting reporting of Gordon Brown’s handwriting. Applying what is called the Social Model of disability, this really does highlight the engrained stigmatisation and discrimination that disabled people have in society. The endemic nature of discrimination may lead many to ask why I am even talking about disability in relation to Brown’s letter. Well a disability, using the Social Model’s definition, is when society itself is what disables the individual. It is not the actual impairment, so in this case, Gordon Brown’s handwriting, is not the disability per se, instead, it is the societal actions and stigmatisation in society that has lead it to becoming a disability.

I myself suffer from extremely bad handwriting, so bad that I have to use a computer for my exams so I have experience of what discrimination in relation to your handwriting feels like. However, if Brown had used a computer when writing the very personal letter then I am sure there would have been complaints that he was not person enough. The mother of the solider who complained to The Sun states that she questions whether the Prime Minister even really cared when writing it, and instead saw it as part of his duty. Well if he really didn’t care, then why doesn’t he send out a computerised automated round robin letter to all the relatives of soldiers killed at War? Of course he cares. I really can’t believe the level of criticism that Brown has faced, mainly from The Sun, for simply having bad handwriting and for simply being a human being.

This links to something I have blogged about recently in relation to Europe, in how The Sun appears to be increasing losing its credibility. They claim for example, Brown:

“COMMITTED four other spelling mistakes: Greats for greatest, condolencs for condolences, you instead of your, and colleagus for colleagues”

Do they even take into account that he has poor handwriting, so what they perceive to be spelling mistakes may actually just be illegibility? Do they take into account his poor eyesight when writing this? Well the answer to the latter is yes, but highlights how the media can use disability to question the legitimacy of the worker – as shown by their use of the following  Brown quote:

“I have had very serious problems with my eye and it has been very difficult over the years. But you can do a job, you can work hard.” (my emphasis)

It is an obvious attempt, as the last sentence of the article, to make people question whether Brown is competent to do the job. What this highlights is the ingrained stigmatisation within the media around disability issues. Disability issues are both physical and mental, as shown by the debates surrounding whether Brown was taking pills. It is very depressing when you see human beings being treat as though they are robots with no problems, there needs to be a fundamental change to the culture of our society, as this is just simply wrong.

Women AND men object to women being treated as objects

Today, I got involved in a Feminist campaign at the University, which seeks to challenge objectification within the Student Union. It was interesting to learn about the motions that have been passed in the Union, where the Union has agreed to make sure that objectification of women does not occur, but then they do exactly the opposite. The specific issues of concern were things such as FHM free hand outs, ‘Lynx girls’ having up close and personal photographs with men and the promotion of tanning to make you look ‘beautifiul’. All of which, happened in Freshers week.

Whilst these specific issues regarding Freshers week are part of the campaign, the campaign is more general and relates to many of the issues I have talked about in previous blogs. The discussion today around the campaign got me thinking about things I haven’t mentioned before, however. Primarily, race and disability issues.

I never really thought about objectification in a more general equality basis, and tended to view it in a sexism context. However, it is interesting to think, when do you really ever see ethnic minority models on the front of FHM? This heteronormativity and stereotyping of what ‘men want’ also relates to disability, as when was the last time you saw a disabled person feature on page 3, for example? It is not that I would like to see these people doing these sorts of things, I don’t like seeing any woman do that to themselves, but what i am saying, is that if it is going to be done, surely there should be equality in this sense? There again, equality full stop would be contrary to what the actual aim of these degrading practices set out to achieve!

What it made me think about however, was how communicating with other equality promoting groups such as ethnic minorities and disabled people will help wider groups realise their own objectification within contemporary society. Thus, fighting the objectification of women should not be a primarily women’s struggle. This was highlighted to me today by the presence of many men at the meeting, which again helped me realise that I am sometimes viewing the objectification debate within some sort of prism.

Something I have always believed in, but was made more apparent to me today was also the way in which, if we want to produce alternative images to the unrealistic images put on the front of lads mags etc, then we should do this within a non sexual context. Thus, the Dove campaign where women were promoting a more realistic image of what women’s bodies look like, was wrong in how it did this within a sexual framework. The women were put in their underwear to show this. This is simply trying to beat the industry at its own game, but actually is fueling the industry’s power, as it almost says, well actually in order for any woman to be beautiful they have to be judged by what their body looks like, and thus takes attention away from the overall person.

The discussion today has informed more of my own views, and I hope to write more about this as time goes on. Objectification is something I feel very strongly about, as I am sure those who read my blog know. A change of slogan from my last woman focused blog is needed to end this blog:

Women and men object to women being treated as objects