Exception not exceptional!

Many moons ago, when I was younger and more resilient, I cringed when facing ableism. Once, while working for a large employer, facilitating a day on Disability Equality, when the recruitment lead said to me: “anyway, this is a waste of time, we don’t employ disabled people because we need our staff to be exceptional".  I asked them why they assumed that disabled workers were not exceptional, they got angry, and shouted back that it was obvious. Despite a clenching in my rear-end, I persevered, and pointed out that this might be a an assumption based on prejudice. The unconscious bias was assuming disabled applicants were ‘a bit rubbish’, a notion I’d qualify it now as ableist these days. I asked gently, that maybe they were voicing an idea they hadn’t fully thought through. ‘And now!’, they replied, ‘you’re just being stupid!’. Ableism twice!!  I bit down on my shame! Here was me thinking I would be valued as an equal- a professional – but treated as a child. I can’t even start to unpick the levels of wrong, or the embarrassment I felt. Fear rose, as let go of feeling competent, qualified and confident.

To this day, when I see ‘exceptional’ in a job advert I shiver. Is it even worth applying? Or will the days I spent on the application end up in someone’s trash file. It’s a difficult one, and hard not to give up altogether. Especially as I know it’s a world where disabled people face great disadvantage, so my efforts need to be greater. The messages we are given are certainly contradictory. I am often asked why I chose not to work for example!? Rarely, is it acknowledged that I keep trying despite the hundreds of applications that have been rejected. And while those around me struggle to find jobs, their unguarded remarks suggest I don’t need one... it’s implied that for disabled people employment is a luxury.  I am told I’m lucky to have made a choice; that somehow being paid the equivalent of 7 months minimum pay over the last decade is a acceptable ‘lifestyle option’. Ten years in which I’ve spent most days filling in job applications or aiming to prove I’m good enough through qualification and experience.

There’s irony that I undertook my PhD on advice it would put me in a better position to get a job. Sadly, the findings seem to suggest I’d have more luck bumping into a three legged unicorn next time I leave the house.

It’s not that I haven’t had really positive experiences gifting my time and energy for free. Partly job experience, partly job satisfaction, and lots of meaningful interaction. But I’m always taken aback when people I’ve trusted then openly tell me they’ve given paid work to those they feel could afford it. Or, as it happened once, forgetting the days of hard work I was happy to offer by questioning we’d worked together. Work a friend payed for. ‘Oh, we thought you needed to keep busy?!’  Few acknowledge that my husband pays for the hours I gift. As I stop applying, and rely on his good nature to keep the roof over our heads. Furthermore, he often picks up the pieces when in tears I realise my contribution was never seen as having any worth.

So this year I’m going to say ‘no’.  Not to those who joyfully accept my presence as adding to their conversation. But ‘no’ to those who don’t even admit to their belief that I’m rubbish, stupid, broken, incompetent and worthless... even when they don’t think it.

 

Stories, storytelling and storytellers...

I am lucky enough to have a friend who can spin a proper yarn. Her phone calls transport me, to different lands with exotic players... who knew the world of education could be so enthralling. I hope I am a rewarding audience, I to gasp or giggle in all the right places. The performance is a shared experience, the tale weaved between us. I never think to question the truth of the words, within them our reality is created. A joy and a pleasure.  To miss quote Robison, without me she wouldn’t be a storyteller - just a woman speaking into the void.

 

I often think the legacy of scientific research is a belief in one truth. I am thankful the social sciences have offered us a plural. I hope we’ve all had the joy of learning things that tilt our private worlds on their axis. With implications falling like dominos in fluid sequential movement – rarely tbh. 

 

My such moment was being told the story of the Disabled people’s movement, its storytellers and its truths.  The Social Model was presented as a truth, one was new to me, part of an alternative vision. Since then I’ve discovered a world full of tellers with stories of equally compelling landscapes. All have a shared perspective, a direction, of a redefined world. One I’d complacently never questioned.  

 

The story about the Social Model was so powerful it was hard to ever speak of disability without thinking of the pioneers. In a day I’d jumped from 6 to 9 never then able to see one without the other. It didn't erase other stories or tellings, but sometimes spoke a truth to my own experience. Unfortunately, while in my heart I still felt I am a problem having impairments, now occasionally if I concentrate I can think myself free of the oppression Disabled people face – the Medical Model. Every tale that speaks to the prejudice, institutional discrimination and global inequality - reinforces the truth of my story in any number of small ways.

 

Why do I slip back in times of stress, fatigue or difficulty? Well unfortunately tales about disabled people - in society’s stories - are far more available and plentiful which makes them difficult ignore or contradict. As Saint or Sinner the presentation of disabled people is polarised. Therefore, it requires a lot of effort to stand against the weight of common assumptions. That is because unthinking is much like driving a cross-wired car, turning left to go right only works while you are vigilant. The minute you rely on instinct - driven by bias - you are off the road or in oncoming traffic. CRASH!

 

Unthinking is far harder than going along with an existing storyline. Across many cultures, in tales disabled people are described as costly and/or deficient. These myths are woven into everyday stories, so deeply they are barely noticeable. And while many people have come to believe that these tales need serious contradiction, more subtly Disabled people themselves are treated as unreliable tellers. This maybe because our experience seems too unusual, it jars with the shared story. The alternatives Disabled people put in words chimes against the assumptions told about us. So like the car we crash against both truth and teller. Recent personal examples:

◦            I told a friend I lived in West Yorkshire - "... it doesn't exist" he said.

◦            I answered my mum’s name was Caroline - the woman asking said "no it’s Claire".

I could go on... and I’m not denying I talk utter rubbish on occasion. But you’d be surprised how many times a week people correct me purely because my truth doesn’t chime with theirs. It’s a six they cry, in the face my truth - if not indisputable knowledge. I particularly like the wagging finger that goes with "if you lot had done your activism properly!!” or the "if you could agree with each other”. Yes, because Martin Luther King Jr’s dream took a decade to achieve and all feminists have one definition of sexism!!!!

 

In own research I felt I had to present the literature chapter as an analysis because in matters of human rights the stories I read appeared distorted. More widely I feel Disabled people haven’t been trusted as storytellers - even on matters of disability. One week I read 800 papers I had found by typing ‘disability’, ‘disabled people’ or ‘people with disabilities’ in the search criteria. Only about 2% even alluded to a political strength, a theoretical view, or the  interests of Disabled people as a group - a shared voice. I was actually shocked how much was written about disability without legitimacy - as above, clearly West Yorkshire doesn't exist.

An understanding of power and language

Speaking as a writer not an author, and daunting as it is, here is a story. Years ago I stood outside a classroom, waiting for my turn to teach, listening to the woman ending her session. ‘Black Majority’ she said ‘is the way I articulate Black people’s power in the world. I use the words to counter the oppression – the racism - they face’. She went on to explain that it was not the number that marks a minority, but the silencing imposed on experience that minimises group voice. I remember her talking about the whiteness of her world, where few Black people were visible - on streets, in text, in storytelling. She said she needed to frame the strength of a group voice against her own privilege. That was decades ago, it was my first memorable lesson in anti-racism. It stuck. 

To inform my research I was guided by the storytelling of Black authors – a cultural immersion (Gladwell, 2008). Their stories helped address my own racism, but more importantly helped me write more accurately about the population I was focussing on. Foremost, I wanted to convey in my own storytelling that many of the people I was speaking about were in receipt of racism. I found myself resonating to a growing collection of stories, nodding in recognition of the pain - if not the words that caused it. I began to recognise, but not identify with, the racism carried by seemingly harmless words. I empathised with Reni Eddo-Lodge’s (2017) wish not to talk to white people. I understood Sara Ahmed’s (2017), feelings of being viewed as a problem. Importantly, I acknowledge that there are aspects of their experience I’ll never have to endure. As Pease’s (2013) story of the mirror illustrates, in the morning I never have to consider the problem most people will have with the colour of my skin. That’s my privilege. 

As l made my journey, I continued to look out for the characteristic way different stereotypes drive the character of each discrimination. It was a Black woman who taught me that she understood being Black as a choice [her emphasis in capitals]. She spoke to me of her choice to articulate her belonging to a group of people in receipt of racism. My privilege, she explained was not being white so much as not having to endure the racism she experienced every day - the prejudice, institutional discrimination and global inequality imposed on a Black world majority. As a Black Disabled woman, she said her parents had taught her to frame the disablism she faced as similar to racism. Working in a similar way to other isms, but different in its specific character, a triple whammy. 

It was in conversation with a Black trainer that I learned in what way the prejudice she faced was different from mine. My colleague’s name is Smith, yet she tells me how often people ask her to spell it. That’s racism, she says - their prejudice – people are unaware that they expect her name to have an exotic spelling. She is from Peckham she adds pointedly ...

In the words of Marianne Coleman; ‘there are more differences within groups than between them’. ‘Them’ might be useful in pointing to individuals in a park, it has direction and is specific. But trying to identify who is Black, Gay or Disabled it is not helpful. it is probably more true to say that there are people facing racism, homophobia, ageism, transphobia, religious intolerance and ableism ... WHEREVER we gather.

Because the myths about groups have different characters, I feel that we need a conversation about the cumulative negative impact of -isms more than ever. As those in receipt of double or triple prejudice are undoubtedly under greatest likelihood of exclusion in society and in its storytelling. ‘AND’ I find is more useful than EITHER / OR in these matters. We have a long way to go to address racism AND all other forms of oppression, AND we need not choose between them to work under a duty and with agency to dismantle the stories that threatened their lives.

An anti-racist language was easier to adopt than one with a more Intersectional fluency. I think this is because there is such a pull on us to see things in binary, sometimes the ‘them’ and ‘us’ is formed in our hearts before we’ve properly had a chance to un-think it. As a writer I found it hard to talk about ‘we’, avoiding ‘them’ and ‘us’. Statements of identity are personal, and multifaceted. It would be hard to be on the end of any spectrum.

These matters became spiny issues in my thesis. Because when dealing with a storytelling that silenced Disabled people’s stories (Coleman, Brunell, & Hauge, 2014). Not only was it hard to find ‘disability’ on the list of Equality and Diversity literature, but it was rare to find disability studies added to a wide range of critiques. It is telling that early disabled campaigners, fighting for human rights made links between the oppression they faced and the one that drove the apartheid that harmed Black South Africans (Finklestein, 1999). Unlike Ms Smith, I have an unusual maiden name: Mulhern. From an early age I remember my mother having to spell - M U L H E R N - every time we went anywhere requiring identification. In my head I heard the chant as I learnt to write … in two different languages. Yet, I can remember people adding Es, As and Ss! Was it because I could not be trusted to spell my own name correctly?! I also observe, that many of my friends will rarely have people invading their privacy, asking rude questions or telling them what to do and what to say as often as I do. I’m disabled, they are not, that’s their privilege, however those that are allies speak to the power of Disabled people.

 

Bibliography

Ahmed, S. (2017). Living a Feminist Life [Kindle Edition] . Duke University Press.

Coleman, J., Brunell, A., & Hauge, I. (2014). Multiple Forms of Prejudice: How Gender and Disability Stereotypes Influence Judgments of Disabled Women and Men. Science+Business Media, 34, 177–189.

Eddo-Lodge, R. (2017). Why I’m No Longer Talking to White People About Race [kindle edition]. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.

Ferguson, P., & Nusbaum, E. (2012). Disability Studies: What Is It and What Difference Does It Make? Research & Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 27(2), pp. 70-80.

Finklestein, V. (1999). Professions Allied to the Community (PACs) . Therapy Weekly, 1-9.

Gladwell, M. (2008). Blink - The Power of Thinking Without Thinking. London: Penguin Books.

Pease, B. (2013). Undoing Privilege, unearned advantage in a divided world. London, New York: Zed Books.

 

 

So... I had a melt down!

The following is a tidy up of a thread I posted on twitter on Sunday. While in no way ‘viral’ it was a little snuffle. 

 

I’m not denying my own privilege, but the past few weeks have been tough at times, despite ample room for personal freedom...  Sadly, Saturday night was a time of great distress. The tweet Matt Hancock posted celebrating the reopening of a racecourse sent me over the edge. I was left struggling, with few words to be honest. I sat in anger, rage and hopelessness. Even cheese, that well known panacea, did not help.

 

Matt Hancock is the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, he has responsibility for the well-being of all, and the return to health of many.  In equal measure he needs to consider the whole population, and the voices of those most disadvantaged by the impact of inequality. Our nation’s growing health inequality has been described as societal injustice. Therefore, while understandably his focus needs to be on the entire population, he also needs to  respond to the needs of groups within it most threatened by disadvantage. This means searching for voices that are often ignored in strident headlines - stories of keen interest – that shout loudly, thundering over the more devastating issues raised by some networks.

 

It seems to me that for some years Matt Hancock has managed to remain silent on matters of Human Rights. Ignoring the call of individuals, and their families, who are locked in institutions or denied the help they need. Deprived of the most basic freedoms, and denied adequate support, many have no escape from degrading treatment, cruelty, violence and sometimes murder. As building evidence shows, institutionalisation has provided opportunity for Disability Hate Crime to grow, which speaks volumes on a culture where increasingly atrocities are ignored because they are behind closed doors. 

 

So why is the celebration of horse racing so important at this moment in time?   With his position comes a duty to know the evidence regarding the cost to society of gambling. His power gives him access to evidence that few are privileged with. The literature on well-being and social policy present the likelihood of addiction as having a significant negative impact on communities, with the harm extending beyond individuals to families, police and health services. For many the implications of addiction result in death. Yet it seems that despite his position, his focus is largely on the fun of a few rather than the health and the well-being the many... [I say again Matt Hancock is the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care]

 

Long before the pandemic much work was needed to reverse the harm done by decades of ever decreasing investment in social care. With many organisations having to pick the pieces of the underinvestment in state provision. endless tenders reducing the shares strength to support those facing the edge of the edge, those pushed into poverty, running on empty on treadmills, stressed and afraid without safety nets.   Let’s be clear successive governments and their austerity measures, universal credit and PIP for example, have pushed many into poverty. More harm has been done to marginalised groups than inaction would have imposed.  The voice of affluent privilege has helped vilify groups already having to cope with gross injustice. Despite resistance, growing numbers within the civic movement have been ignored. Their voices hushed amid the cries of taller tales - the limelight of those most privileged.

 

Policies drawn up in the name of efficiency, austerity, bottom line and cost. Hardly demonstrating the values of a caring and compassionate society where all may flourish. So while the institutional silos chug on, reiterating tales about the elite, harm is dismissed as result of individual failure - rather than society’s need to act to right their negligent administrations. 

 

I don’t think I am standing against those obviously so immune to society’s injustice to deny them pleasure ... or am I? The internal rage is raw! While too many have died, others celebrate what may kill. Thankfully last night the outrage was palpable, at last the hypocrisy wasn’t applauded but called out. 

 

When later matters of shielding were thrown back to the public, people started questioning their survival in terms of ‘despite’ a government they can no longer trust. One thing remains for me, in their devotion to money, greed and privilege, those in a position of power are using it with contempt and cruelty. I hope this government’s accountability is shown to be lacking in time, as its negligence described as gross failure. Their words seen as without legitimacy, speaking only the moneyed, to further the advantage and pleasure of an elite, leaving many of us with sole option to turn away in disgust.

Dr Chapman

Ditch the book!

I’ve read a lot of leadership books, thousands of words in all manner of texts over a decade. I was recommended a book recently, so thought I would enjoy a few hours learning, being challenged, feeling excited and hopeful. Sadly not, there were a number of things that got under my skin, by chapter 4 I decided the book was not worth a read. 

Many assume, I guess, that I’m new to leadership. That because I’m disabled, ‘disability’ is my subject, I am not therefore viewed as a leadership scholar. Leaders are tall, symmetrical and bold, and that stereotype pushes my buttons. In the last few years I’ve read a sizeable amount, and when it comes to the clangers in leadership literature these are my top peeves. I’ve learned to ditch the book, I call each gripe a *ditch klaxon*!  I hope the following rant reads as a think piece…..

Ditch the books!

 

1. Jargon and pseudo speak. I understand that at some levels, in academic journals say, a specialist language is needed to articulate a subject that is nuanced and complex. To a large extent I am on the side of the writer struggling for simplicity – it's a hard job. As a reader however, when I spend hours looking up every other word only to find the page offers little in terms of ideas, I despair. If the central message needs to speak to many, to reflect ideas of shared strength and power, failing to make the text accessible is a basic fail. *ditch klaxon*

 

2.  Leadership literature suggests a shared responsibility, so how personal tales are told is revealing I find. Beware the ‘heroic’ anecdote that places writer as saviour, the chosen one, the expert above others.  *ditch klaxon*   When authors tell you of their experience, as thinkers above the rest, you have to ask yourself whether they demonstrate mutual respect in their writing. Slagging of others isn’t pretty. There’s a difference between criticism and critique! Beware of those using the former in the name of the latter.  *ditch klaxon*

 

3. An adjective in the title, that added to leadership, denotes the author’s possession of position. *ditch klaxon*  Great, green, brave, quiet, sustainable, fierce, courageous, distributive, simple, crisis, emotional, inspiring, questioning… whatever!?  The available reams suggest leadership activity is all of these things, and so much more. Essentially leadership that is not green, brave, quiet, sustainable, fierce, courageous, distributive, simple, crisis, emotional, inspiring, questioning, is not leadership. And let’s face it there’s plenty of not-leadership about! *ditch klaxon* By all means question the stereotypes of existing leaders, our unconscious belief that loud, brutish and strong people are best leaders. Leadership activity is empathetic, empowering and kind where you look for it.

 

4.  I look for texts that stand against injustice, by confronting the myths that promote privilege. Leadership activity needs to challenge inequality - ideally in many ways. If the writing does not address a mix of anti-   sexism, racism, homophobia, ableism, religious intolerance, ageism ...  it’s a *ditch klaxon*  Strategic intent is hard to judge, i can't as reader guess to moral intent, but language is a clue if possibly limited. Without considering the disadvantage of others, the global power structures, writers are not walking the talk: writing to lead.  *ditch klaxon*  I tend to look for a choice of words that present an alternative view or a fresh perspective on existing narratives. Not challenging injustice means the status quo remains accepted, and implies inequality is unavoidable, thereby somewhat easier to ignore.  Writing about strength and weakness from a privileged position, without the consideration of unequal power, does not address the drivers of disadvantage. Writing requires an intersectional approach to advantage to make it an activity that promotes change in an equitable way. See point 3.

 

5. Enthusiasm! I know, I know, not everyone wants effusive wording, or the equivalent of dancing cheerleaders on the page! But in line with well-being literature generally, and broaden-and-build theory specifically, it seems important to feel happy in the moment and positive about the future. If you’re on page 40 and have not managed a smile *ditch klaxon* In order to articulate capacity for change, experimentation and acceptance, positive feelings are important as they enable a wish to explore, consider and try new things. I’m not a huge fan of the individualism lurking within ideas of positive psychology, those that state if happy enough we can all overcome our personal circumstance. Such thinking implies a personal failure to be jolly to those most marginalised, blaming whole groups for their lack of enthusiasm and fecklessness. This I think denies a healthy reaction to abuse and violence rarely made explicit in conversations about inequality.  Reframing hardship and disadvantage as occasional and private – tosh and bollocks - see point 4. I rather subscribe to the benefits of community, and the happiness found in shared Endeavour: giving, working, having fun, building new paths with generosity and cheer. That doesn’t necessarily mean hugs and kisses, but the degree of closeness that helps empathy along and makes us feel hopeful about the good times that benefit us all.

 

6. It’s said 73.6% of statistics are made up.  *ditch klaxon*  Numbers don’t prove more truthful than narrative it seems. Seeking stories of leadership activity amidst the marginalised groups literature silences is fascinating. For centuries individuals within marginalised groups have been silenced by institutional and societal culture. While personal experience is finally being encouraged in many areas, organisational, institutional and global stories need to present a variety of views. Indeed, far more than the richer and most privileged. *ditch klaxon* Stripping the invaluable from the measurable is the risk when translating the human to the payable. Time and worth may disappear, obscured by a belief in big numbers. Yet terrestrial experience is priceless, there is no opportunity cost, loss has no affordable option.

 

7. References. People have been writing about leadership activity for decades. As a writer - while doing your best - you are joining a crowd. The idea you’ll be at the front this crowd is presumptuous.  Believing you are at the top of the pile, or 1^st in line, reminds me of the old quip attributed to John Maxwell: "if you think you’re leading, but no one is following, then you’re just taking a walk!”  On the one hand, references feel like a constraint of the academic form, on the other they represent the library that nourishes our personal understanding. I think they show homework's been done, a number of perspectives have been explored, and marginalised voices have been listened to. References are an acknowledgement of shared thinking, common endeavour, and joint conversation. There's nothing worse than the name of the author on page after page. *ditch klaxon* My references might seem eclectic, but I hope they indicate an intent to find diversity, highlighting groups often ignored. I certainly found that titles are misleading, leadership ideas pop up in all sorts of places.  

 

I hope in writing this I’m in the round, a storyteller within a bigger story, not a tale-teller speaking alone in a vacuum, but one of many in a far-reaching conversation.

 

For some inspiration see a list of those not ditched below!

Happy holding books 

Bibliography

Ahmed, S. (2017). Living a Feminist Life [Kindle Edition] . Duke University Press.

Beresford, P. (2003). It's our lives, A short theory of Knowledge, Distance and Experience. London: Citizen Press / Shaping our lives.

Bhopal, K. (2018). White privilege: The myth of a post-racial society [Kindle Edition]. Bristol: Policy Press.

Bohm, D. (1996). On Dialogue. Abingdon: Routledge.

Brown, & Leigh. (2018). Ableism in academia: where are the disabled and ill academics? Disability & Society , 33 (6), 985-989.

Brown, A. (2014). The Myth of the Strong Leader: Political Leadership in the Modern Age. Vintage Digital.

Carastathis, A. (2016). Intersectionality: Origins, Contestations, Horizons (Expanding Frontiers: Interdisciplinary Approaches to Studies of Women, Gender, and Sexuality) [Kindle]. Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press.

Crenhaw, K. (2017). On Intersectionality: Essential Writings Kindle Edition. New York: The New Press.

Criado Perez, C. (2019). Invisible Woman. London: Vintage.

Crow, L. (2014, 8 28). Scroungers and Superhumans: Images of Disability from the Summer of 2012: A Visual Inquiry. Journal of visual culture, 13 (2), pp. 168-181.

de Waal, F. (2009). The Age of Empathy, nature’s lessons for a kinder society. London: Harmony Books.

Diener, E. (2008). Happiness, unlocking the Mysteries of Psychological Wealth. London: Blackwell Publishing.

Diers, J. (2004). Neighbor Power - building community the Seattle way. Seattle: University of Washington Press.

Eddo-Lodge, R. (2017). Why I’m No Longer Talking to White People About Race [kindle edition]. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. London: Penguin.

Giddens, A. (2013). The Politics of Climate Change; 2 edition [Kindle edition}. Malden US: Polity.

Gladwell, M. (2008). Blink - The Power of Thinking Without Thinking. London: Penguin Books.

Goleman, D. (2003). Primal Leadership. Harvard Business School Publishing.

Handy, C. (2015). The Second Curve [Kindle edition]. Kindle: Cornerstone Digital.

Hargeaves, A. (2005). Sustainable Leadership. San Fransico: Jossey Bass.

Hawken, P. (2007). Blessed Unrest, How the biggest movement in the world came into being and why no one saw it coming. New York: Pengiun.

Helgesen, S. (1995). The Female Advantage, Woman’s Ways of Leadership. New York:: Doubleday .

Helgesen, S. (2005). The Web of Inclusion. Washington: Beard Books.

Hochschild, A. (2012). The Managed Heart: Commercialization of Human Feeling. Berkeley: University of California Press.

hooks, b. (1989). Talking back: Thinking feminist, thinking black. Boston MA: South End Press.

Huppert, F., Baylis, N., & Kevene, B. (2005). The Science of Well-Being. Oxford: Oxford Press.

Issacs, W. (1999). Dialogue and the Art of Thinking Together. New York Doubleday. New York: Doubleday.

Kafer, A. (2013). Feminist, Queer, Crip. Indiana: Indiana University Press.

Kahane, A. (2010). Power and Love; A Theory and Practice of Social Change. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.

Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow [Kindle edition]. London: Penguin.

Kelly, J. (2017, March). Why women should tell the stories of humanity. Retrieved March 11, 2017, from TED talks: http://www.ted.com/talks/jude_kelly_why_women_should_tell_the_stories_of_humanity/transcript?language=en

Lawson, I. (1999). Leaders for Tomorrow’s Society. London: The Industrial Society.

Lovett, H. (1996). Learning to Listen: Positive Approaches and People with Difficult Behavior . London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

Marmott, M. (2015). The Health Gap: The Challenge of an Unequal World [Kindle Edition]. London: Bloomsbury.

O'Hara, M. (2017, Aug 15). Liz Sayce: ‘The UK thinks it is a leader in disability rights. But it has a long way to go’. Retrieved 10 30, 2017, from The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/aug/15/disability-rights-uk-not-doing-enough?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Pease, B. (2013). Undoing Privilege, unearned advantage in a divided world. London, New York: Zed Books.

Pinker, S. (2014). The Village Effect: Why Face-to-face Contact Matters [Kindle Edition]. London: Random House.

Sandel, M. (2009). Justice: What's the Right Thing to Do? London: Penguin.

Sang, K. (2017). Complementing psychological approaches to employee well-being with a socio-structural perspective on violence in the workplace: An alternative research agenda . unpublished .

Senge, P. (2006). The Fifth Discipline, The art & practice of the learning organisation. London: Random House.

Sergiovanni, T. (1985). Landscapes, mindscapes, and reflective practice in supervision. Journal of curriculum and supervision , No 1.5-17 5.

Thompson, N. (2007). Power and Empowerment. Lyme Regis: Russell House Publishing.

UPIAS. (1975). Fundamental principles of disability. London: UPIAS.

West-Burnham, J. (2009). Rethinking Educational Leadership. London: Continuum.

Wolff, J. (2006). An introduction to political philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Zeldin, T. (1998). Conversation, How Talk Can Change Your Life. London: The Havilland Press.

 

 

Flippin more than words!

Changing conversations

I hope you’ll notice the s on ‘conversations’ above. This blog is inspired by to the one written by Elly Chapple & Dr. Kristen Liesch [blog]. The following isn’t said in opposition, I hope it is a complementary storytelling, in both senses of the word, I hope to agree before I add. Thank you @JillBerry102, I’m so pleased you thought to bring us together.  I’m left wondering what would have changed in 30 years if as survivors we had been heard, listened to and acknowledged. Could  pain have been avoided? Could the harm inflicted by a system have been addressed, minimised or avoided? We’ll never know, in a story not so much told badly, but miss-authored by tellers who more widely held a voice in a storytelling that denies truth for so many of us. Disabled people described as faulty, within a grander narrative, dropped from a history that vilified their reaction to harm.

I think #FlippingTheNarrative is a great idea, but how we do this is still up for expansion. Certainly, when it comes to education and inclusive practice much still needs flipping to reinstated a sense of belonging often shattered by convention. A number of decades ago I was accused of being a ‘walking contradiction’, a title I still love, because as an articulation it still speaks to my work as an activist. Being at the end of a challenging PhD journey exploring conversations, Human Rights and disabled people’s voices, I feel have I bit to say. Foremost, I think we need more words, and better-defined ones, with which to challenge an existing culture that keeps silencing, or gate-keeping, the voice of the disabled population. Stripping mainstream storytelling of a group’s shared experience, specific sensitivity and trustworthy knowledge.  As Elly Chapple says in her TED Talk, her daughter Ella was only seven years old when she lost her eyes; surely we don’t need more people to be robbed of their sight for perspectives to change about common humanity.

 I agree with tidal waves, certainly we need a seismic shake up in the ideas that define an on-going injustice in our landscape. Thus proposing a different narrative, an alternative storytelling in the histories that affect the way we talk about people like Ely’s daughter Ella. the myths and distortions in storytelling.  We need to change conversations about those marginalised by language in classrooms, schools, professions and society.  So what prevents what Elly states as " that difference lies every possible solution we could need, and the ability to share our space to be able to include everyone. Somehow, along the way this has become a ‘problem’ or a stumbling block”? 

Yes, we could wait for every person to guide each professional in one conversation at a time. With positive experience thus dependent on the willingness of a singular judgement to cede power in favour of change. A precarious proposition in a system blighted by variation. But how does this flip the narratives that sit beyond each individual: beyond the year group, beyond the school, or beyond education as an institution within society? Surely each flip needs to oppose a different meaning at every level to address all the ideas in a layering of conversations. All of which ultimately impact on Ella if left unstated.

Civil rights campaigners have over many decades introduced us to words that help define what silences young people, parents, teachers, and citizens? Some Disabled others not.  As Kirsten reflects: "Ella is someone who doesn’t fit neatly into the social infrastructure we’ve created around us, whether they’re built into our health care, education or social supports… This inequality of opportunity creates a significant missed opportunity, because our organizations, institutions and communities can’t achieve their full potential if the people working inside them are thwarted."  I would say silenced rather than thwarted, or told what to say, how to say it, and when… the price of mainstreaming is a belonging denied by an imperceptible but disempowering rephrasing at multiple levels. Almost indiscernible to the naked ear. 

So we come to the word ‘vulnerable’. No longer used in Brown’s words to define the human qualities of openness, trust and kindness; a choice we’re all entitled to as human beings (2012). No, vulnerable, has become a euphemistic allusion to those who don’t fit in – those who speak against a more acceptable truth – one that's as widespread as it is toxic. Voices that dare disrupt the acceptability of injustice so commonplace it is lost in conversation. Irrespective of a system build on the assumptions of an age where disabled people were locked away, we mute the challenging with a language no longer fit for today’s reality. Acronyms replacing learning that could potentially aid vision in a culture that would foster an alternative reality for those currently rejected...  

In using vulnerable, we’ve stopped saying who is in receipt of disdain, shame and pain; in a conversation that avoids naming who’s disadvantaged and by what. We’ve lumped marginalised groups together, erasing the lines of privilege, and getting rid of the words that define sexism, ageism, homophobia, racism, bigotry, intolerance, and hate speech. No longer can we state how our systems fail individuals, nor can we state those ideas that are harmful and why they hurt. By labouring the least offensive option, we are no longer able to voice our opposition to what harms our daughters and our sons. 

How do we tackle the ablism that justifies the removal of Disabled people across communities, without nuanced words to articulate the culture in which such hate is deemed ok? We need a richer vocabulary to describe the personal prejudice, private indifference, institutional barriers, professional mindsets and societal inequality imposed on named groups.  As a disabled person I do not need a positive spin, particularly not one based on someone else’s privileged view of me as less broken. I need more allies to speak of impairment with respect, and against disablism, abuse and ablism with knowledge and power. At each level of storytelling, the misrepresentation of Disabled people needs to change significantly to oppose negative bias, with multiple layers of conversation speaking with clarity to the global unsustainably, economic growth, greed and privilege that leaves disabled people unfairly treated. #RudeWordKlaxon “I’m not vulnerable, I’ve had the shit kicked out of me, so I’m sensitive… possibly, but angry definitely!”

I started my work as an activist without a language to describe the horror of being harmed. Being silenced stopped the shouting, the crying, the screaming, the kicking, and spitting against a pain inflicted in the name of schooling. My challenging behaviour was due to the condition they said, not a reaction to the violence I experienced. “Be quiet!” they said later, “don't say nasty things about the nice man”.  Apparently the rage and guilt of the middle-aged is far less attractive and easier to dismiss. Eradicating many vile tale from the sanitised lens of society’s storytelling…

Strength and Power against Disability Hate Crime

Disability Hate Crime: Strength in numbers and the power of CAPITALS

It’s always a joy to be invited! A pleasure to participate and an honour to contribute. You know you’re in the right place when the words ‘nothing about us, without us’ and ‘by Disabled people for Disabled people’ hang on the walls. The #bigLearningEvent 2019 began with a reminder that ‘Disabled’, in capitals, is a shorthand for the Disabled People’s movement, its activists, its ideas and its power.  Deaf and Disabled People’s Organisations [DDPOs] also in their voice show their intent in the telling of Disabled people’s interests. No one person can speak for a whole population, however together as a movement we can inch toward a vision in hundreds of single steps. Better together is the strength and power of many individuals.

It was a huge privilege to share insights from my recent work on the fight against disability hate crime since the ground-breaking 2008 report ‘Getting away with murder’. As a seminal piece following in the steps of its authors was an act of respect. Tall shoulders indeed! These are a few takeaways from the work so far:

The conversation about Disability Hate Crime is slowly gathering pace. Ten years ago there were few common words to give the phrase meaning, so talk of the crime was practically nonexistent. Thankfully things have changed – somewhat.  Slowly so far, the story of the intentional hate and harm directed at Disabled individuals as a group is growing. The conversation has started, words are spreading, and gaining strength in society more widely .

Disability Hate Crime in short is an abuse of human rights. Unfortunately, it is a crime that occurs in circumstances where it is not always recognised and it takes so many different forms so few see it for what it is. The character of its violence can be physical, emotional, financial, psychological, sexual, neglect and institutional. Emerging research, despite growth, has a sparse literature, but is gaining pace. However, evidence needs to grow in order to change a landscape where it’s rarely acknowledged.

In a list of difficulties, the Disability Hate Crimes themselves can at first seem trivial to many. Particularly to those who’ve not been gifted an insight into the realities of Disabled people’s lives. Many still find it unbelievable that Disabled individuals are subjected to derision, mockery and abuse most days. The initial response to "I’ve been hurt" is most often "you must be joking ?”

Trust is rarely placed in the testimony of Disabled victims.

Crimes against Disabled people are often seen as mere bullying. Attacks are thus normalised, rather than challenged. Sadly, experienced as a bombardment of mini aggressions, what may seem inconsequential to many is a nightmare to the few who endure it. The impact is cumulative, weeks of low-blows can impact on Disabled individuals in life-changing ways. Fear, or more often the fear of fear,  haunts many and leads to habits that avoid public spaces. Sadly, the type of life affirming habit that helps relationships flourish and help people feel less exposed. 

Thankfully growing quantification and qualification is revealing evidence of size. While attackers as are not treated as perpetrators of disability hate crimes, as the offence isn’t recognised, sentencing has become stricter. The Disability hate crime knowledge-base is poorly shared, despite training programmes that are updated and attended, people struggle to recognise it, or have a language for it, to call it put when they are faced with it. It is cloaked by so many other complex taboos.

Disability hate crime can be an intimate, often individualised therefore dismissed as personal, especially because when perpetrated by friends and family. Sadly, akin to the red flags for identifying coercive control, small acts of violence follow a pattern that can end in sustained violence that can lead to murder.

For agencies to respond more effectively, a great deal more needs stating about the systemic failures and the societal myths that fuel the negative ideas and attitudes that feed hate.  Lack of Disabled people is noticeable in institutional settings, and their Voices in associated instructional materials. When this silencing is linked to multi-agency working, as omission of of self-representative language creates a huge clash of conflicting terminology. In addition to the pain of crime, it is disrespectful to the Disabled public who need to navigate institutional warrens in order to get help, support and ultimately justice.

In terms of a single word, moving from the use of ‘vulnerable’ to the use of ‘crime’ in line with a conversation about Human Rights abuse and towards an entitlement perspective seems positive. Disability hate crime is a violation of Human Rights that is not well understood. 

I believe vulnerability is a choice, as human beings we are most vulnerable when we allow ourselves to trust. In telling my story I’m vulnerable, in taking your hand I’m vulnerable, in joining a cause I’m vulnerable... I love you.  In no way does my impairment make me more / less vulnerable, however others abusing honesty, openness and trust can be an opportunity for them to inflict harm. Vulnerability is complex. To quote Brené “Vulnerability is about sharing our feelings and our experiences with people who’ve earned the right to hear them. Being vulnerable and open is mutual and an integral part of the trust-building process.” (Brown, 2012, p.45)

I'm thankful that language is changing, and through Disabled people’s experience, there is growing knowledge of their storytelling in the world. We need to encourage this characteristic group voice, nurture it, and help it flourish. 

Leadership Activity

Inspired by the conversation of Annie and Roz on the ‘Leadership Quest’ podcast, I went looking for a blog I thought I had written on the subject leadership…. I found nothing, I’d obviously either deleted or merely imagined it. I know I was asked to write one a while back, and I chickened out… the topic is vast. It is so much easier to talk of leadership activity in context than as a theoretical subject I find, because it is complex and far reaching.  So, here is an enthusiastic response to Annie and Roz’s words. This piece repeats many of their ideas, I’ve added of my own thoughts, at random I admit. My thinking has emerged from numerous conversations. Nothing’s new, nothing’s original, the knowledge is ours, and the errors are mine.

There are stereotypes attached to the word ‘leader’ that I think drive our assumptions about who can lead.  The idea of a charismatic individual telling others what to do dominates storytelling across the centuries. Power is is critical, moreover how it is used seems key, there’s an ocean better holding power-over others and sharing power to highlight the injustice others face.  More specifically within the leadership literature, where many authors define their specific type of leadership, concepts can appear hugely individualistic. Presumably this is done by many as a way of qualifying how their interpretation stands as better articulation leadership against thecommon assumptions based on myths. I do think on the whole library holds a great deal of truth, leadership needs to be seen as just, good and moral. Or, rather, demonstrate an understanding of what is accountable, ethical, sustainable, environmental, or seeking greater social justice - leadership is leadership. I made the same mistake 16yrs ago, I though leadership needed to become more equitable, that is oriented to further social justice. The more I read, 100s of texts of a decade, the more I understood that leadership was generally well defined - however in common terms what was criticised for being oppressive was not leadership at all! Confused, let me try and illustrate with a few perspectives. Not an exhaustive list, I’m going for fast-and-furious, not structured-and-precise. In my enthusiasm I’ll no doubt stumble. The following points, in no particular order, rose to consciousness as I listened to Ros. 

·      Language. I say ‘Leadership Activity’, because I find using the word ‘leader’ does little to articulate leadership as action, possibly shared. Given opportunity and strength activity is a choice to move, not a personal characteristic.

·      Leadership activity is not a position or a title. I find that having to put ‘leadership activity’ in a sentence stops the talk of me-leader / you-follower; it speaks to power-with not power-over.

·      Context. Place is critical. As I watch images of London Bridge, it is the individuals who step up, step in and run towards what’s needed that make a difference.

·      What – not who.  Sometimes it is about physical strength or specialist knowledge. Some situations aren’t improved by a meeting. “Can anyone fly an aircraft perchance? Please form a queue and we’ll weigh up options”. Thankfully for democracy to emerge, leadership activity necessitates conversation, and certainly coproduction delivers on transformation. For alternative ideas to emerge, diversity and divergence help, turning away from improvement and to illuminate new horizons.

·      Unthinking. Assumptions, sadly, beliefs not thoughts, lead our hands before our heads make the story. Sadly before our minds can reflect on meaning hidden beyond view, we act on stereotypes that draw heavily on myths and often falsehoods. Mindful determination is needed to interrupt a belief in the charismatic, loud, aggressive winners that inhabit our hearts – the tall tales that cloud our heads. It takes energy, slow-thinking, to consider the quiet, inquisitive, wise, learned and joyful people engaged in a shared movement for a better world. In a hurry, in a panic, or with anger, the chances are we’ll be robbed of the strength to challenge existing tales. [I don’t wonder how the bullies get in]. Evidence suggest people are swayed by feelings, not arguments, and our perception tends to discredit any information that is at odds with what’s in our hearts. Evidence suggest we will find a variety of imaginative way to re-tell stories from our experience, and to view the decisions we make as objective. 

·      Education! You wouldn’t ask a person to be an optometrist because they’re wearing glasses. Yet we dismiss people because they have the wrong status, physique, language or look. As any other activity, leadership action is best when underpinned by knowledge. We need to do our homework. We’re back to the 10 000 hours and 800+ texts. I’m always amazed that so many books on leadership are written in the first person; with no evidence, no background, no community, and no shared thinking. To miss-quote John Maxwell; “if you think you are leading without looking behind you, it’s nothing but a walk in the park”. If the one in front taking advantage of the privilege does not acknowledge others, that’s not leadership. It is not about character, it’s about understanding, that’s why we need to hear all perspectives. References or citations aren’t an affectation imho, they are an acknowledgment of joint endeavour – on the shoulders of others.

·      People. Leadership activity benefits from community, more specifically a network of connection and shared interest! Attacking a problem often gets little achieved; as fighting bad doesn’t ensure good.  Imagining a better world has benefits that go way beyond beneficial gains in the short term.

·      Together. Yes it is about power, but it’s about using it wisely, sharing it, trusting other individuals, and defending rights and the empowerment of groups often silences. It is about shouting beside those who are seldom heard. 

·      Accountability and legitimacy: Knowing who’s missing!! An activist attitude certainly keeps action on the disadvantage. Leadership activity needs to respond to injustice, articulating its anti-sexist, anti-racist, anti-homophobic or ant-ableist intent. Speaking the name of injustice helps us work to increase power for good. If we don’t stand against unearned privilege existing myths will not be challenged. 

·      Values! Not value. We don’t have to have the same values to respect each other’s. The list may be extensive, but not infinite. I think it’s important that action has strategic intent, and price does little to determine its worth. If we are too busy, stretched, broke to have a conversation about sustainability the damage is probably far worse than we can say. [wrong forest!]

·   Stop!? It’s a question I ask in training.  Where Institutions continue to deepen inequality, by getting better at delivering on inequality, its working practice and its culture obscures the discrimination it perpetuates. In an age of imposed insecurity, driven by a belief in scarcity and deficit. What can we stop doing? Time and energy gained could be better spent, surely? 

A moral imperative is needed to develop Leadership activity, which requires both the ability to think in a hopeful way about possibility and a determination to act on what is positive. This requires an ability to articulate both great vision and daily activity as congruent movement. Reality will alter evolving vision if change facilitates re-imagining in the process. Leadership activity can be shared, but no doubt a more difficult choice for those most oppressed by isms touched on above. As my friend John taught me, leadership activity is to put principles into practice: the abstract to the concrete and the inspirational into the actual experience. 

Leadership activity demands an ability to be authentic in words and true in deed. That means saying sorry, because it’s hard, and mistakes happen. It is hard to walk power-with, and to act in ways that empower those around us. Helping others to believe in their ability to  change their own world, and their ability to live their best lives. 

I’m sorry to say that for too many years I only understood leadership as an autocratic or bureaucratic position of power, an immediate response by an overpowering voice with more qualifications and status than trust in a collective strength to change the world. I was a little too keen to be admitted to an elitist club – one I assumed would give me authority and power-over. Ironically, I was angry because I believed I had the right to join in, but felt I would not be accepted, let alone treated as an equal. I now realise why my feelings were deeply contradictory, how my own learning has changed my own definition, and the increasing tension with public notions of the conquering-hero over the kind and wise.

It’s infuriating, but I found the other blog as I finished writing this one: it’s a myth

Leadership blogs are like buses, you don’t see one for ages…

It’s a wrap!! 

My leadership team today:

Ahmed, S. (2017). Living a Feminist Life [Kindle Edition] . Duke University Press.

Block, P. (2008). Community: The structure of belonging. San Francisco: Berret-Koehler.

Block, P. (2013). Stewardship. Chicago: Berrett-Koehler.

Brown, B. (2012). Dearing greatly: How the courage to be vulnerable transforms the way we live, love, parent, and lead. London: Pengiun Books Ltd.

Daniel Goleman, R. B. (2004). Primal Leadership. Harvard Business School Press.

Denning, S. (2005). The leader's guide to storytelling, Mastering the art and discipline of business naratives. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Gladwell, M. (2008). Blink - The Power of Thinking Without Thinking. London: Penguin Books.

Helgesen, S. (1995). The Female Advantage, Woman’s Ways of Leadership. New York:: Doubleday .

Holbeche, L. (1999). Aligning Human Resources and Business Strategy. London: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Kahane, A. (2010). Power and Love; A Theory and Practice of Social Change. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.

Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow [Kindle edition]. London: Penguin.

Lawson, I. (1999). Leaders for Tomorrow’s Society. London: The Industrial Society.

Lukes, S. (2005). Power: A Radical View. Palgrave McMillan.

McKnight, J., & Block, P. (2010). The Abundant Community, Awakening the Power of Families and Neighborhood. San Fransisco: Berret-Koehler Publishers.

Senge, P. (2006). The Fifth Discipline, The art & practice of the learning organisation. London: Random House.

Sennet, R. (2003). Respect, the formation of character in an age of inquality [Kindle edition]. London: Pengiun group.

Sergiovanni, T. (1985). Landscapes, mindscapes, and reflective practice in supervision. Journal of curculum and seprevision , No 1.5-17 5.

Thompson, N. (2007). Power and Empowerment. Lyme Regis: Russell House Publishing.

Zeldin, T. (1998). Conversation, How Talk Can Change Your Life. London: The Havilland Press.