Posts by Hilary Stace
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
No one seems to have commented on the disability bit. I presume you are referring to the US. Obama has promised to ratify the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities which is a hugely significantly step nationally and internationally as the US is not known for ratifying UN conventions. They also have policies for universal coverage for health care for disabled people, as in the US a lot is dependent on what insurance cover you have, and tough if have none or the wrong type.
By the way last week NZ passed the Disability Bill which clears the way for NZ to ratify the Convention as it ensures all our legislation is compliant. Incredibly important but passed at midnight without a journalist in sight.
-
The debate proposition is outdated in that it does not reflect an inclusive vision. It gives only two options - king or foot soldier. What about those generating content who are lower leg amputees, or who use wheelchairs? This moot therefore contravenes the Human Rights Act, the NZ Disability Strategy and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Disabled Persons.
There is a growing body of literature on disability and electronic media. See, for example, Digital Disability: the social construction of disability in the new media, by Australians Gerard Goggin and Christopher Newell. -
I have a problem with the monarchist, militarist and sexist assumptions contained in the proposition as indicated by the words 'King' and ' foot soldier'. How about critiquing the underlying power relationships from a Marxist, Foucauldian or good old feminist perspective? Where do you go for a quick, clear, and up to date description of these theories? Consumer generated Wikipedia of course.