Fasching 1ac Peyton

7/28/2019 Fasching 1ac Peyton

1/16

Contention 1: Transit Immobility

(Begin relatively slow)Imagine you woke up tomorrow and there were no cars. You didnt have

one, your neighbor didnt have one, your cousin in Vermillion didnt have one.Also no bikes, vespas, or motorcycles. No highway transport of any kind,except for the occasional delayed and underfunded ambulance.So you could get to medical care sometimes.But what is the list of things you are completely unable to do?If groceries arent close, thats shot. What about your pharmacy?Im one of the lucky ones. By accident of location I am close to church, banking,pharmacy, and groceries.)What about clothing, shoes, or dental care? Glasses?Never mind the out of reach luxury of visiting friends, taking in a movie, orgoing to the park. Out to dinner? Forget about it.Thats the kind of life that many many people with disabilities live in Lorain

County right now, and have since 2009 when paratransit and fixed transitdisappeared from everywhere in Lorain County except Lorain and Elyria in 2009.(With some exceptions that Ill detail in a moment.)And please dont bring out that tired old saw: We dont have that problem in LorainCountyI never see any folks with disabilities in my business anyway so its not myproblem.The *reason* you dont see us spending our time or money in yourbusinesses , houses of worship, or homes, folks.is because we *cannotget to them.* If we cannot get to then, how would you ever be able toaccurately grasp the scope of the problem?Some of us do not have friends or family with accessible transport thatcan step in. Its not like theres a lift van in every garage.

We cannot walk where we need to go.We cannot defray some of our own cost to society as we would verymuch like to do, by full or part time employment, because how in the heckdo we get there? One of my neighbors lost a cool job because her transportsource became inaccessible to her.There was a meeting last week for us to voice our opinions about this. Beheard.Irony of Ironies,Couldnt get there to talk about why I couldnt get there,,,,,

That narrative comes from Jean Flynn in 2012

Jean M. Flynn, June 29, 2012, Lorain County Transit- an unacceptable situationhttp://midlifeandtreachery.wordpress.com/2012/06/29/lorain-county-transit-an-unacceptable-situation/, accessed 7/12/12
http://midlifeandtreachery.wordpress.com/2012/06/29/lorain-county-transit-an-unacceptable-situation/http://midlifeandtreachery.wordpress.com/2012/06/29/lorain-county-transit-an-unacceptable-situation/http://midlifeandtreachery.wordpress.com/2012/06/29/lorain-county-transit-an-unacceptable-situation/http://midlifeandtreachery.wordpress.com/2012/06/29/lorain-county-transit-an-unacceptable-situation/


2/16

First person accounts of disability are necessary for effective critical inquiry. Only through

reflexive interdisciplinary methods can we begin to authentically understand Disability

Life

Ferri, 11Associate Professor, The Center on Human Policy, Law, and DisabilityStudies, Syracuse University,(Beth, Teachers College Record, Disability Life Writing and the Politics of Knowing,Volume 113 Number 10,http://syr.academia.edu/BethFerri/Papers/661249/Disability_Life_Writing_and_the_Politics_of_Knowing, accessed 7/12/12)

Seeking to interrupt the dominant scripts of disability (Ferri, 2008) and todelve more deeply into the "interplay between ableism and other aspectsof [identity and] culture" (Baglieri, Bejoian, Broderick, Connor, &Valle, 2011, thisissue), scholars in disability studies in education (DSE), like scholars in othercritical fields of inquiry, increasingly employ interdisciplinary methods in their

research and teaching. To counter a critical understandings of disability inspecial education discourse, for example, scholar s in disability studies oftenincorporate fiction, film, popular culture, and first-person narratives into theirteaching and scholarly work. These works are valued for their ability tohelp us to "imagine disability otherwise . . . and move beyond overlydeterministic normalizing discourses of cure and care" within clinical andpopular discourses (Ware, 2002, p. 146).Autobiographical narratives as a form of "counter discourse" (Couser, 1997)are valued for their ability to "talk back" to dominant understandings ofdisability as deficit (Mintz, 2007). Disability life writing locates "disability asa complex social, political, and embodied position from which an individualmight legitimately narrate [his/]her life experience" (p. 17). These kinds of

narratives "do cultural work. They frame our understandings of raw,unorganized experience, giving it coherent meaning and making itaccessible to us through story " (Garland-Thomson, 2007, p. 121). In otherwords, these texts should be seen as a form of social critique . Of course, thepublishing industry, like the film and television industry, privileges sentimental andemotional stories that position disability as loss, or triumphal stories of individualsovercoming adversity through sheer force of will or determination (Couser, 2002).Such stereotypical portrayals of the inspirational "super-crip" who succeeds againstthe odds seem designed to make "disability palatable to an ableist" audience(Mintz, p. 17). According to Couser, however, autobiographical works that arecounterdiscursive are written from the "inside of experience," in ways thatare self-consciously political and challenge conventional meanings

ascribed to disability (pp. 109-110).
http://var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_1/%20http://syr.academia.edu/BethFerri/Papers/661249/Disability_Life_Writing_and_the_Politics_of_Knowinghttp://var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_1/%20http://syr.academia.edu/BethFerri/Papers/661249/Disability_Life_Writing_and_the_Politics_of_Knowinghttp://var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_1/%20http://syr.academia.edu/BethFerri/Papers/661249/Disability_Life_Writing_and_the_Politics_of_Knowinghttp://var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_1/%20http://syr.academia.edu/BethFerri/Papers/661249/Disability_Life_Writing_and_the_Politics_of_Knowinghttp://var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_1/%20http://syr.academia.edu/BethFerri/Papers/661249/Disability_Life_Writing_and_the_Politics_of_Knowinghttp://var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_1/%20http://syr.academia.edu/BethFerri/Papers/661249/Disability_Life_Writing_and_the_Politics_of_Knowing


3/16

Our position cannot resolve physical disability, but it canshape the cultural response to persons considered outside thenorm. Society is shaped around the figure of the abled,strong-body individual and sweeps under the rug those whoare outside the ideal. This violence continues systematicallyat both the psychic and physical levelsBagenstos, 2000(Samuel R., Law Professor at Harvard, 86 Va. L. Rev. 397, April)

Erving Goffman's notion of stigma is a useful tool here. Although "stigma" refers colloquially to animus andprejudice, Goffman used the term to refer to a broader problem. He described the condition as an "undesireddifferentness" from what society deems to be "normal" or expected. 153 Under Goffman's approach, the coreaspect of stigma occurs when prevailing social practices treat particular "undesirable" traits as universallydiscrediting. As Goffman emphasized, those who deal with stigmatized persons "tend to impute a wide range of

imperfections on the basis of the original one." 154 As a result, people with stigmatized traits arenot considered to be among the "normals" for whom society, and itsinstitutions, are designed. 155 This stigma is as much about social attitudesas about the traits themselves; even if an individual can "cure" astigmatized trait, she may still not be accepted in the community of"normals." 156 Goffman's construct of "stigma" provides a useful tool in giving content to my subordination-based understanding of disability rights law for at least two reasons. First, Goffman's analysis strongly influencedthe thoughts of many of the disability rights activists on whose work I rely. 157 Second, that analysis provides away of connecting the animus-and stereotype-based discrimination experienced by many people with disabilitieswith their more systemic neglect in the design of the environment. It therefore provides a way of treating the threebasic manifestations of disability discrimination under a single rubric, and it provides a way of predicting whichtypes of impairments are likely to be associated with systematic deprivation of opportunities. Because Goffmanwrote primarily about individual interactions between "the normals" and "the stigmatized," his notion of stigmamost directly helps to describe the prejudice and stereotypes people with disabilities experience in such

interactions. 158 It is especially useful in explaining the "spread effect," under which an impairment to a particularlife function is seen as universally disabling. 159 But Goffman's analysis of stigma helps to describe the society-

wide neglect of people with disabilities as well. 160 In particular, it helps to explain why [*439] people withsome impairments are likely to be systematically neglected by socialdecisions , and why those people are likely to be the same people as thosewho experience animus and stereotyping. 161 If stigma means that anindividual is not considered to be one of "the normals," then people withstigmatized impairments are likely not to be a part of the social "norm"considered by those who design the social and physical environment . Even ifthe environment's "designers" do not harbor prejudiced or stereotyped thoughts about people with stigmatizedconditions, they are likely not to consider their needs in the same way that they consider the needs of those whoare "normal." Disability rights advocates have long made this precise point about "disability." 162They have

argued that "the entire physical and social organization of life" is frequently

structured as though everyone were physically strong, as though all bodies wereshaped [*440] the same, as though everyone could walk, hear, and see well, as though everyone could work andplay at a pace that is not compatible with any kind of illness or pain, as though no one were ever dizzy orincontinent or simply needed to sit or lie down. 163 This phenomenon is most obvious in the built environment.Architects design structures with a model of the "normal" user in mind, and that model has typically been a personwithout any discernible impairments. 164 This "assumption of able-bodiedness as the norm" 165 can be seen inbuildings with unnecessary stairs, doorways that are too narrow to accommodate wheelchairs, and entrances that

fail to provide any detectable warning for people with visual impairments. But the phenomenon ofneglect extends beyond the decisions that have constructed our physicalarchitecture. It affects our patterns of social organization as well. Among otherthings, it affects the structure of jobs and the means by which businesses and governments deliver services. 166
http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n153%23n153http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n154%23n154http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n155%23n155http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n156%23n156http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n157%23n157http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n158%23n158http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n159%23n159http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n160%23n160http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n161%23n161http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n162%23n162http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n163%23n163http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n164%23n164http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n165%23n165http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n166%23n166http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n153%23n153http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n154%23n154http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n155%23n155http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n156%23n156http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n157%23n157http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n158%23n158http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n159%23n159http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n160%23n160http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n161%23n161http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n162%23n162http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n163%23n163http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n164%23n164http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n165%23n165http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n166%23n166


4/16

Why have those who constructed our social and physical environmentfailed to consider people with disabilities as among the "normal" users?One explanation might look to the very history of [*441] prejudice and stereotypesnoted by Congress. For much of our history, people with a variety of physicaland mental disabilities were "shunted aside, hidden, and ignored." 167 Peoplewith impairments ranging from epilepsy to blindness to mental retardation were segregated from the community in

a collection of congregate institutions. 168Such segregation "perpetuated unwarrantedassumptions that persons so isolated are incapable or unworthy ofparticipating in community life." 169 Even among those who were not institutionalized, peoplewith disabilities frequently did not work, patronize businesses, or use government services outside of the home. 170(In some cases, they were required by law to stay at home; as late as 1974, some major American jurisdictions stillmaintained "ugly laws" that prohibited "unsightly" people - a category that encompassed people with disabilities -from appearing in public. 171 ) A person designing a particular building, production process, or job description couldthus be forgiven for failing to think of people with disabilities as potential customers or workers. The designer mighthave had no particular negative attitudes toward "the disabled." Indeed, it might never have entered her mind thatpeople with disabilities might wish to use her building or work in her business; she might simply have had noavailable model of people with disabilities as ordinary people with ordinary needs and tastes. 172 Al [*442] thoughpeople with disabilities have become more and more integrated into society at large in the last two decades, thehistory of exclusion may have a particularly long "tail." Buildings and processes designed without people withdisabilities in mind may be used for many years to come. And prejudice and stereotypes - which have themselvesbeen fed by the absence of people with disabilities from the larger community 173 - may linger even longer. 174

The historic exclusion of people with disabilities from "normal" society hasinteracted in complex and reciprocal ways with broader ideologicalcurrents. Lennard Davis has argued that the notion of "norms" dates only to the development of a science ofstatistics in the early nineteenth century. 175 Until then, Davis contends, the place now occupied bythe "norm" was held by the notion of an "ideal," which was understood tobe unattainable by any human. 176 But the [*443] newfound "concept of a norm, unlike that of anideal, implied that the majority of the population must or should somehow be part of the norm." 177 Earlystatisticians made this point expressly: They argued that social institutions should be built around the broad middle

group of persons who fit the social norm. 178 As Davis demonstrates, their arguments bothprovided justification for, and drew strength from, an ideology thataccorded a morally privileged position to the middle class . 179 More darkly, theyfed the eugenic ideology that led to the institutionalization andsterilization of many people whom we now label "disabled ." 180 The nineteenth-century notion that institutions should be designed for the "norm" persists. But our vision of "normal"human attributes has become increasingly idealized, as the eugenicsmovement (which sought "to norm the nonstandard" 181 ) may have been the first todemonstrate. Rob Imrie's account of modernist architecture points out the effect that such an ideology of the"norm" has had on our built environment. In seeking to make form follow function, and to "tie buildings back to thescale of the human being," modernists harbored a particularly able-bodied vision of who "the human being" was.182 Imrie illustrates this vision by pointing to Le Corbusier's "Modular," which "utilized the proportions of the (able)body to enable the architect to create the built spaces." 183The "Modular," a diagram of a muscular six-foot tallman, was "the person for whom functionality in building design and form was being defined." 184 Manyinaccessible features of today's buildings, Imrie argues, trace directly to modernism's exclusion of people with

disabilities from its idealized version of the "norm." 185 [*444] As we move to a new millennium,we seem to believe as strongly as ever that everyone should fit an "ideal"body type. Although there are surely a variety of reasons for this development, the most notable are aconsumer/advertising culture that idealizes beauty and a widespread belief in the ability of modern medicine to

enhance our mental and physical lives. 186 As a result, the ideological currents that excludepeople with disabilities from our notion of the "norm" stubbornly remainwith us . In this view, "disability" is a group status, but it is not one defined byanything inherent in the members of the group . Rather, the attitudes andpractices that exclude people with "disabilities" from many opportunitiesto participate in society are the very ones that create the "disability"category. Although individuals em [*445] braced by the category have vastly different impairments andlimitations (indeed, some have no impairment or limitation at all), what is crucial is that society treats them as
http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n167%23n167http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n168%23n168http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n169%23n169http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n170%23n170http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n171%23n171http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n172%23n172http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n173%23n173http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n174%23n174http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n175%23n175http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n176%23n176http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n177%23n177http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n178%23n178http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n179%23n179http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n180%23n180http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n181%23n181http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n182%23n182http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n183%23n183http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n184%23n184http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n185%23n185http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n186%23n186http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n167%23n167http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n168%23n168http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n169%23n169http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n170%23n170http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n171%23n171http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n172%23n172http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n173%23n173http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n174%23n174http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n175%23n175http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n176%23n176http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n177%23n177http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n178%23n178http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n179%23n179http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n180%23n180http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n181%23n181http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n182%23n182http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n183%23n183http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n184%23n184http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n185%23n185http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n186%23n186


5/16

essentially similar. 188 In Wendell's words, "widespread perceptions that people withdisabilities are similar in very significant ways create the category,"people with disabilities.'" 189 The widespread acts of "discrimination,segregation, and denial of equal opportunity " directed at people withdisabilities have effectively marked that group as a "dependent caste."

The eugenic gaze cast by the status quo relationship todisability culminates in the genocidal impulse theinstitutional spaces of exclusion epitomized by transportationpolicies legitimize state-sponsored violenceHughes, 2002(Bill, Professor of Social Policy at the University Glasgow, Disability Studies, p. 60-62)

The dominant framework for understanding disability in the modern period hasbeen the medical model. From the early nineteenth century onwards, biomedicinelegitimated the view that biophysical abnormality or maladaptation leads to, or isthe cause of, social abnormality or maladaptation. In other words, to be defined as a

flawed body is simultaneously to be defined as incapable of adequatesocial participation.The corporealization of disability meant, in practical terms,the segregation of those so labeled. The logic of the medical model runs from diagnosis to socialresponse. In causal terms, there seem to be three linked elements in the chain: impairment leads to disability,which in turn leads to confinement or institutionalization. The social respond to the flawed body particularly inthe nineteenth century was anthropoemic. This concept refers to the expulsion or exile of alien persons. The

Victorian penchant for excluding people from social participation on the ground ofwhat today might be called difference was summed up by Foucaults (1969) notion of the greatconfinement. The segregation associated with confinement was not only equivalent to a custodial sentence often

for life but was also the sentence of a social death, which was in itself a sortof tacit legitimation for the denial of human rights and the application ofoppressive practices of care (Barnes 1990). These institutional spaces ofexclusion , into which disabled people were cast, were, after all, civilized by

medical jurisdiction. The very authority that had objectified disabled people by reducing them to theirimpairments now had the opportunity to define disabled peoples needs and, in many cases, act in locl parentis.

[continues] The medical model of disability is, and has been, strongly associated with thepotentially reactionary, theme that biology is destiny, and is embedded in popularculture by the naturalization of the view that natural aptitudes determine life chances. Nurture is causallyimpotent in the social world, it is natural endowment that is the most efficacious variable. At its worst, in the

nineteenth century, the medicalization of disability dovetailed with what Foucaultcalled the racisms of the state (1979: 54), with the Darwinist and eugenicistperspectives which promised to cleanse the social body of impunity,imperfection, degeneracy and effectiveness . [continues] The concept of fitness was used,in such contexts, as a criterion for making humanity defined in terms of aesthetic ideals of embodiment into a

relative term. Modernity is riddled with such eugenic conceptions of social hygiene.They are based on the view that disabled people are either unfit to be in

society or to reproduce. The eugenic gaze proposes collective solutions tothe contaminant that disabled bodies represent, but does not propose collectivistexplanations. It is imprisoned in the repertoire of socio-biology and socialDarwinism, and treats disability as an error of nature that should berighted. When wedded to a rigid concept of heredity, biologicalreductionism may at its worst translate into a politics of genocide.
http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n188%23n188http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n189%23n189http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n188%23n188http://web.lexis-nexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/universe/document?_m=76459013af57cf46b6d59eec148f7142&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=deac550f5aac503ff467eaa85488b002#n189%23n189


6/16

Only repoliticizing transportation infrastructure can shift responsibility to the

institutions that maintain exclusion and can open space to expose our complicity in

ableist structures of knowledgeKoch, 2008 (Tom, Adjunct Professor of Medical Ethics at the University of British Columbia, Spaced Out in theCity: the Wrinkled World of Transit for Those With Limited Mobility, Disability Studies Quarterly, Vol. 28 No. 2,Spring, http://dsq-sds.org/article/view/94/94)

Making my way slowly toward the geography building I wondered about the nature of impairments and the limits

they impose, the world they create. What did it mean to be a 20-something, wheelchair-mobile car driver in a city; how was that different from being a middle-aged,sight-impaired fellow with a cane? Was my world in fact restricted because I cannot drive? Is it in some way limitedby my reliance on transit? Having written about disability ethics I was familiar with the broad arguments of bothphysical limits and their social construction (Koch 2001; 2006a; 2006b). Here, however, the broad issues werefocused in the built environment and there the data seems sparse. The problem is clear: "people adjust theirpreferences to what they think they can achieve" (Nussbaum 2006, 73). But to what extent might my impairments

limit what I saw as achievable. How is being unable to drive, and perhaps to use a bus, a limit that forcesus to adjust our goals and does that limit our lives? The more I looked the more I came to understood that thereal problemin thinking about this problem is the method in which we think abouttransit, the methodology constructed to frame questions and seek

answers about accessibility. Understanding, and perhaps reconstructing, our view of theenvironment as a traversable surface became the goal of a project whose origins were personal and broadlyconceptual but whose end is concrete and pragmatic. Literature: Geography There are two pertinent literatureshere, one is geographic and the other a "disability literature." Many have described in a general way the affect ofphysical limits on urban access and mobility, the broad differences between "enabling" (Gleeson 2002, 201) andconversely inhibiting environments. Eric Britton described the changing circumstances of his mother's life as her

Parkinson's disease progressed (Britton 2002); I described the limits social and physical myfather experienced in a "geriatric decline" (Koch 1990). Reginald Golledge has written extensively, alone and withothers, on "disability, barriers, and discrimination," from the perspective of the blind (Golledge 1994, Marston,

Golledge and Costanzo 1997). Within this broad literature is a subset concerning limits on urbanaccessibility based not on the physical characteristics of the person alonebut on the structure of transport systems that connect the builtenvironments in which we live. The consensus seems to be that what Porter called "the simplisticequation of impairment with disability" is unsustainable when, as she discovered, a quadriplegic with a motorizedwheelchair and adapted motor van was more mobile and "independent" than many with less extreme physical

limits (Porter 2002, 12). My observation, clearly, was not unique. What Porter calls "transitdisability" defines in a general way limits to urban access based on one'smode of transportation and the inability ofsome bus travel, for example, tomatch the access of others, especially automobile use. But what is meant by this, and how it is to beunderstood, is unclear in Porter's work or that of other researchers. The problem was framed in a general way in

1993 by Golledge who suggested, as Church and Marston have noted, that "even when consideringthe exact same geographic space, people with differing abilities must use,access, and travel through that environment using different routes, suchthat the conception and use of that space is 'transformed' for differentusers" (Church and Marston 2003, 12). The problem, therefore, is not simply in thelocation of this or that barrier but in the space created by different routesand different modes of travel for users with different capabilities . While

this makes intuitive sense, it flies in the face of decades of transportationstudies. There space is assumed to be democratically uniform and constantirrespective of the mode of transportation or the abilities of users . Its topologyis typically expressed as a collection of lines (streets, bus routes, airline routes) and points (street intersections, busstops, airline terminals) that permit regular access to and egress from across the regular and unchanging space of

the city or state (Taffe and Gauthier 1973). The systems we useto design urban systems andmeasure their accessibility all rely on this idea of a space that can bemeasured in simple and regular units of time and distance such that ten miles willtake twice as long to travel as five miles. By the late 1960s, a series of algorithms had been developed in whichgraph theoretic modeling was employed to design interactive systems at a range of scales (the city, the nation, and
http://dsq-sds.org/article/view/94/94http://dsq-sds.org/article/view/94/94


7/16

the world) based on this idea of a single and regular space accessible by all (Haggett 1967). Those equations remain the very essence of our thinking today(for a review see Church and Marston 2003). But what ifpersons with mobility disorders , andpersons who cannot drive, in fact are relegated by the transit system to avery different space? How might this different space be understood, its origins described? Geographiesof disability, while rich in "the everyday geographies of people with disability, chronic illness, and psychiatric

problems" ( Dyck and O'Brien 2003) hold no answers to the broader problem. This paper details an attempt to cometo grips with this idea of non-regular spaces as a function of mobility limits and transit systems. It offers no answersand is less a report of "work-in-progress" than a pre-study whose outcome is a proposed means of defining amethodology that might better express the variable spaces in which we live. This paper describes the first stage ofa research initiative, one that grounded in individual experience will lead, hopefully, to a more complete and

complex spatial metric capable of describingtransit modalitiesand the method theyconstructdifferent spacesaffecting users differently.Througha carefulconsiderationof a single case,questions are raised and methodologies proposed for future application .Disability and Impairment While concrete and geographic in its subject and analysis,the result willcertainly bear upon the greater issues of social exclusion and inclusion ofpersons of difference.For more than a generation debate has continued over the degree to whichphysical limits and the social context in which they are enacted influence daily life activities and life quality. A

"social disability model" argues, to paraphrase Tremain,"disablement is nothing to do withthe [physical] body, impairment is nothing less than a description of thebody"(Tremain 2005, 9). Myimpairments low vision and mobility restrictions are physicalrealities but any limits they present in daily life, in this trope,result form afailure in social infrastructure support, the real "disablement." Inconsidering the space created by transit modalities, the nature of thatinfrastructure itself becomes the subject .Once a principal proponent of the social disabilitymodel, British sociologist Tom Shakespeare recently has argued thedichotomies ofdisablement/impairment, of physical realities and social barriers, are toosimple. "Disability studies would be better off without the social model,which has become fatally undermined by its own contractions andinadequacies"(Shakespeare 2006, 28).It is not that social realities areunimportant, Shakespeare insists,but that they exist within a context in whichthe physical difference is real and not necessarily society's responsibilityto address.A vast literature has grown around the poles of disability and impairment, of clinical reality andsocial responsibility, one rich in theory if not in pragmatic answers (for a review see, for example, Koch 2006a,2006b). The technical literature in this area typically takes an "activity-based approach" (Marston, Golledge, andCostanzo 1997). Grounded in the regular space of classical transportation modeling in which space is constant andregular, Kwan, among others, has experimented with network-based approaches that develop space-timeaccessibility measures, a point-based approach in which travel networks are divided into origins and destinations,points on a map or graph, between which distance is calculated in one or another metric (time travel, cost of travel,

etc.) (Kwan 1988). Two problems were immediately apparent. First, the assumption has been thatwhile travel across existing urban networks may be more expensive or more timeconsuming for some the system is accessible to all. Whether that is true is unclear,however. One may as easily argue that physical limits create absolute barriers,spaces that cannot be traveled.Methodologically, an activities-based approach trips to the doctors, to shop, to therecord store is necessarily individualistic and therefore eccentric. While useful as a starting point, the goal must be a broader analytic whose subject isgeneral and not specific. How might that broader analytic be expressed? Thus, the study of an individual case or cases should serve not as a description of"transportation disability" but as a springboard to a general problem of "transportation space" as eccentric and fluid. How might that transposition fromindividual to general be achieved? Urban Barriers One stream of work seeks to identify barriers to access in the local environment, those elements highcurbs, busy traffic intersections, steep slopes that impede access for those with mobility limits. An example of this focused, large-scale approach is astudy by Kitchen in association with members of an Irish "pan-disability organization" (Kitchen 2002). Working with the Newbridge (Ireland) Access Group,Kitchen developed a map of largely preventable environmental barriers gradients, ground surfaces, high curbs etc that impeded travel on individualstreets and the buildings in them. The collaborative project involved contributors with various physical distinctions who together categorized the urbanbarriers that were mapped within a small, eight-block area. The focus of their investigation was not access to the area but accessibility of buildings andsidewalks within it. The goal of the work, and similar projects elsewhere, was to identify those local, micro-geographic barriers that made otherwiseaccessible places inconvenient or inaccessible. "Overcoming space requires expenditure of resources, energy, and time, a charge that nature (includinghumans) attempts to minimize subject to constraints and other objectives" (Miller 2007, 203). Even if access is theoretically possible if getting there istoo time consuming, too expensive, or too arduous those places are, effectively, "off the map." This work is typically restricted to a fine scale ofconcern, a few city streets and their buildings. Its relation to the city-at-large might be supposed but was unconsidered. A research program emerged thatwould use mapping technologies as one of its tools. First, it would be useful to carefully record my daily travel patterns, the "daily activities" and the timesand methods of travel to work, stores, leisure destinations. Secondly, these origin-destination records could be compared both to my own, pre-surgicalpatterns of activity and to the travel times, as a measure of accessibility, of the average, motorized Vancouverite. This data would hopefully would lead toa more rigorous, general analysis of "transit disability" and what it means, a new way to make concrete the broad problem of accessibility and distance


8/16

barriers. Daily Activities Listing Between 2002 and 2005 a series of recurring destinations were recorded in my daily travel journals. These included traveltime from home to the Dept. of Geography, University of British Columbia, where I served as an adjunct professor of medical geography, and to SimonFraser University's downtown campus where I was an adjunct professor of gerontology. There were as well trips to the food markets on Fourth Avenue (Ilived on Thirteenth), Granville Island, and Commercial Drive. At another scale entirely daily activities included trips to a local coffee shop, neighborhoodsupermarkets, and other non-work locations frequently visited prior to my osteoarthritis. As a non-driver, these trips were largely undertaken on the publictransit system except for a period of seven months in which post-surgical limits made bus travel on crutches impossible. During that time I was unable toget on local buses whose entry steps were too high for me to use. In Greater Vancouver the Coast Mountain Bus Company operates an integrated systemof bus and electric trolley services under the provincially funded Translink agency serving the 21-municipality region that is Vancouver and its suburbs.Across the region the bus system is linked to an expanding light rail transit system with stations in downtown Vancouver and on Vancouver's CommercialDrive. On the general bus route two or three different styles of bus are in use, some with steep steps, some that kneel, making access easier, and otherswith full wheelchair capability. A subset of bus routes at the time of this work was wheelchair accessible. Since the study began in 2002 the number of

kneeling and wheelchair accessible buses has increased on an annual basis and the number of wheelchair accessible routes has slowly expanded. The firstmap, therefore, would have to be blank, a map of the city I could not access except by taxi because I was unable to use public transit and cannot drive.Once I could both walk four blocks to the nearest bus stop and board the bus on crutches, the travel journal that would provide the data for my mapscould be constructed. For each trip made I noted (a) walking time to a bus stop (b) time waiting for a bus (c) time traveling on a bus and (d) time from thedestination stop to the destination itself. While on crutches, and then on a cane, my walking was approximately a third slower than that of the averagewalker. Informants walking the same route at the same time of day required an average of 6.5 minutes to walk from Arbutus and 13th to Arbutus and 9th(Broadway), I required 9.5 minutes to traverse that same distance. Later testing with others including a person with familial dystonia found the one-third time differential a fairly constant difference although several seniors on four-pronged walkers I timed took even longer. For comparison, I usedbicycle travel time based on my own, prior travel journals and those of an assistant as well as travel time by automobile recorded by an assistant. Theautomobile is the assumed mode of travel in Vancouver although efforts are made to wean drivers from their cars to public transit. The bicycle wasincluded as a potentially important indicator of the argument some might make that poverty is itself a disability as real as any physical limit. For thosewithout the $2.25 (Canadian) one-way fare price, and without a car, the bicycle provides an alternative form of transportation. While extremely coarse, itserves as a first measure of the mundanely-abled for whom automobile use and transit use were unavailable. Differences were quickly evident at two verydifferent scales of concern. These included variable access ranges at both the level of the metropolis and the level of the immediate neighborhood. Thefirst involved non-neighborhood trips to work and other more distant locations. The second occurred at the very fine scale of the neighborhood. At thisscale the result was a series of substitutions in which formerly frequented locations were abandoned for other, closer stores within a maximum four-blockradius. The Metropolitan Scale Within an hour driving time of my home accessibility reached from the southern ferry terminal in Tsawassen, BritishColumbia's Gulf Islands, to the northern terminal at Horseshoe Bay that serves Bowen Island in How Sound, the Sunshine Coast, and Nanaimo on centralVancouver Island. Bus and bicycle ranges were more restricted, permitting access only to the central city. The oval shape of the transit systems generalreach reflects the light rapid system that stretches from east Vancouver, a 32-38 minute bus trip from my house, to eastern suburbs. The more regularrange of the bicycle commuting circle is based on my own cycling records, those of bicycle commuting friends, and a general assumption of an averagespeed of twenty to twenty five kilometers an hour in non-rush hour traffic. The conclusion is presented in Figure 1, a map of coarse ranges, based on an

hour's travel time, for the three transportation modalities. Clearly, these reflect different access potentials. Destinations include, to the west, theUniversity of British Columbia, and to the east, Commercial Drive shopping area from which the light rail transit system can be accessed. To the north ofthe central city are Simon Fraser University's Downtown Campus and the maritime Seabus terminal permitting access to North Vancouver. Included asgray lines are the major bus routes that traverse the city it symbolized with gray lines. Major roads not covered by the system are symbolized with whitelines. The map serves as an imprecise if useful descriptor of the variable effect of transportation modalities across the urban system. It does not proposedifferent spaces but rater suggests relative ranges based on transportation modes within a single constant space. As Kwan has claimed, "Individualaccessibility is determined not by how many opportunities are located close to the reference location, but how many opportunities are within reach giventhe particularities of an individual's life situation and adaptive capacity" (1999, 212). Clearly, transit modality defines accessibility, providing predictablygreater access within a finite time frame to a larger range of places than the bicycle or the public transit route. Thus, while reflecting my own eccentrictravel the general differences in range at least theoretically serve to identify general differences from any point in the system for the varying travelmodalities, the specific range shifting east or west, north or south, depending on the originating location. The simple transit modality range map does notexpress differences in travel time between locations embedded in the map, however. Implicit in the range map is one of travel time as a constant, albeitoccurring at different but still constant rates (30 km. an hour for cars, perhaps 20 km. an hour for buses, and less for the bicycle). The daily activities logshowed distance when measured by time to be a non-linear, complex space, however. Figure 2 is a table that catalogues the differences in travel timebetween representative locations in these ranges by modality. Reported times reflect the average duration of multiple trips from my home at Arbutus andThirteenth Avenues based on my own and my informants' travel. Interestingly, within the immediate neighborhood represented by the Granville IslandMarket and those on Fourth Avenue the difference between car and bike was relatively minor. Between car and bus, however, the difference at the localscale was significant. In effect, the inability to drive meant that what for others would be brief excursions for example to Fourth Avenue markets became, for me, significant trips requiring significant expenditures of time. Further, these locations assumed an ability to walk at least four blocks withminimal discomfort. While on crutches, however, and on the first months with a cane, this assumption was unrealized. The approximately six-blockdistance from the nearest bus stop to the Granville Island market was too great to be attempted safely. It was added to the list only after post-operativerecovery was well advanced. The difference in travel modalities are expressed graphically in Figure 3 through a simple scaling technique that gives someidea of the effect of travel modality on trip times. Each single arrow is ten minutes travel and multiple arrows are additives of ten minutes, or a fraction ofit. Everything is close when travel is by automobile, further when travel is by bus. The bicycle is a surprisingly effective substitute for the automobile forshort-range trips, albeit one that was unavailable to me. Effectively, travel time constraints permitted, at most, one interurban trip by normal transit forexample to UBC or to SFU or to Commercial Drive. That time, with chores as the destination, effectively made a trip that might be for a car driver a briefexpedition an expedition that was, for me, at least a half-day round-trip. While travel across the system was possible in theory, travel time became aprohibitive in trips outside of the core city, for example to the Tsawassen (southern terminal, figure 1) or Horseshoe Bay (northwestern figure 1) ferryterminals. More importantly, the result presented a time-space that was not smooth and constant but wrinkled and irregular. The local coffee shop I hadpatronized, one a few minutes from my house, became a more distant destination, for example. At issue was not raw accessibility I could get there by abus using two transfers but the distance in time was far more complex, and variable (less constant), than a Euclidian space measured in kilometerswould have predicted. Neighborhood Scale The effect on daily living patterns was especially notable in the neighborhood I had, prior to surgery,unthinkingly inhabited. During much of the study period my walking time was a third that of average citizens and limited to a range of four to a maximumof five city blocks. Any distance farther than four blocks required a several-minute rest period to permit the pain to decrease. Within Greater Vancouverthat made some destinations, while theoretically accessible, practically unavailable. Included in the list of inaccessible sites would be those homes orshops on slopes greater than perhaps 8 degrees. While relatively few, they were still noticeable for example the home of a friend at Third and Yew ablock north of the Fourth Avenue coffee shop. Included as well were a large part of Pacific Spirit Park and homes on Eighth to Six Streets betweenGranville and Cambie, principal homes and commercial areas of the city. More importantly, perhaps, because of limits in walking distance or cycling,neighborhood shopping that had required little time now required a 28-32 minute bus trip. Because no bus runs along Arbutus to Fourth Avenue, forexample, it was necessary to travel west to Broadway and Alma to transfer to an eastbound bus or to Granville and Fifth for a westbound bus. Thus totravel to the stores previously patronized required two buses, with their attendant waiting times, and one transfer. As a result, my daily purchase patternsshifted from Fourth Avenue to Broadway Avenue stores near Arbutus, from small specialty stores to a single supermarket for food. Travel to CommercialDrive, Granville Market, and the North Shore became full day trips rather than afternoon excursions. In effect, my travel range for daily necessities wasaltered, restricted by the time a bus-transfer trip would require for food, shopping, afternoon coffee, etc. At night, when transit is less frequent, thesituation worsened. The shifting range of transport disability is graphically described in Figure 4 where shops on Fourth Avenue and the Granville Marketare shown outside a darker, home-centered rectangle that was the post-operative travel range. Discussion All of this may seem obvious, confirming whatis known, and certainly commonsensical. Inability to drive is in this study certainly a disadvantage it takes longer to get there from here exacerbatedby ambulatory limits. Travel took longer and not all equidistant points were equally accessible: some places came off my daily map because of distancefrom a transit stop, or became excursions rather than simple trips. For those who are wheelchair users in my neighborhood, the lack of accessible stopswould be, at least for those who do not drive, not disadvantageous but disastrous. There is no wheelchair access to the transit system within 1.5kilometers of the Arbutus and Thirteenth Avenue epicenter of this study. In a wheelchair, or again with limited mobility on crutches, one is literally off themap. Equally disadvantaged are those whose poverty inhibits both transit use and automobile ownership although for some the bicycle may serve as alocal-and mid-distance substitute. Whether the result is "disabling" depends as much on one's understanding of the adjective "disability" as it does on thelimits of either the transit system or the potential transit rider him or her self. In a similar vein, this experience affirmed the observation by Golledge(1993) quoted earlier, and more recently rephrased by others, that differing abilities require people to move differently through the environment which istransformed by individual capabilities (Church and Marston 2003, 9096). Automobile drivers, irrespective of other impairments, access the city in a waythat I and others without cars could not. Persons with mobility limits who have a limited range have different access levels than those whose

ambulation is more or less mundane. Not obvious either in the maps or the literature is what all this means. If"transit disability" is


9/16

embedded in the systemthen how can it be defined and expressed across the system? Theexperiences detailed in this paper, and by others with mobility limits, suggests a differencespace in which the regular metrics of time-distance transit planning aremodified or suspended in the reality of daily use.In the design of urbansystems we assume distance is a constant that expands in a regular andconsistent, linear fashion. If it is five minutes to "x" location at this speed; a distance twice as farrequires twice as much time. And while that may be generally true for some, thereality experienced here was different. Space is in effect wrinkled, anirregular surface in which hills of time create barriers for some that forothers are simple planes of distance. In addition, mobility limits may imposeabsolute barriers for some for example a 6-block walk for me that for others arenot impediments at all. Like all very personal studies the results are limited to the nature of theindividual experience. Even if one accepts the commonality of my experience, what is the reality of those whorequire wheelchair access to the transit system? Not all paraplegics can drive. Nor can all those who requirescooters and other motorized ambulatory aides. Within Greater Vancouver transit access for those who use

wheelchairs is restricted not only by temporal wrinkling but by the system itself. They are limitedabsolutely to a small number of routes that permit access at specific timesof the day. The question of wheelchair users is not simply one of a distinctrange but of accessibility itself.Clearly, simple mapping of eccentric daily activity routes do not serve to express thegeneral reality experienced here. More fundamentally, the traditional assumptions of transportation and urban analysis reflected in this paper's map,assumptions of distance measured in time as a regular constant, require a different analytic. How does one argue a "wrinkled" space that is generally non-constant and in parts practically inaccessible even if system maps make the systems that traverse them appear accessible to all? Future Works First,there would need to be a map depicting the lines and stops of the system. Those would become the raw data from which travel time surfaces based ondifferent travel modalities would be developed. Centered on a single location, what was required was a surfacing of the space-time of the city for differenttravel modalities if a very plastic and variable travel space based on modality were to be created. In future studies automobile use would be the necessarytravel mode against which other travel spaces were measured. This would require either a number of drivers logging travel points from the centrallocation to all other locations, or a travel-time algorithm that would generate those points. In comparison, a time accessibility analysis based on transitsystem lines would need to be generated in a manner that reflected real travel time, including time walking from the origin point to transit access nodes,time waiting at access nodes and transfer points, and time walking to destinations. Finally, a parallel study based on transit accessibility and time forwheelchair accessible transit routes would need to be created for the region. Surface analysis uses data points to generate a continuous space in which asingle variable travel time, cost, etc. can be created across an area in which origin and destination points can be identified. This inverts traditionaltransit mapping in which such points are the focus within a space that is assumed to be constant and linear. Developing the data to map a complexsurface on the basis of cost, time, or some other variable is not a trivial problem. It requires first a well-developed dataset and secondly a method oftesting the accuracy of the resulting surface. As a first step, I applied for and received from Coast Mountain Bus Company (CMBC) map files that describedall routes within the Greater Vancouver Regional District and all bus, trolley, and light rapid transit system within the region. CMBC officials also providedthe location of individual transit stops on each route. Online schedules for the period of December 2006 to April 2007 permitted travel time and transfertime to be added to all routes. To analyze this data, and develop an approach that would serve for the various modalities, I applied for assistance toseveral colleagues. They include, to date: adjunct professor of geography Ray Torchinsky, Simon Fraser University (Vancouver, BC); University of BritishColumbia transport and urban geographer Ken Denike, and Simon Fraser University transportation and urban geographer Warren Gill. Together wecreated the Vancouver Transit Access Study Consortium, to develop a system of accurately assessing the relative accessibility of the city by varying

modalities for persons with different physical limits. Aware that all travel is dependent on traffic levels, we decided to begin by limiting our work to non-peak travel hours during the weekday. To date a tentative system of mapping has been developed that permits surface maps analyzing travel time forautomobile, transit, and wheelchair transit use. A second task, not yet complete, is to add to these transit maps multi-modal capabilities, including forexample the time it takes to walk or wheel to and from a transit stop. Also to be added will be surface contours permitting streets with specific gradientsto be taken off the map of mobility limited users Generation of the maps is only part of the exercise. The maps are the workbenches on which we hope togenerate more precise mathematic descriptors of relative accessibility of these interrelated but distinct travel systems. We believe the methodologiesevolving from this work will permit an accurate portrait of mobility constrained, locational accessibility measures for critical urban locations city hall,hospitals, shopping malls, universities, etc. as well as a general portrait of modal inaccessibility. In other words, we will be able not only to mapgeneralities but specifics, to ask whether Vancouver City Hall is accessible to all or is its accessibility limited, and if so to what degree, to certain classes ofcitizens who can drive, afford a bus, or find wheelchair routes from home to the City Hall. This degree of specificity will require an analytic sufficiently

flexible to focus on a wide variety of central points and to refashion the mapped perspective from a range of origins and destinations. Theresearch is academic to the extent that it seeks to find a consistentmethodology encouraging the investigation ofurban accessibility both interms of characteristics of different modes of travel and of constraints onthe mobility of individuals. It is academic in its critique of an existingassumption of space. The goal, however, is practical, activist, and local. The hopeis to develop a methodology by which debates over urban accessibility canbe pursued in a climate not simply of political dissent (See, for example, Imrie andEdwards 2007; Valentine 2003; Gleeson 2000) but instead grounded in clear expressions ofconcrete differences. The hope is that development of this approach will serve both local communities ofdifference and transit officials who are making a strong, good faith effort to expand their service to assure thegreatest possible ridership. At this writing the first surface models of the variable systems are being generated.Attempts to expand them to include more variables including the effect of slope on walking, of absolute walkinglimits, speed variation and non-linearity of walking times, etc. are soon to be begun. So, too, we hope to developgeneral algorithms that may modify those currently employed on the assumption of special regularity. That,however, is for the future. The program has to date received no outside funding. Nor has any been applied for. Webelieved it important to first investigate the potential of our approach before seeking support for further research.


10/16

This report therefore presents a first statement of the pre-test and early modeling rather than of the results of ourefforts. We hope within six months to a year to be able to begin a series of more detailed reports expanding theeccentric and personal critique presented here into a more general, system-wide exploration whose methodologyencompasses the traditional planner's focus on locations of origin and destination in a general surface analytic webelieve will best serve to express the effect of physical limits on urban access using different transportation

modalities. We believe with that the need to equal the playing field to assure equalaccess to all will be not simply a political ideal but a social goal in transit

planning.


11/16

PLAN

The United States federal government should increase investment in transportation

infrastructure to make it more accessible.

Here are examples of transportation infrastructure investments that the plan includes

Carpenter 2006(Matt, Senior Planner with the Sacramento Area Council of Governments, Senior and DisabledMobility Study, Sacramento Area Council of Governments, October 23)

Implement local Pedestrian Master Plans and pedestrian access improvements in theplanning, design, construction, maintenance and rehabilitation oflocaltransportation infrastructure, including: - Improve design at key destinations forseniors and persons with disabilities by requiring buildings to front the street, or providingsafe pedestrian access ways through large parking lots. -Increase pedestrian safety incrosswalks by increasing crossing times or installing extra-time pedestrian request buttonsat major intersections, insuring accessible curb cuts, adding pedestrian refuge

islands in wide streets, audible/countdown signals and/or in-pavement lighting.-Adopt narrower street designs and traffic calming strategies to slow traffic. -Add pedestrian restingareas with amenities such as benches in downtown and suburban settings. -Improve pedestrian accessand comfort by providing ample sidewalks, sidewalk connectivity, reducingsidewalk obstacles (poles, garbage cans, etc.), adding lighting for safety and shade for comfort,and using noise-reducing materials and acoustic processes to reduce street and freeway noise. -Insure goodbus stop design and access.


12/16

Contention 2: The Holy

The holy community is founded on narratives of hospitality, which affirms

dignity. Transportation infrastructure in the status quo is rooted in the sacredorder, which is founded on exclusive narratives and approaches otherness with

hostility and violence.

Fasching and deChant 2001 (Darrell J., Professor of Religious Studies at the University of South Florida, Dell, Director ofReligious Studies in the Department of Religious Studies at the University of South Florida, Comparative Religious Ethics: A Narrative

Approach, Pp. 10)

Human religiousness is defined by two opposing types of experience that tend to shape the way stories are told and interpreted.

Moreover, our understanding of good and evil is defined by the kind of story we think we are in and the role we

see ourselves playing in that story. The terms the sacred and the holy, which have typically been used

interchangeably, are proposed here as names for these opposing types of experience. The sacred defines

those who share a common identity as human and sees all others as profane and

less(or less than

) human.

The sacred generates a morality expressed in narratives ofmistrustand hostility toward the stranger. The holy, by contrast, generates an ethic which calls into

question every sacred morality in order to transform it in the name of justice and compassion,

especially toward the stranger. The task of an ethic of the holy is not to replace the morality

of a society, but to transform it by breaking down the divisions between the sacred

and profane, through narratives ofhospitality to the stranger, which affirm the

human dignity of precisely those who do not share my identity and my stories.

Holy Communities project openness to the transformative impact of the experiences of

others. The sacred order is a methodology of domination. Its foreclosure of the possibility

of truth in difference condemns us to an apocalyptic stalemate moving ever closer to

human self-destruction.

Fasching 1993 (Darrell J. Fasching is a Professor of Religious Studies at the University of South Florida, The Ethical Challenge ofAushwitz and Hiroshima, Pp. 5-8)

The best way to describe the "style" of the theology of culture proposed in these books is to suggest that it is a "decentered" or "alienated

theology". Alienated theology is the opposite of apologetic theology. Apologetic theology typically

seeks to defend the "truth" and "superiority" of one's own tradition against the "false,"

"inferior," and "alien" views of other traditions. Alienated theology,by contrast, is theology

done "as if" one were a stranger to one's own narrative traditions, seeing and critiquing

one's own traditions from the vantage point of the other's narrative traditions. It is myconviction that alienated theology is the appropriate mode for theology in an emerging world civilizationa

civilization tottering in the balance between apocalypse and utopia. There are two ways to enter

world history, according to the contemporary author John Dunne: you can be dragged in by way of world

war or you can walk in by way ofmutual understanding. By the first path, globalcivilization emerges as a totalitarian project of dominance that risks escalating into

nuclear apocalypse. By the secondpath, we prevent the rise of the first, creating global

civilization through an expansion of our understanding of what it means to be human .This occurs when we pass over to another's religion and culture and come back with new insight into our

own. Ghandi is an example, passing over to the Sermon on the Mount and coming

back to the Hindu Bhagavad Gita to gain new insight into it as a scripture of

nonviolence. Ghandi never seriously considered becoming a Christian but his


13/16

Hinduism was radically altered by his encounter with Christianity. One could say the same(reversing the directions) for Martin Luther King Jr., who was deeply influenced by Ghandi's understanding of nonviolent resistance in

the Gita. When we pass over (whether through travel, friendship, or disciplined study and imagination) we become

"strangers in a strange land" as well as stangers to ourselves, seeing ourselves through the eyes of

another. Assuming the perspective of a stranger is an occasion for insight and the sharing of insight. Such

cross-cultural interactions build bridges of understanding and action between

persons and cultures that make cooperation possible and conquest unnecessary."Passing over" short circuits apocalyptic confrontation and inaugurates utopian new beginningsnew

beginnings for the "postmodern" world of the coming third millennium. Ghandi and King are symbols of a possible

style for postmodern alienated theology. To be an alien is to be a stranger. To be alienated is to be a stranger to oneself.

We live in a world of ideological conflict in which fartoo many individuals (whether theists or a-theists)

practice a centered theology in which they are too sure of who they are and what

they must do. Such a world has far too many answers and not nearly enough questions and self-

questioning. A world divided by its answers is headed for an inevitable apocalyptic

destiny. However, when we are willing to become strangers to ourselves (or when we unwillingly become so), new possibilitiesopen up where before everything was closed and hopeless. At the heart of my position is the conviction that the kairos of our time

calls forth the badly neglected ethic of welcoming the outcast that underlies the Buddhist tradition. This care for

the stranger and the outcast, I shall argue,provides the critical norm for identifying authentic transcendence as

self-transcendence. Centered theologies, whether sacred or secular, theist or a-theist, are ethnocentric theologies

that can tolerate the alien or other, if at all, only as a potential candidate for conversion to

sameness. Centered theologies are exercises in narcissism that inevitably lead down

apocalyptic paths like those that led to Auschwitz and Hiroshima. Why? Because such

theologies, whether sacred or secular, cannot permit there to be others in the world whose

way of being might, by sheer contrast, cause self-doubt and self-questioning. When as a student I read PaulTillich, I found it hard to believe him when he said that the questions were more important than the answers. I was so taken with his

answers that I was sure he was just trying to be modest. What really mattered were the answers. Since then, I have come to realize thatanswers always seem more important and more certain to those who have come by them without wrestling with the questions. I know

now that Tillich was quite serious and quite rightthe questions are indeed more important. I have come to find a fullness in the

doubts and questions of my life, which I once thought could be found only in the answers. After Auschwitz and Hiroshima, I distrust all

final answersall final solutions. Mercifully, doubts and questions have come to be so fulfilling that I find myself suspicious of

answers, not because they are necessarily false or irrelevant, but because even when relevant and true they are, and can be, only partial.

It is doubt and questioning that always lures me on to broader horizons and deeper insights through anopenness to the infinite that leaves me contentedly discontent. Alienated theology understands doubt and the questionsthat arise from it as our most fundamental experience of the infinite. For, our unending questions keep us open to the infinite,

continually inviting us to transcend our present horizon of understanding. In a like manner, the presence of the

stranger continuously calls us into question and invites us to transcend the present

horizon of the egocentric and ethnocentric answers that structure our personal and

cultural identities. An alienated theology understands that only a faith which requires one to

welcome the alien or strangeris truly a utopian faith capable of transforming us into

new beings who are capable ofcreating a new world of pluralistic human

interdependence. To put it in terms closest to home for myself, as a Christian who seeks to come to grips with Aushwitz in thelight the history of Christan anti-Judaism, I cannot be a Christian except as I am prepared to welcome Jews (and analogously Buddhists

or secular humanists, etc.) into my life. The very attempt to convert them would be to destroy the authenticity of my

own faith by robbing me of the chance to welcome the stranger(the one who is different from me and a permanentwitness of the Wholly Other in my life) who is given to me as an invitation to self-transcendence. For the literal

meaning of transcendence is "to go beyond"to go beyond ourselves (individually and communally)as we are tobecome something more and something new. To be human is to have a utopian capacity to create new

worlds. When we deny ourselves that possibility, we set in motion the seeds of our apocalyptic self-destruction. The tragedy of human existence revealed by Auhswitz and Hiroshima is that we have continued to misread our situation.

Given the opportunity for selftranscendence, the opportunity to be carried beyond ourselves into a

new global human community, we have instead insisted on a technological solution" a

MAD (mutual assured destruction) solution. This at best, leads to a global stalemate between cultures


14/16

and at worst an attempt at global conquest. In either case we place ourselves under

the dark and threatening cloud of a nuclear apocalypse that such a path risks.

The separation of personal ethics from public policy is the only way genocide becomes

possible

Herbert 2008 (Brent, The Genocidal Mentality, Pt. 1: The 'free market' as genocidalideology, http://www.awitness.org/journal/free_market_genocide.html)

In a later book, the Genocidal Mentality, Lifton went on to generalize the workings of a classic genocidal system, that of t he Nazis, and apply what was revealed to other prevalentsystems of genocide which remain at work on the planet today (his particular interest being the parallels between Nazi genocidal ideology, and the Nuclear Ideology at work inAmerican society today, in which weapons whose only purpose is genocidal slaughter are mystified and mythologized using a process remarkably similar to the process ofmystification that infused Nazi society). Genocidal requires a master narrative' which excludes alternative views, and which are crucially sustained by certain psychologicalmechanisms that protect individual people from experiencing the harmful effects...of their own actions upon others. These mechanisms which blunt human feelings, includedissociation" (the separation of one part of the mind from another) . This leads to doubling', or the existence of two contradictory personalities which exist in one person. One is thegenocidal self (a Nazi doctor at work on genocidal duty at death camps) and the other is the real self' (the same Doctor volunteering for a children's charity in the evening, after along day of killing other people's kids). "Psychic numbing" is "characterized by the diminished capacity to feel, and usually includes separation of thought from feeling...When

numbing ordoubling enables one, with relatively little psychological cost, to engage in sustained actions

that cause harm to others, we may speak of brutalization'." A sense of inevitability, fostered

by thepower of the state, facilitates the process by "divesting the individual of a sense ofresponsibility, for destructive collective behavior." So, therefore, Nazi doctors could justify performing cruelexperiments on the victims of death camps, using the justification that they are going to die in any case' and therefore it would be awasted death if they were not made the subjects of experimentation. Nazi concentration camp guards could rationalize their activities in

the same way, since if they didn't do it, someone else would.' Genocidal ideology carries with it a sense of

impotence before a mystified, irresistible force, embodied in the machinery of the state. Otherwisegood police officers could become Gestapo officers, and could often even justify their participation in genocide using the rationalization

that if good people don't do it, then only the evil will do it, and the results would be much more cruel.' Thus genocidal,brutalizing

systems can be rationalized using the familiar refrain about the lesser of two evils' and using this type of thinking

even good people' can become part of the genocidal machine , becoming socialized

critics, or protestors working within the system, or even active participants in genocidal activities, using

rationalizations about how one must be pragmatic' , its going to happen in any case', one must work within the system, toavoid having the system run by the greater evil' and we have to do it.' Mystification concerning the inevitability of destructive systems of genocide are an important component in

getting good people' to do atrociously harmful things. Thus the architects and workers of genocide are found to be not the stereotypical monsters of Hollywood fiction or simplistichistory retelling, but rather are ordinary people', well regarded doctors or average police officers who through a process of mystification producing a sense of helplessness' before anirresistible force, through arguments concerning pragmatism' which dilute moral imperatives, and a logic of pursuing the lesser of t wo evils' become the very monsters' responsiblefor genocide. That this process is kept hidden by being wrapped in mythologies concerning the purely evil Nazi' is not really a surprise when you stop to consider the constantworkings of genocidal ideologies in our world today, and in particular when you come to understand that even today, good people' are committing acts of genocide, as well as acts ofecocide, a process which demystification would make much harder (and which therefore makes this demystification all the more a requirement). By maintaining ignorance concerningthe true workings of systems of genocide, by cloaking genocide in dualistic mythologies which paint the workers of genocide as inhuman monsters' unlike the rest of us', suchsystems remain cloaked in mystification and this process contributes to the forward progress and maintenance of genocidal systems, and also ensures the support of good people' whowill not only support the system of genocide, but will also become workers of genocide themselves. Genocidal systems can promote the splitting of the personality into two halves,sometimes one professional (the architect of genocide) and one personal (the family personality). This splitting of the human personality is promoted by genocidal ideology since it is

mirrored by the systems of destruction themselves, which are found to be riddled by contradictions and inconsistencies which are impossible to resolve.The central

core contradiction of all genocidal ideology is the irreconcilable nature of the belief in

killing to heal.' This inconsistency can be found in expressed in the belief that one must build

weapons ofmass destruction to keep the peace.' Similarly one must kill civilians in warfare

to save the nation.' One must destroy the environment to end poverty'. The logic of death and destruction brings renewaland life. One must cause great harm in order to promote the greater good, one must hurt and kill in order to heal. In an extreme case, one

must kill Jews to save Germany. Because genocidal ideology is the cause of destructive suffering, itpromotes both numbing and derealization' (a failure to experience the suffering being caused as real). In addition their is acurious mix of omnipotence' (the sense of power that comes by taking action, by the killing side of the ideology) combined with a

strange sense of impotence (resistance is futile, genocidal systems are inevitable.) Genocidal systems promote a

separate reality, where the doing of evil is removed from the ordinary experience of evil or

the ordinary concepts ofethical behavior that would govern the normal self' (as opposed to the genocidalself) a process which is encapsulated in the rationalizations of participation in known genocidal systems (the system is inevitable, you must be pragmatic and not moral or even worseidealistic or utopian, since nothing can be done, its going to happen in any case, and if you don't do it, someone else will, and you are the lesser of two evils - these trade markrationalizations are the surest signals that someone is participating in a harmful genocidal system, and since genocide is so pervasive in our society, you hear these sorts of things allthe time, since they are a vital component of the process of numbing, of separating intellect from feeling, to allow derealization and facilitate doubling).


15/16


16/16

Documents

Fasching 1ac Peyton