Perspectives

Laugh, and the world joins you!

I like the joke about an insomniac agnostic dyslexic being someone who lies awake at night wondering if there is a Dog. It's a religious joke, which is one of my favourite kinds, as well as a disability joke, which is not my favourite kind, but which, I have to admit, is still funny.

Maybe it takes a certain kind of person to laugh at a joke about disability or about God; but it takes a much more frightening kind of person to put the writer of the joke against a wall and shoot him or her, instead of looking coldly down their nose and moving on, or coming up with a counter–joke, which one imagines would be the democratic thing to do.

Speaking of jokes, I think it's very funny that people still think of India as a democracy, when any two–bit organisation masquerading as the servant/defender of some faith or the other can boot people who speak their minds right out of their houses (or, as in the case of poor old M F Husain, right out of the country) as well as hold a government to ransom, all over some perceived slight to God. Who, as any good atheist will tell you, doesn't even exist.

These days everyone is so busy killing or suing everyone else over slights, real or imagined, to one or another of their gods, that they forget what a hard time we atheists have, getting ourselves through the bitter gales of life without anybody to dump on, or at least blame.

Atheism is defined as the belief that even if God did once exist, chances are that He or She would long ago have fired Himself or Herself for incompetence, and drunk Himself or Herself to death on Ambrosial Nectar in some seedy galactic bar, and this is not a bad thing insofar as it renders the whole Karma and Heaven vs Hell issues moot, though it also means that anything you suffer will be in the here and now, and not in the safely–distant, ever afterlife.

Atheists get bad press for being irreverent about other people's gods, when in fact they have to struggle as much as everyone else to keep their faith in moments of crisis, since it would be so much easier to just be able to confess, or believe that someone else will fix everything, or deflect decision–making in the direction of some Book.

Irreverence of all kinds, not to mention free speech, is the basis not just of humour, but also of originality, creativity and thoughtfulness.

It seems to be dying a slow and horrible death, if not all over the world, then certainly in this country, while piety and pseudo–piety in their ugliest forms are fed to bursting, grow tall, put on weight and proceed to throw it around, while governments stand around being sensitive to religious sentiments, otherwise known as undesirable swings in voting patterns.

Luckily, there are pockets of sanity left in the world, where irreverence is not just allowed but encouraged, even though it sometimes leads to stupid lawsuits. If you've never had the pleasure of reading the satirical newspaper The Onion, I beg you to haul yourself over to www.theonion.com and daily take in such headlines as “Christ Kills Two, Injures Seven In Abortion–Clinic Attack” and and “15,000 Brown People Dead Somewhere”, and “Heroic PETA Commandos Kill 49, Save Rabbit”, and “New Oliver Stone 9/11 Film Introduces ‘Single Plane’ Theory”. The Onion takes the pants off everyone and everything.

It may run satirical headlines and stories, but they're a lot less offensive than non–satirical headlines and stories like “Cong, Left pass buck on Taslima”.

Source: Mitali Saran. The death of satire. Business Standard, New Delhi, 1 December 2007

Top

It's the way you look at it

Twenty years ago, if you were a vegetarian traveling to the US, it was slim picking. If you visited people in their homes, the chances were they had no idea what to feed you. As a guest, you were a pain in the neck so you probably didn't get many invitations to dinner. In a meat–centric nation, as a vegetarian, you were excluded.

By contrast, India's cuisine is the most inclusive in the world. With today being World Day for the Disabled, it is important to understand this inclusiveness. When we approach the inclusion of people with disability as progress–as proof of development like clean drinking water and good health care – we change the terms of the debate.

However, appealing to the public sense of morality or kindness is a mistake. It would be nice if that helped kids with disability to get into school, or adults with disability to get into the workforce. It would be nice if building and public transport were made accessible because it's the right thing to do, but, it is not happening. So let's try self–interest.

Over the past 20 years, America has developed a far more inclusive cuisine. Even in small cities, you can find Thai, Indian, Mediterranean, Middle Eastern and Chinese restaurants. And why? Not because people who come from those countries have the right to eat their own diet. It's because people have realized that the food tastes good and is worth buying.

We have to pitch inclusion in such a way that people want to do it. Why should a fit, young executive care about whether a building is accessible or not? She is so concerned about her cardiac health that she would never take a lift anyway. She loves the stairs. What's in it for her to put in ramps or an elevator?

One day she needs to make a big presentation and her laptop, LCD projector and collection of handouts are so heavy she has to stow them all in her wheeled suitcase. No worries–up the ramp and into the lift.

When she leaves her office, she wants to take her toddler to a mall for new shoes. She pops him in the pram and pushes him up the ramp. She has elderly parents with painful knee problems and they can't do stairs anymore. If they are ever going to see her new fifth–floor flat, there's got to be an elevator.

Why should a parent who has two typical children care whether kids with disabilities are included in his children's school? His kids will get a better education if they go to school with kids who have disability. A teacher who can convey her material successfully to a class which includes kids with learning problems, visual difficulties or hearing impairment is, by definition, a creative teacher.

Why should a healthy, productive citizen with a good job and a decent income care whether people with disabilities get hired? Unemployed people, with disability or not, are a drain on the enonomy. An employed citizen's hard–earned money gets taxed to support them and the money they could be earning. That's tax money which is not going into better roads, better health care, better schools. When employers make adjustments in the workplace for their staff who have disability, that immediately opens the door to more flexible arrangements for everyone.

This may worry those employers, but it shouldn't. Because concepts like flexitime, job–sharing, on–site crèches, and tele–commuting all make for a more human, more people–centred work environment and that translates into job satisfaction and higher productivity.

Inclusion just makes sense. So let's stop appealing to people's better instincts to bring it about. Appeal to their selfishness.

India's vegetarian cuisine developed from a basic premise that people need to eat and that nothing should be killed to feed them. How we got from that to shahi paneer and dal makhni is all masala and magic. A similar innovative approach should extend to disability.

Source: : Everyone's invited, The Times of India, New Delhi, 3 December 2007.

Top

Who is responsible?

Various non government organisations and civil society groups under the aegis of Bal Adhikar Abhiyan (BAA) highlighted the plight of children and differently–able people here on the occasion of International Day of Disabled Persons. They alleged that the negative mindset of the Government and other employers were responsible for the problems faced by the differently–abled.

Sanjeev Sheel of NGO Anchal said an application under the right to Information Act had revealed that while the Department of Social Welfare in Delhi had earmarked Rs.30 lakh for mentally challenged children for the year 2006–2007, only Rs. 27,460 had been spent. A query to the Ministry of Heavy Industries and Public Enterprises about a suitable mode of transport for the physically challenged revealed that there was no such vehicle available, said Mr. Sheel.

Recounting his helplessness in dealing with the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, 30–year–old Vinod, a resident of Nand Nagri, who had lost both his legs, said that he had applied for a public ago but was yet to be allotted one. An RTI application was filed with the MCD, which replied saying such cases were under consideration. A 30–year–old graduate, Vimla, who had disability in one leg, had intended to start a self–help group and wanted some land for the same, Unable to get land allotted by the Delhi Development Authority, she filed an RTI application with the Authority. It replied that institutional land, except for religious purposes, was allotted only through auction or allotted to Government and local bodies.

There were other physically challenged children and parents who shared their fears of leading an uncertain life with no hope for the future.

Source: “Negative mindset responsible for problems of the disabled”, The Hindu, New Delhi, 4 December 2007.

Top