It is a very good example of how society may bring barriers to social activities. The interesting part is that it is up to the same society to remove those barriers!
2024 and I find this video very relating. A true depiction of how societal exclusions are unnecessarily created due to lack of foresights. Then, the whole avoidable drama of fitting in ensues, creating several inconveniences and resource demands.
I think this is based on a short story because I remember reading one with this exact premise in 10th grade that still lives in my head rent-free to this day. For the life of me, I can't remember the name or author though
I believe this came from an idea by Vic Finkelstein, one of the founders of the Union of the Physically Impaired against Segregation (UPIAS). He was involved in the early days of what became Disability Studies.
I wish I could make this required viewing for anyone in political office. My local library put in a $25,000 wheelchair ramp, but did not make the entrance wheelchair accessible. My hospital has an entrance that I cannot navigate so have to call the hospital for someone to open the door for me. Walmart put barriers around things to prevent carts from scratching things - but the barriers prevent me from getting close enough in my chair to use the check-out, etc. Check-out aisles are too thin for me to go through them without knocking things off shelves.
This is so cool explained. My boyfriend is over 2 m tall, and he feels as well that the world could be built a little bit different, for all kinds of people....
What a real head up the ass concept! The able bodied in this scenario could just get a wheelchair themselves anyway, because people without disabilities have more options. I’m autistic and I want a cure for it, not acceptance. Acceptance won’t make the world a quieter place.
@@weareallbornmad410 I don't know about the film itself, but I do know it's based on the 1975 paper "To Deny or Not to Deny Disability - What is disability?" by Vic Finkelstein. Here's a link: www.independentliving.org/docs1/finkelstein.html
A sweet video. I remember one of my professors showing this to us in class. Also, I love the two long rambly comments under here utter missing the point of the video to complain about "ideology", and respect to the people trying to argue with them though it's mostly for naught.
That reminds me of one of those USA or UK for Africa charity events in reverse, it was Africa for Norway, in the video, you saw African people helping the people of Norway with heating systems, very good video.
The assumption seems to be invariably made, that if someone has a physical impairment or limitation, then by default that person must also have something of a barrier to what would otherwise pass for normal and acceptable interaction and acceptance in society, therefore to avoid embarrassment many people appear to choose not to notice and keep going? Educating and informing those who simply do not understand the true situation might seem to be the first step towards correcting this misunderstanding?
Not a bad film. Unfortunately, rather than use the appropriate term "non disabled", the film uses the inappropriate term "able bodied", thus undermining the Social Model of Disability.
By "cut people some slack" do you mean any comments that are not glowing with praise should be omitted? (Id already said it was not a bad film. What do you want; an Oscar?) As for your comment "It's a very old film" ... we established that the term "able-bodied" was inappropriate back in the mid-1970s. When was this film made?
I've been looking around for an accurate portrayal of the social model of disability for a while, so I'm quite glad I found this. Unfortunately, it's led me to be even less convinced by it. What it seems to be is the refusal to permit the word "normalcy" to enter one's mind about anything at all cost. I believe this is a mistake. I view normalcy as the state and condition of the many. It is also an element of normalcy that not everybody is born to comply with it at all times. This has to be counterbalanced by the many so that the few get to be integrated and face as few disadvantages as possible. I'm sympathetic to some claims of the social model, and I certainly agree with reducing barriers, however, this video is somewhat contradictory in its choice of words and also defeats the entire point of the analogy as I shall explain: the terms "disabled" or "physically impaired" or whatever euphemism you choose to employ imply a lack of ability of things which are humanly possible. I cannot fly, but this doesn't cause me to be disabled because no human can do this (without artificial help). Therefore, these terms necessitate a deviation from that which is "normal" or else the sheer existance of these terms doesn't make sense. Finally, the video is a bit morbidly ridiculous with regard to the main point that it seeks to make: what if there were a town of only wheelchair users? Well, I'm pretty sure there would be no construction of any houses, ceilings or doors at any height, no cars (unless designed, produced, and imported by the able-bodied outside world), no emergency services and, before too long, everyone would be dead. No ideology will ever be apt to defeat a reality like the fact that disabled people require the assistance of able-bodied people but not vice versa. We have to deal with it without surrendering this reality and thereby being ridiculous.
you do make a decent argument, and though I believe differently I am absolutely horrendous at organizing my thoughts, but I shall ATTEMPT it. firstly I should discuss the other models of disability, which lay as such: "The medical model sees disability as something that is ‘wrong’ with a person’s body or mind. For example this model might suggest that a disabled person is ‘suffering’ from an illness, disease, genetic defect or injury that would ideally be “treated and cured.” This way of thinking often makes people want to help by fixing the problem, maybe using drugs, surgery or other interventions. This way of thinking may also make people want to help by preventing transmission of the problem to other generations maybe by promoting interventions such as sterilization or contraception. The medical model is said to make the following assumptions: The young person (their body or mind) is the problem The problem may make difficult for it young person to make good decisions about their own life They are likely to need professionals to look after them If the problem cannot be fixed, they will never be equal to other young people" I shall conclude this in another part, as I am near my character limit
I love it....this should be on TV instead of commercials
The Adventures of the Disabled Village
(A Different Perspective) - Vic Finkelstein 1975.
It is a very good example of how society may bring barriers to social activities. The interesting part is that it is up to the same society to remove those barriers!
2024 and I find this video very relating. A true depiction of how societal exclusions are unnecessarily created due to lack of foresights.
Then, the whole avoidable drama of fitting in ensues, creating several inconveniences and resource demands.
This is fantastic. I wish there was a longer version that goes into more detail. 💖💖💖
There must be, it's obviously a clip lifted from something.
There is and I saw it once and am now looking for it. Anyone knows let me know
I think this is based on a short story because I remember reading one with this exact premise in 10th grade that still lives in my head rent-free to this day. For the life of me, I can't remember the name or author though
Who made this? Very interested in learning more about the "story" behind this video.
I believe this came from an idea by Vic Finkelstein, one of the founders of the Union of the Physically Impaired against Segregation (UPIAS). He was involved in the early days of what became Disability Studies.
I wish I could make this required viewing for anyone in political office. My local library put in a $25,000 wheelchair ramp, but did not make the entrance wheelchair accessible. My hospital has an entrance that I cannot navigate so have to call the hospital for someone to open the door for me. Walmart put barriers around things to prevent carts from scratching things - but the barriers prevent me from getting close enough in my chair to use the check-out, etc. Check-out aisles are too thin for me to go through them without knocking things off shelves.
What a brilliant animation so true
This is so cool explained. My boyfriend is over 2 m tall, and he feels as well that the world could be built a little bit different, for all kinds of people....
What a real head up the ass concept! The able bodied in this scenario could just get a wheelchair themselves anyway, because people without disabilities have more options.
I’m autistic and I want a cure for it, not acceptance. Acceptance won’t make the world a quieter place.
So, are the able-bodied people not able to use wheelchairs?
I'm looking for the whole film. Anyone know more about it or it's original name/source/director/author?
I'm looking for that too. Let me know if you find it, ok?
@@weareallbornmad410 I don't know about the film itself, but I do know it's based on the 1975 paper "To Deny or Not to Deny Disability - What is disability?" by Vic Finkelstein. Here's a link: www.independentliving.org/docs1/finkelstein.html
A sweet video. I remember one of my professors showing this to us in class.
Also, I love the two long rambly comments under here utter missing the point of the video to complain about "ideology", and respect to the people trying to argue with them though it's mostly for naught.
SHEEEEESH
Major Payne is a good example of an ableist that rather be that without being labeled.
Any ideas why this film would not be playing?
What a amezing illustration...love to see this animation and found very interesting!!
Love it
What year was this film made?
That reminds me of one of those USA or UK for Africa charity events in reverse, it was Africa for Norway, in the video, you saw African people helping the people of Norway with heating systems, very good video.
@J. D. A bit of tounge in cheek as they say
Brilliant!
wär vo de ph isch do?
Oh wait hold on
ha ha this is genius
The assumption seems to be invariably made, that if someone has a physical impairment or limitation, then by default that person must also have something of a barrier to what would otherwise pass for normal and acceptable interaction and acceptance in society, therefore to avoid embarrassment many people appear to choose not to notice and keep going?
Educating and informing those who simply do not understand the true situation might seem to be the first step towards correcting this misunderstanding?
I'm going to get in trouble for this but any comment on who built the town?
It is implied that the wheelchair users did
How did they build it though?
GREAT ONE!
💕
Brilliant
BRILLIANT
Not a bad film. Unfortunately, rather than use the appropriate term "non disabled", the film uses the inappropriate term "able bodied", thus undermining the Social Model of Disability.
+janaltus I think it is, unfortunately, just a product of it's time, and using outdated language.
The double negative in non-disabled (non and dis) turns that into a positive and equates to same thing. Maybe non-wheelchair users would be better.
It's a very old film. Cut people some slack for goddess sake‼️
By "cut people some slack" do you mean any comments that are not glowing with praise should be omitted? (Id already said it was not a bad film. What do you want; an Oscar?) As for your comment "It's a very old film" ... we established that the term "able-bodied" was inappropriate back in the mid-1970s. When was this film made?
True..well spotted
Uhmm ok
Society can accommodate disabled people without lying to itself that there is nothing wrong with disability.
I've been looking around for an accurate portrayal of the social model of disability for a while, so I'm quite glad I found this. Unfortunately, it's led me to be even less convinced by it. What it seems to be is the refusal to permit the word "normalcy" to enter one's mind about anything at all cost. I believe this is a mistake. I view normalcy as the state and condition of the many. It is also an element of normalcy that not everybody is born to comply with it at all times. This has to be counterbalanced by the many so that the few get to be integrated and face as few disadvantages as possible. I'm sympathetic to some claims of the social model, and I certainly agree with reducing barriers, however, this video is somewhat contradictory in its choice of words and also defeats the entire point of the analogy as I shall explain: the terms "disabled" or "physically impaired" or whatever euphemism you choose to employ imply a lack of ability of things which are humanly possible. I cannot fly, but this doesn't cause me to be disabled because no human can do this (without artificial help). Therefore, these terms necessitate a deviation from that which is "normal" or else the sheer existance of these terms doesn't make sense.
Finally, the video is a bit morbidly ridiculous with regard to the main point that it seeks to make: what if there were a town of only wheelchair users? Well, I'm pretty sure there would be no construction of any houses, ceilings or doors at any height, no cars (unless designed, produced, and imported by the able-bodied outside world), no emergency services and, before too long, everyone would be dead. No ideology will ever be apt to defeat a reality like the fact that disabled people require the assistance of able-bodied people but not vice versa. We have to deal with it without surrendering this reality and thereby being ridiculous.
Do you feel better getting that off your chest? I sure hope so, now go change yourself for the better please
@T. K. point me to the well thought out argumentation and I'll reconsider
@T. K. ha ha come come your comment was totally passagg - I was just retuning the favour
@T. K. toodles
you do make a decent argument, and though I believe differently I am absolutely horrendous at organizing my thoughts, but I shall ATTEMPT it. firstly I should discuss the other models of disability, which lay as such: "The medical model sees disability as something that is ‘wrong’ with a person’s body or
mind.
For example this model might suggest that a disabled person is ‘suffering’ from an
illness, disease, genetic defect or injury that would ideally be “treated and cured.” This
way of thinking often makes people want to help by fixing the problem, maybe using
drugs, surgery or other interventions. This way of thinking may also make people want
to help by preventing transmission of the problem to other generations maybe by
promoting interventions such as sterilization or contraception. The medical model is
said to make the following assumptions:
The young person (their body or mind) is the problem
The problem may make difficult for it young person to make good decisions
about their own life
They are likely to need professionals to look after them
If the problem cannot be fixed, they will never be equal to other young people" I shall conclude this in another part, as I am near my character limit
who is normal? who don’t have disabilities?