Wednesday, 26 October 2011

What message does royal patronage send?

"If it takes a royal or a celebrity to highlight the difficulties disabled people face, than that's not ideal, but at least the message is getting out.."

The thread isn't about royalty highlighting the plight of osteoporosis it is about the Daily Hate's willingness to on the one hand demean disabled people on benefits while on the other promote a disabling condition because it has royal backing. The point is about the hypocrisy of this particular paper.

As for 'the message is getting out' argument, yes it's true. The message is saying if you have osteoporosis you're genuinely disabled, therefore worthy of consideration by the Daily Heil and its readership; but, woe to the rest of you with so-called disabilities, because we're on your case and will continue to run our campaign of hate until the government gets the message!

As an afterthought to the OP and to comments made, this isn't about a royal or a celebrity highlighting the difficulties encountered by disabled people. This is about an individual using her position to focus on a particular condition because it's close to her heart. This is about individuals, maybe inadvertently, creating hierarchies of disability and conditions. This is about what conditions are acceptable to people of influence and editorial boards of newspapers.

We shouldn't be running our medical services on the whim of a royals personal connection to an illness or condition; nor should we be depending on a charity that taken the fancy of some celebrity to dole out equipment or services to disabled people. And, we certainly shouldn't be applauding the Daily Heil for jumping on a royal bandwagon.  

No comments:

Post a Comment