On August 22, the New York Times ran an obituary for Sandy Allen, the tallest woman in the world at over 7 foot 7 inches tall. The piece chronicled a bit of Allen's life, focusing on the social prejudice she faced because of her stature. In many ways, the social prejudice Allen navigated was a bit like the cultural barriers that many people of short stature endure. In particular, one paragraph of the story captured the similarities. Speaking of acceptance, the reporter, Arriane Cohen, writes that in the age of civil rights, differences began to be more accepted. That is,
For "everyone except very tall people. Unlike the cultural rules for weight or ethnicity or looks or disability, the social mores for height still allow bystanders to stare and say whatever they’re thinking. Which for a very tall person, let alone a giant like Sandy Allen, means: “Wow, you’re really tall!” (possibly while whipping out a cellphone camera).
Of course, Arriane is not completely correct. While people who are above average in stature may be the focus of mocks and jeers, they are not alone. Many people with disabilities, including people of short stature, still earn the unwanted the attention. This oversight is not the only incorrect piece of the article. Just one paragraph above the section quoted above, Cohen wrote,
"But the circuit dried up in the 1960s, when audiences began seeing giants not as magical creatures but as sufferers of a medical ailment. Zoo-style objectification — of hair-covered men, of midgets — was out of fashion. It was the era of civil rights: We’re all the same on the inside, and we’re going to treat people as equals."
If Cohen is attempting to build emphathy around physical differences in humanity, she is not going to get much support from the dwarfism community if she continues to use the word midget. But nevertheless, the article was empowering in so far that it was about a person who is strikingly different from people of short stature in a physical sense, but who has much in common with people of short stature in a cultural sense.
The complete article can be found at this link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/22/opinion/22cohen.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
Great blog item, Gary! I was Sandy Allen's friend for 31 years and what this woman wrote was a bunch of bull. Unfortunately, most of the readers of her piece bought it and dragged out their hankies. Here is the comment I posted for her piece of fiction:
ReplyDeleteWow, I hate to burst your bubbles about this very touching story, but it's not even close to the truth! Sandy did NOT die alone or live her last years without family and friends. Yes, her school years were tough, but after she got her world's record as an adult her life became much more tolerable. She made good money working at the Guinness Museum of Records and later returned to Indiana to be a secretary. Sandy had many, many good friends who surrounded her. At the nursing home, she was well taken care of for the most part (it was, after all, a nursing home). There were 2 local women, her friends, who constantly watched out for her welfare and raised hell if things weren't right. I visited her at least once a month, and would have gone more often but I don't live in her town. She had many visitors -- maybe not every day, but who does? And the 2 wonderful women who watched over her promised Sandy that if she were dying, one of them would be with her so she wouldn't die alone -- and she was. Most of her family and friends visited her the day before she died. Her funeral and calling saw many notable visitors -- the mayors of Indianapolis and Shelbyville, some retired Pacers basketball players, Cincinnati Tall Club members and many more -- and more than 400 people signed the guest book.
If Sandy was alone the day the writer of this article visited, that was just one day out of many where she had plenty of attention. She shouldn't have judged Sandy's situation based on one day, and without talking to some of Sandy's friends and caretakers. I certainly hope her book was much better researched because this truly is sloppy, exploitative journalism. I was Sandy's friend for 31 years and knew her well. The portrayal of her in this story is sad all right -- and not because of Sandy's situation. Please know that she was well-loved and cared for!
Great blog item, Gary! I was Sandy Allen's friend for 31 years and what this woman wrote was a bunch of bull. Unfortunately, most of the readers of her piece bought it and dragged out their hankies. Here is the comment I posted for her piece of fiction:
ReplyDeleteWow, I hate to burst your bubbles about this very touching story, but it's not even close to the truth! Sandy did NOT die alone or live her last years without family and friends. Yes, her school years were tough, but after she got her world's record as an adult her life became much more tolerable. She made good money working at the Guinness Museum of Records and later returned to Indiana to be a secretary. Sandy had many, many good friends who surrounded her. At the nursing home, she was well taken care of for the most part (it was, after all, a nursing home). There were 2 local women, her friends, who constantly watched out for her welfare and raised hell if things weren't right. I visited her at least once a month, and would have gone more often but I don't live in her town. She had many visitors -- maybe not every day, but who does? And the 2 wonderful women who watched over her promised Sandy that if she were dying, one of them would be with her so she wouldn't die alone -- and she was. Most of her family and friends visited her the day before she died. Her funeral and calling saw many notable visitors -- the mayors of Indianapolis and Shelbyville, some retired Pacers basketball players, Cincinnati Tall Club members and many more -- and more than 400 people signed the guest book.
If Sandy was alone the day the writer of this article visited, that was just one day out of many where she had plenty of attention. She shouldn't have judged Sandy's situation based on one day, and without talking to some of Sandy's friends and caretakers. I certainly hope her book was much better researched because this truly is sloppy, exploitative journalism. I was Sandy's friend for 31 years and knew her well. The portrayal of her in this story is sad all right -- and not because of Sandy's situation. Please know that she was well-loved and cared for!
A query i don't know where else to ask:
ReplyDeleteWhy is the word "midget" considered an offensive word, and yet the word "dwarf" not? What is the difference in history between the two words? Is it simply that one has been "reclaimed" and the other not, by historical coincidence, or is there something else in the actual etymology?
Personally i find the word "dwarf" hard to use to describe a non-fictional person, simply because i grew up on fantasy fiction such as Lord of the Rings and thus have it strongly associated in my head with the connotation of a non-human, magical race.
Of course, i will use it to describe a person if that is the word they prefer to describe them, but it still feels a bit like calling someone "elf" or "goblin"...