Hello FASA-heads, and welcome back from conference.
I really wish I could've ventured out to Gonzaga with you all - I could tell that everybody was pumped to go! Unfortunately, the Democratic Legislative District Caucus was on Saturday morning, and as a delegate for Obama, I felt that it was important to do my civic duty. But enough about my exploits.
What did you think of the NWFASA Conference? Why do we have this event - is there a point to it other than our own personal enjoyment?
Of course not - the power that is having so many charged Filipino American students from all around the Pacific Northwest is nothing short of awesome. The amount that we can learn from each other is so much more. The opportunities to network and work together is something that can only be beneficial.
How is our conference any different from other conferences that unite students from several universities? Is it just that because Conference applies to our lives as students and discusses issues of being Filipino that we value this sharing?
And this question extends to our own FASA here at the University as well. Is our presence here necessary, do we need to gather to have equal representation at UW and in America?
My own knee-jerk reaction is yes, and I don't think the existence of FASA or any other ethnic group is detrimental. The honest truth is that in America, everybody is trying to get a piece of the pie, and it seems like getting that piece is very hard. It is - not everybody in this country has the opportunities that we are opened to. Not everybody can go to university, or even graduate high school! The problem is when others assume that we as Filipino-Americans gain supposedly unfair advantages when the fact is that we have worked hard to get where we are.
Monday, April 7, 2008
Monday, November 26, 2007
SAB Meeting Update: Disability 101
Last Monday I attended the SAB meeting and there was a presentation called Disability 101 presented by Disability Advocacy Student Alliance (DASA) and the Student Disability Commissioner. They engaged the members of SAB in teaching some of the more politically correct terms to use around people with disabilities, which is well and good.
What I found more interesting is that they briefly explained the rhetoric behind how society has treated disability. Three models: Moral, Medical, Social. These models are chronologically ordered - past, present, and future.
The moral model is the claim that disabilities were due to something that the parents did wrong, or that their child is "touched" by a demon or something outrageous like that.
The medical model claims that disabilities are the inability of a person to conform to the norm. This is better in that it calls for treatment for the disabilities, but it is condescending in assuming that people with disabilities must strive to be "normal".
The social model turns the problem on its head - the disability is then that society fails to accomodate those with impairments. In this model is the idea that impaired peoples don't want to be viewed as broken, but that they just want to be viewed as different than the "statistical norm". Meaning that they don't have to live up to the same standards and thus it would be unjust for someone who is not in their position of impairment to force norms on them.
At the end they mentioned eugenics, or in some ways improving the human race by the elimination of disabilities through medical means, such as genetic engineering to eliminate autism. But the question would be why? I can understand if impaired peoples were being forced to get rid of something that defines who they are - identities, much like if someone asked a Filipino American that given the choice of being born white, would they?
Moreover, certain explanations of eugenics suggest the "designer baby" idea. My question is: the elimination of disabilities is well and good, as long as the recieving party is willing. But modifying a child's genes to conform to a standard defined by their parents - is that right? Is it right to "play God" or conform a child to a certain standard before they are even born? In my opinion, the answer is no.
What I found more interesting is that they briefly explained the rhetoric behind how society has treated disability. Three models: Moral, Medical, Social. These models are chronologically ordered - past, present, and future.
The moral model is the claim that disabilities were due to something that the parents did wrong, or that their child is "touched" by a demon or something outrageous like that.
The medical model claims that disabilities are the inability of a person to conform to the norm. This is better in that it calls for treatment for the disabilities, but it is condescending in assuming that people with disabilities must strive to be "normal".
The social model turns the problem on its head - the disability is then that society fails to accomodate those with impairments. In this model is the idea that impaired peoples don't want to be viewed as broken, but that they just want to be viewed as different than the "statistical norm". Meaning that they don't have to live up to the same standards and thus it would be unjust for someone who is not in their position of impairment to force norms on them.
At the end they mentioned eugenics, or in some ways improving the human race by the elimination of disabilities through medical means, such as genetic engineering to eliminate autism. But the question would be why? I can understand if impaired peoples were being forced to get rid of something that defines who they are - identities, much like if someone asked a Filipino American that given the choice of being born white, would they?
Moreover, certain explanations of eugenics suggest the "designer baby" idea. My question is: the elimination of disabilities is well and good, as long as the recieving party is willing. But modifying a child's genes to conform to a standard defined by their parents - is that right? Is it right to "play God" or conform a child to a certain standard before they are even born? In my opinion, the answer is no.
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Concluding Thoughts
What do you think about what we have gone over today?
Do you feel like this is leading us in a certain direction, towards any particular issues?
Do you know of any worthwhile news sources about the Philippines, Filipinos, or Fil-Ams?
Do you feel like this is leading us in a certain direction, towards any particular issues?
Do you know of any worthwhile news sources about the Philippines, Filipinos, or Fil-Ams?
Sunday, October 14, 2007
First Post! Goals and Upcoming Deadlines....
Here we go.
As the first post in the FASA PoliCom's online journal, I will list some of the goals I have for the school year.
- Create a yearly event that can be the focus of the Political Committee and not leave the Political Chair out dry.
- Facilitate the FASA member's better understanding of politics and social awareness. This can be accomplished by keeping members up to date on national and international events.
- Ensure that members understand what is happening politically on campus by getting involved in other organizations like the ASUW Senate, PISC, ASC, and other networking opportunities.
- Figure out good topics and an outline for Political Committee-headed FASA General Meeting on November 15th!
As the first post in the FASA PoliCom's online journal, I will list some of the goals I have for the school year.
- Create a yearly event that can be the focus of the Political Committee and not leave the Political Chair out dry.
- Facilitate the FASA member's better understanding of politics and social awareness. This can be accomplished by keeping members up to date on national and international events.
- Ensure that members understand what is happening politically on campus by getting involved in other organizations like the ASUW Senate, PISC, ASC, and other networking opportunities.
- Figure out good topics and an outline for Political Committee-headed FASA General Meeting on November 15th!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
