> Instead of "blind review", consider using "anonymous review". Context: Unintentionally perpetuates that disability is somehow abnormal or negative, furthering an ableist culture.
Such recommendations reflect the authors own prejudices.
Some forms of blinding like "Blind auditions" are literal and are largely indistinguishable from how blind people normally conduct auditions. "Blindness" is a symbol of justice and fairness and non-prejudice.
Blindness is also one of the easiest disabilities to achieve, temporarily or permanently. If blindness is at least neutral state of being, nothing stops one from wandering about with a blindfold. Somebody who fails to do so while talking about how blindness isn't a negative is insincere and all talk.
You can't just go and wander about in a blindfold - it requires practise and skill as well as some affordances from the environment: tactile pavements, audible traffic lights etc.
Blindness is perhaps somewhat negative in how it makes you vulnerable to some of the society's shortcomings, but then again aren't we all to some extent?
Consider people who are blind since birth vs people who are otherwise disadvantaged say because they will encounter more racism. Both can be shortcomings compared to the mode but does it make sense to talk of them as "negative"?
Ultimately in such matters I find that truth is the supreme value. If what you’re saying about a disability isn’t true, no matter what good intentions you may have, the things you’re saying are likely just going to confuse matters further.
The biggest problem with the guide on the point of blindness is it prescribes the correct attitude to have towards blindness, but people have all sorts of feelings about blindness, for all sorts of different and valid reasons. I think you’ve lost the plot to some extent when you start insisting that ANY disability shouldn’t be portrayed in a negative light, because the reality is people have many negative experiences with disability, there are positive experiences as well, but negative feelings are a big part of disability (even if you don’t feel them presently you’re probably felt them at some point), and not just for reasons of culture.
The blindfold example is a bit facetious, but if being blind is just as good as not being blind, why do people go to such lengths to stay sighted? Glasses are an entire industry. Why don’t people just live without sight? A theory about the world which cannot answer such questions is incomplete.
Such recommendations reflect the authors own prejudices.
Some forms of blinding like "Blind auditions" are literal and are largely indistinguishable from how blind people normally conduct auditions. "Blindness" is a symbol of justice and fairness and non-prejudice.
Blindness is also one of the easiest disabilities to achieve, temporarily or permanently. If blindness is at least neutral state of being, nothing stops one from wandering about with a blindfold. Somebody who fails to do so while talking about how blindness isn't a negative is insincere and all talk.