The whole column is supposedly about disability in SF/F, but the person running it seems to end up with people who don't actually understand disability issues rather too often. I'm not certain if the issue is her understanding of disability, or just that she's trying to get people to write articles about it, from a genre where people historically have not the first clue about disability.
The representation of disability in SF/F is one of my personal campaigning foci, and cross-links into what I'm trying to do in writing SF/F, so this isn't so much running off on a hobby-horse in unintended directions, as core to stuff I'm doing anyway.
As it turns out, I think I basically said what I wanted to for a follow-up in my reply to her post on Jim Hines' blog. I'll use that as the core for a second post and just top and tail it with the appropriate links, mostly to have it on my blog rather than a forgotten post elsewhere.
no subject
The representation of disability in SF/F is one of my personal campaigning foci, and cross-links into what I'm trying to do in writing SF/F, so this isn't so much running off on a hobby-horse in unintended directions, as core to stuff I'm doing anyway.
As it turns out, I think I basically said what I wanted to for a follow-up in my reply to her post on Jim Hines' blog. I'll use that as the core for a second post and just top and tail it with the appropriate links, mostly to have it on my blog rather than a forgotten post elsewhere.