I'm not allowed to say the topic in a public post (though definitely in private, if you're at all interested), but you're right - it was interdisciplinary between humanities, arts, and some of the fiddly ones (gender studies, new media etc). You're absolutely right that we missed the target of the conference - it was officially supposed to be a feminist conference.
I believe most papers presented were more or less understandable (though honestly, a lot of the time I was outside trying to make sure there would be water to drink during the break, or directing people to the bathrooms, or for a crucial 20 minutes - hiding out in the wheelchair ramp trying to deal with someone having triggered me despite me telling her no.
We did - as it turned out - get two requests regarding accessibility, that were just not mentioned to either of the people in charge of it, it turns out. What is even - we had an e-mail and facebook address for accessibility issued. We put it on all our publications, and additionally posted specifically about it on different platforms. Every panel was opened with accessibility questions including a general invitation to approach the people with the tags for ay relevant need. I am fat and loud and was wearing a bright red dress. I've discussed accessibility with the organizers and presenters so much for weeks, one on one and in groups and in PMs and all the time. I gave a briefing. I gave a lecture about disability activism and philosophy and led a discussion about it. I made handy checklists (though I didn't consider specifically writing "if someone approaches you with an accessibility issue, don't insult and humiliate them - shut up and go get me"). The ironic!organizer and I had a talk specifically about the things she decided to add to her lecture, and knew I consider them ableist - and also I made a real effort to make sure she wasn't angry about the issue etc (apparently she was so ok with it she managed to forget, because she came to me for comfort after what happened, and when I told her she knew I didn't agree with her she had a moment of "oh, right"). Couldn't people just fucking have gotten one of the people in charge of accessibility? why did people not even consider doing that and how do I get them to yes consider it next time (if I ever do thing again esrghdgfhh)? OK, I'm done whining for now....
I believe most people honestly cared, and I believe it showed in most of their lectures. I should have emphasized more that being understandable was an issue. As for the person who was being unclear - I should have interrupted her and asked that she be clearer, and as for ironic!organizer
probably the best way one of those vaudeville canes??
no subject
Thank you , bb
I'm not allowed to say the topic in a public post (though definitely in private, if you're at all interested), but you're right - it was interdisciplinary between humanities, arts, and some of the fiddly ones (gender studies, new media etc). You're absolutely right that we missed the target of the conference - it was officially supposed to be a feminist conference.
I believe most papers presented were more or less understandable (though honestly, a lot of the time I was outside trying to make sure there would be water to drink during the break, or directing people to the bathrooms, or for a crucial 20 minutes - hiding out in the wheelchair ramp trying to deal with someone having triggered me despite me telling her no.
We did - as it turned out - get two requests regarding accessibility, that were just not mentioned to either of the people in charge of it, it turns out. What is even - we had an e-mail and facebook address for accessibility issued. We put it on all our publications, and additionally posted specifically about it on different platforms. Every panel was opened with accessibility questions including a general invitation to approach the people with the tags for ay relevant need. I am fat and loud and was wearing a bright red dress. I've discussed accessibility with the organizers and presenters so much for weeks, one on one and in groups and in PMs and all the time. I gave a briefing. I gave a lecture about disability activism and philosophy and led a discussion about it. I made handy checklists (though I didn't consider specifically writing "if someone approaches you with an accessibility issue, don't insult and humiliate them - shut up and go get me"). The ironic!organizer and I had a talk specifically about the things she decided to add to her lecture, and knew I consider them ableist - and also I made a real effort to make sure she wasn't angry about the issue etc (apparently she was so ok with it she managed to forget, because she came to me for comfort after what happened, and when I told her she knew I didn't agree with her she had a moment of "oh, right"). Couldn't people just fucking have gotten one of the people in charge of accessibility? why did people not even consider doing that and how do I get them to yes consider it next time (if I ever do thing again esrghdgfhh)? OK, I'm done whining for now....
I believe most people honestly cared, and I believe it showed in most of their lectures. I should have emphasized more that being understandable was an issue. As for the person who was being unclear - I should have interrupted her and asked that she be clearer,
and as for ironic!organizer
probably the best way
one of those vaudeville canes??