Service Organisations and Sexual Diversity: Sensory Impairment, Subcultures and Representation
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Service Organisations and Sexual Diversity: Sensory Impairment, Subcultures and Representation Author Abrahams, Warwick Ashkey Published 2012 Thesis Type Thesis (PhD Doctorate) School School of Human Services and Social Work DOI https://doi.org/10.25904/1912/3819 Copyright Statement The author owns the copyright in this thesis, unless stated otherwise. Downloaded from http://hdl.handle.net/10072/367772 Griffith Research Online https://research-repository.griffith.edu.au Service Organisations and Sexual Diversity: Sensory Impairment, Subcultures and Representation Warwick Ashley Abrahams BA (Hons) University of Queensland Grad Cert (Philanthropy & NpSt) Queensland University of Technology School of Human Services and Social Work Griffith Health Griffith University Submitted in fulfillment of the requirements of the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy June 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapters of the thesis…………………………………………………..i Synopsis...............................................................................iv Keywords.............................................................................iv Declaration...........................................................................v Acknowledgement................................................................vi Terminology........................................................................vii Syntax……….........................................................................xii Tables 1. Responses from blind persons........................26 2. Responses from d/Deaf persons.....................27 Part A Pictures of Difference Introduction.......................................................................1 Chapter One: Epistemology, Methodology and Context...........9 1.1 Research questions............................................................16 1.2 Methodologies...................................................................18 1.3 Rigour and ethics in data collection.................................32 1.4 Possible limitations and strengths of the study...............43 Chapter Two: Identity formation.............................................51 2.1 Fluidity of Identities………….............................................57 2.2 QLGBT identities – little match, less mix….....................63 2.3 Subcultures – are we there yet?......................................68 Chapter Three: Crip, Disabled and d/Deaf Identities............93 3.1 Exposing the ghost of Nazism……………………………..…….95 3.2 Crip identities...................................................................97 3.3 Sustaining the creation of multiple, artificial ‘normalities’…………………………….102 3.4 Exceptionality…………………............................................108 3.5 Body Theory....................................................................124 3.6 Social Identity and its connections.................................125 3.7 Blind persons and identity perceptions..........................129 3.8 On being d/Deaf and deafness........................................152 i. Chapter Four: Nonprofit Organisations................................169 4.1 The individual and organisations...................................172 4.2 Organisations and blind persons....................................182 4.3 Organizations for d/Deaf persons…………………………….188 4.4 Scoping QLGBT Organisations………..............................192 4.5 Nonprofit management issues........................................193 Part B Interpreting Diverse and Elusive Images Chapter Five: Thematic Analysis...........................................215 5.1 Identity processes and impacting fact0rs…………………222 5.2 Inhabiting diversity……………………………………………….236 5.3 Qwirly visible………………………………………………………..242 5.4 Exceptionality……………………………………………………….247 5.5 Coping and affirming…………………………………………….267 5.6 Interaction with peers……………………………………………269 5.7 Feeling ‘safe’…………………………………………………………284 5.8 Organisational concerns………………………………………..290 5.9 Imagined ways forward………………………………………….317 Chapter Six: Scintillas in the mist………..............................332 6.1 What happened to ‘the groups’?...................................334 6.2 Fragments of Theirstory………………………………………..338 6.3 Sustainable convergence of sustainable interests……..346 6.4 The quest for safe spaces………………………………………..350 6.5 Reflections in the organisational mirror…………………..350 6.6 Neo-groups, acknowledgment and peaks…………………351 6.7 Building IORs……………………………………………………….352 6.8 Organisations, exclusion, governance……………………..355 6.9 Adjusting the focus of the Third Sector……………………356 ii. APPENDICES Appendix One (a)..................................................................................386 Blindness and Sexuality Interests Collective Branch Proposal ca. 2003 Appendix One (b)..................................................................................388 Minutes (extract) of the first meeting 16th December 2002: proposed foundation of a Group ‘advocating on GLBT issues’, allied to BCA Appendix Two (a)..................................................................................390 Post-marking movements in organisational change Appendix Two (b)..................................................................................393 Robin McKenzie, CEO of BCA interviews Ross de Vent, creator of the internet group ozblinddiv Appendix Three.....................................................................................394 Sample advertisements for netsurvey.com.au and social networking Appendix Four (a)………………………………………………………………………398 Qwir blind persons and cyber social networking Appendix Four (b)……………………………………………………………………..400 About Vision Australia, adapted from their web site Appendix Five (a)………………………………………………………………………402 Questions for interviews with d/Deaf persons Appendix Five (b).................................................................................404 Questions asked of Deaf Australia Appendix Six..........................................................................................408 Cochlear implant internet group for LGBTQ persons Appendix Seven (a)...............................................................................409 Number of signing Deaf person Appendix Seven (b)..............................................................................410 Qwir Deaf persons and cyber social networking Appendix Eight……………………………………………………………………………411 Marshall’s Goodness Criteria Appendix Nine………………………………….................................................412 Contestations around language Appendix Ten……………………………………………………………………………..413 Profile Information from d/Deaf respondents Bibliography...........................................................................................414 iii. Synopsis The research deals with how blind or d/Deaf, Queer, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transvestite and Transgendered (QLGBT) citizens are recognized or not by their advocacy and service organization. QLGBT persons with sensory difference or impairment are largely excluded from QLGBT lives. Even for those persons who have access to broader worlds substantially off-limits for persons with sensory difference or impairment, being ‘who one really is’ may not be an option in those environments daily lived. Representation, acceptable stereotypes, dominant constructs, self-acceptance, community bonding and the establishment of truly representative organizations are issues in this research. Disability, being Queer blind, d/Deaf, and disabled are 'normal' even if not 'average'. Sexual diversity and sensory difference are normal in the realm of human and animal lived experience. The research has investigated how organisations can assist stakeholders to enjoy or at least survive in their multi- faceted identities. www.netsurvey.com.au was a specially created website designed to interview people who are Deaf, an Australian first in the field, now being emulated. A long and extensive publicity campaign brought self-selecting blind and d/Deaf persons to the research. Ambitions of the research included: painting a picture of what was happening to persons who were marginalized in marginal situations, opening up the topics of sensory difference and diverse sexualities to further study and debate, providing a forum that might augment the voices of persons who seek recognition, catalyzing activism and increasing focus on the issues. Key words Ableism, Advocacy, Blind, Civil Society, d/Deaf, Diversity, Exclusion, Identity, Lifestyles, Nonprofit organizations, Sexuality, Status, Stereotype, Stigma, Subcultures. iv. Declaration I certify that this thesis is my work and it has not previously been submitted for a degree or diploma in any university. To the best of my knowledge of my belief, the thesis contains no material previously published or written by another person except where due reference is made in the thesis itself. Signature....................................................... Warwick Ashley Abrahams Date........................ v. Acknowledgement Thanks, in order of appearance, to Guy Ramsay, Jeni Warburton, Paul Chantrill, Margaret Shapiro, Gail Pritchard, Kym MacFarlane and my three Examiners. You helped 'fit me into the box' that I needed to inhabit if I was to produce anything creditable at all. The intellect and enthusiasm of my supervisor, Dr Fiona Kumari Campbell sustained me through several part-time years. Confidence expressed by my Associate Supervisor Dr. Jane Fowler, help from Associate Professor Jayne Clapton plus goodwill conveyed by Professor Lesley Chenoweth energised my efforts. Gary Jaynes