[nfbwatlk] Target thinks blindness is a laughing matter:

Thu Jan 3 21:24:33 CST 2008

Fellow listers:

I realize that Kay is mightily perturbed over this whole incident. Who 
can blame her? But let's get the emotion out of the discussion and look 
at this logically in light of NFB philosophy and in light of what might 
be effective. I realize that what I say next may not go down well with 
some of you. So be it; you elected me to lead and you have the power of 
the vote; my term is up this year. (grin)

First, let's consider Lisa's suggestion that we go to the press 
concerning this incident. If Kay were sighted, would this incident have 
been worthy of press notice? I submit that the answer is a resounding 
NO! The press wouldn't give the time of day to someone who issued a 
press release saying they were laughed at or treated rudely at a store. 
The general response would be: if you don't like it, shop elsewhere! 
Then if this is true and given that we of NFB wish to be integrated into 
society on the basis of equality with the sighted and if we maintain 
that blindness is just another characteristic with which we must live 
and is nnot much more than a nuisance, do we *really* wish to be treated 
differentially with respect to blindness? I submit that the answer to 
this question, too, is a resounding NO. I further submit that 
complaining to the press about this would play on the sympathy card and 
in the end would accomplish a purpose quite contrary to that which we 
all want -- to be treated the same as everyone else. So I believe that 
trying to arrange a protest or get pres coverage of this incident is 
counterproductive at best.

Now let's consider how effective a boycott might be. Yes, I know; we all 
grew up with knowledge of the glory days of civil rights when 
African-americans boycotted busses and other services. But in the 
instances where such boycotts were effective, African-americans were a 
majority of the customers of the entities being boycotted. That is not 
the situation here. Target has revenues of over $2 billion a year; any 
boycott we might arrange would be a drop -- not just in a bucket but in 
a thimble -- compared to this revenue. So it would be like spitting into 
the wind. It would be wasted effort. WE have enough discrimination 
problems so that we don't need to scatter our shots on ventures that are 
not likely to be effective.

The one possible way I can see to protest Kay's treatment would be for 
her to file a complaint with the U.s. Department of Justice under Title 
III of the ADA alleging that she didn't receive reasonable 
accommodations in gaining access to the menu. But this is a long, 
drawn-out process and, I submit, not worth the bother.

Am I saying that what happened to Kay was right? Of course not. Is it of 
sufficient gravity to make a Federal case out of? I don't think so. 
There's a lot in life that isn't right. But sometimes the best thing to 
do is to ignore it or, in this case, take one's business to a different 
store.

The Serenity Prayer applies in spades!

Now I'll put on my fire-resistant suit. <g>

Mike Freeman, President
NFB of Washington

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Owenblue2 at aol.com
  To: nfbwatlk at nfbnet.org
  Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2008 11:43 PM
  Subject: Re: [nfbwatlk] Target thinks blindness is a laughing matter:

  Ok; let's see how much they laugh if we boycott their stores and Pizza 
Hut
  as well. I think you should go to the press. I am furious and mad as a 
hornet!
  How dare they treat you this way!

  Whatever you decide to do I support you all the way.

  Lisa Owen

  **************************************See AOL's top rated recipes
  (http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  _______________________________________________
  nfbwatlk mailing list
  nfbwatlk at nfbnet.org
  http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbwatlk
-------------- next part --------------
Fellow listers:

I realize that Kay is mightily perturbed over this whole incident. Who can blame her? But let's get the emotion out of the discussion and look at this logically in light of NFB philosophy and in light of what might be effective. I realize that what I say next may not go down well with some of you. So be it; you elected me to lead and you have the power of the vote; my term is up this year. (grin)

First, let's consider Lisa's suggestion that we go to the press concerning this incident. If Kay were sighted, would this incident have been worthy of press notice? I submit that the answer is a resounding NO! The press wouldn't give the time of day to someone who issued a press release saying they were laughed at or treated rudely at a store. The general response would be: if you don't like it, shop elsewhere! Then if this is true and given that we of NFB wish to be integrated into society on the basis of equality with the sighted and if we maintain that blindness is just another characteristic with which we must live and is nnot much more than a nuisance, do we *really* wish to be treated differentially with respect to blindness? I submit that the answer to this question, too, is a resounding NO. I further submit that complaining to the press about this would play on the sympathy card and in the end would accomplish a purpose quite contrary to that which we all want -- to be treated the same as everyone else. So I believe that trying to arrange a protest or get pres coverage of this incident is counterproductive at best.

Now let's consider how effective a boycott might be. Yes, I know; we all grew up with knowledge of the glory days of civil rights when African-americans boycotted busses and other services. But in the instances where such boycotts were effective, African-americans were a majority of the customers of the entities being boycotted. That is not the situation here. Target has revenues of over $2 billion a year; any boycott we might arrange would be a drop -- not just in a bucket but in a thimble -- compared to this revenue. So it would be like spitting into the wind. It would be wasted effort. WE have enough discrimination problems so that we don't need to scatter our shots on ventures that are not likely to be effective.

The one possible way I can see to protest Kay's treatment would be for her to file a complaint with the U.s. Department of Justice under Title III of the ADA alleging that she didn't receive reasonable accommodations in gaining access to the menu. But this is a long, drawn-out process and, I submit, not worth the bother.

Am I saying that what happened to Kay was right? Of course not. Is it of sufficient gravity to make a Federal case out of? I don't think so. There's a lot in life that isn't right. But sometimes the best thing to do is to ignore it or, in this case, take one's business to a different store.

The Serenity Prayer applies in spades!

Now I'll put on my fire-resistant suit. <g>

Mike Freeman, President
NFB of Washington

----- Original Message -----
From:
mailto:Owenblue2 at aol.com Owenblue2 at aol.com
To:
mailto:nfbwatlk at nfbnet.org nfbwatlk at nfbnet.org
Sent:
Wednesday, January 02, 2008 11:43 PM
Subject:
Re: [nfbwatlk] Target thinks blindness is a laughing matter:
Ok; let's see how much they laugh if we boycott their stores and Pizza Hut 
as well. I think you should go to the press. I am furious and mad as a hornet! 
How dare they treat you this way!

Whatever you decide to do I support you all the way.

Lisa Owen
**************************************See AOL's top rated recipes
( http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004 http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004
)
_______________________________________________
nfbwatlk mailing list
mailto:nfbwatlk at nfbnet.org nfbwatlk at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbwatlk http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbwatlk