Tag: shruti pushkarna

By Shruti Pushkarna

Before I delve into this piece, I’d like to congratulate Team MxM on their tenth anniversary. Feels like it was eons ago, when I joined the team in August 2011. As my Editor handed me varied assignments, I saw myself mature and learn. Even today, I credit a great deal to MxM for helping me refine my writing style and develop a deeper understanding of issues. I continue my association with the team, with this fortnightly column on Media and Disability, with the belief that awareness can help create an empathetic society.

As a young girl, 10 or 12 years of age, I was quite interested in pursuing a sport. Badminton, specifically. But it wasn’t easy to nurture my passion.

At school, teachers only seemed to care about the academic scorecard of every student. If you so much asked to be excused for a sporting event, you were deemed lazy and unintelligent. There was no talk around the importance of sports in shaping one’s personality, team spirit and confidence.

At home, parents were busy grappling with their daily difficulties due to my mother’s chronic illness. However, on my insistence, they got me a temporary membership to a sports club nearby. I have vivid memories of that summer day, jumpy, all dressed up, and a racket in hand. I walked in with a beaming glow, as if I had already won my first game.

But the reality was very different from what I had imagined while lacing up my shoes that afternoon. Older men, who dominated the courts, overlooked me. I waited patiently for my turn. This repeated a few times, also because I didn’t have anyone my age to play with.

Soon I made peace, deciding not to pursue this interest further. Once in a blue moon, I would find a friend to play with, but the vehemence was gone.

Why am I reliving this childhood episode today, after all these years?

Sports have been the flavour of the season. After India’s best performance in four decades at the Tokyo Olympics, the Paralympic medal tally brought more cheer. India’s global ranking moved up to 24, with five golds in our kitty.

Each of these champions, who made the country proud, has a story to tell. An account of their beginnings, the budding interest, the journey, the follies, those who supported them, those who shunned them, an account laden with respective set of challenges and achievements.

As the medals started coming in, the Indian audiences began to take notice of a body of sports they never really followed. People on Twitter made open confessions, some journalists even, that they’d never seen Paralympics or any tournament involving Para sports.

It was the success rate that forced everyone to watch and applaud. Thanks to our shooters, archers and athletes, the national conversation steered away from cricket and focused on people beyond the average able-bodied citizen.

Between 1968 and 2021, India won 12 medals altogether. Whereas we got 19 just in this year! The Paralympics created new sporting icons for the country. This was our chance to acknowledge human ability beyond disability. Not just celebrating them as Heroes on primetime but recounting their additional challenges and the need for access.

Inclusion. I kept scanning media coverage for this one word, something the disabled community has long been fighting for. The focus of most news items (barring a few exceptions) in both print and television was on the divine, almost supernatural abilities of the winners.

There was no mention of how the player made his or her way through an inaccessible environment. What are the hurdles in infrastructural access? How difficult is it to get a corporate sponsor or a government body to arrange for special equipment or travel? What is the kind of money allocated to Para sports in the total sports budget?

The other obvious thing missing from the discourse was ‘disability’ itself. What does it mean to live on the fringes of society, unseen and neglected? What is it to be excluded from mainstream activities of education, employment or recreation simply because the physical spaces are ridden with barriers?

Most persons with disabilities lead undignified lives, because they are dependent and confined to the four walls of their homes. They are not seen as contributing members of the community. So if a disabled person manages to achieve something, it comes with a ‘Wow’ element. Because let’s admit it, a majority of us cannot fathom a reality where persons with disabilities lead normal lives.

It took nineteen medals since 1968, for us to nationally acknowledge their feat. Wonder how many more will it take for the media to look beyond their special abilities.

Sport is believed to be an enabler and an equaliser. People from different backgrounds compete on a common front. The same principle applies to disability. The victorious images of our Para champions can wash away the stereotypes of handicap. Once seen in an active avatar, the world can perceive the disabled folk as people with varied characteristics. See them as people first and disabled after.

Insensitivity and apathy springs from our inability to imagine a diverse scenario. Social media was full of ridiculous jokes and cartoons. One of them stated, that we should just break one or two limbs of our sportspersons before the next Olympics.

Reading that made me angry. Just like the time someone got into a Twitter row with me, saying the disabled folk have no business going out to a shopping mall.

But what made me angrier were the shallow interactions and on the surface reporting around this sporting milestone.

The media had the opportunity to bust a few myths. This was a chance to understand that disability is only a condition, and not something that defines a person’s identity.

Shooter Avani Lekhara became the first Indian woman to win a gold at Paralympics. This was an occasion for the media to investigate the state of women with disabilities. How many of them manage to get an education? How many of them face abuse inside and outside their homes due to their gender and bodily limitations?

I can go on ranting, but the moot point is that people simply don’t know enough about disability. Questions need to be asked. Situations need to be probed into. No amount of cash prizes and gifts or airtime will compensate for a faceless existence that the society has handed out to its 2.68 crore population.

Shruti Pushkarna is a former journalist (part of the founding team of MxMIndia) who has moved full-time to the social sector. Shruti writes for MxMIndia every other Thursday. Her views here are personal. You can reach her via Twitter at @shrutipushkarna

By Shruti Pushkarna

A little over a year ago, the novel coronavirus unleased a global pandemic. In March 2020, the country entered a lockdown. The term seemed alien to most people who’d never been forced to stay indoors, barring those who had witnessed temporary impositions during the Emergency or the wars with the neighbouring countries. Of course not counting persons with disabilities, chronic illnesses or the elderly who remain confined for varied reasons (irrespective of the state-enforced measures).

Not only lockdown, many new phrases were introduced into our daily lingo. Remote work, virtual meetings, new normal, social distancing (even though it was physical distancing, I wonder why we called it that), Zoom classes, online hangouts. And let’s not forget the trending obsessions of the lockdown period. Social media posts exhibiting culinary art, workout regimes, TikTok memes, YouTube tutorials on everything under the sun, nature photography (probably the first time people had time to pause and process the beauty around them), bird spotting et cetera.

The Greek philosopher Heraclitus said, “The only thing that is constant is change.” In the past year, the world underwent change constantly and rapidly. Whether it was the rising number of Covid cases, mortality rate, shortage of supplies, hoarding of medicines, bare minimum facilities for the medical fraternity or job losses, every day some bleak dimension was added to our reality.

But not all change was bad. The altering dynamics also brought in different coping mechanisms. We discovered ‘new means and centers of operation’. Schools, colleges, offices or any other forms of professional/social engagement moved online, easily accessible from the comfort of our homes. In the disability space, people termed it as a great opening, a window of opportunity which had the potential of blurring (if not entirely eradicating) the barriers that kept persons with disabilities tucked away from the mainstream.

Disabled people who had access to technology and internet suddenly found themselves included in the virtual scheme of things. Online classes facilitated the integrated mode of education, bringing teachers and study material to students who were otherwise forced to drop out of school, given the inaccessibility of physical spaces and teaching modes. Similarly, employment options opened up for those who had the skills and the qualification but remained jobless because accommodating them in an office environment seemed unfathomable to potential employers.

Universal vulnerability and fear of an unknown virus helped some of us realise how our environment can be disabling, sometimes more than an actual physical or mental impairment. Yes, people were overwhelmed, but they also learnt ways to battle a ‘never-faced-before’ adversity. The world didn’t cease to function. Education, employment, public services, travel, leisure, all resumed, albeit in innovative ways.

What’s obvious here is our ability to deal with a challenge when it impacts the majority population. Same solutions weren’t explored when it was a subsection of disabled, women, transgender, poor or any other labeled (read marginalised) group. Technology emerged as an answer to most limitations caused by Covid-19.

For some years now, and especially after the outbreak, various discussions indicate that we’ve entered the world of data and bio-warfare. But technology isn’t the devil here. Just like morphine can ease someone’s pain and kill another, the handler decides the scope of its usage.

Technology has created a level playing field, bringing people closer and making possibilities real for persons with disabilities. But more than tech innovations, it’s about the choices we make as individuals or businesses or governments, which can either enable or disable citizens.

One year down the line, are we aware that our choices impact other people’s lives?

Just like we can choose to wear a mask to prevent another person from catching the virus, we can choose to create an environment that is inclusive. Leaders can choose to implement policy that will reinforce accessibility in every sphere, be it physical or digital. Tech giants can choose to create solutions that will cater to the needs of the disabled as much as the able-bodied. Logically, a larger customer base makes for affordable and cost-effective products/services. Influencers like the media can choose to amplify challenges faced by persons with disabilities, in the post-Covid era where humans are likelier to understand each other’s difficulties.

Ignorance and indifference can no longer be an excuse for the ableist society to look away from the problems that became evident in the past year. We all got a taste of captivity which was exclusively associated with the disabled, earlier.

Having lived through a near disaster in 2020 and heading into an uncertain future, we have the choice to remain selfish or empathetically co-create a conducive milieu.

Shruti Pushkarna heads operations of the New Delhi-based Score Foundation where she works as Director-Programmes & Communications. She is a former journalist (part of the founding team of MxMIndia) who has moved full-time to the social sector. Shruti writes for MxMIndia every other Thursday. Her views here are personal. While you mull over your life choices, Shruti will be back in a few weeks with more questions, experiences, accounts and inspiration. You can tweet your comments and suggestions to @shrutipushkarna

By Shruti Pushkarna

As a little girl, I enjoyed going to book fairs and fetes with my father. Apart from the daddy-daughter time, I looked forward to buying new toys, books and other items of interest. Here’s a picture of a painted rock I picked out on one such outing. The text on the rock reads: “Daggers and spears are not as sharp as tongues.”

I think my father was a bit intrigued at the choice of a four-year-old, wondering if I really understood what the quote meant. Words can either hurt or heal, was a lesson I grew up with. I was repeatedly told that once uttered, you can never take back your words. So I need to be cautious of what and how I communicate.

Language is a big part of our cultural identity, in how it shapes us. Terminology, over a period of time, seeps so deep into the fabric of society that certain words become synonymous with ideas, people, situations and communities. We often don’t even realise how the choice of words stems from an almost subconscious state of mind.

Let’s be honest. How many of us while driving, have rolled down the window and yelled at a pedestrian who suddenly jumped in front of the car, “Are you blind?” Or incessantly honked at someone ahead of us who refused to move, screaming, “Are you deaf?”

When I was in school, some teachers would often address the weaker students as dumb or retarded. And since school bears such a great influence on a child’s mind, most of us grew up thinking these terms were ‘okay’ to use.

Persons with disabilities have been raging an eternal battle against stereotypes, misconceptions and inappropriate language. Unfortunately, common usage has made some phrases, an intrinsic part of urban parlance. These are no longer restricted to addressing a person with a specific physical or mental condition. The negative connotation of such terms, initially associated with disability, has extended to a wide spectrum of people. Regular utterances include lame, deaf, mental, dumb, freak and so on. Come to think of it, I find it hard to keep track of the times I’m going wrong.

But gradually things are improving. Today, people are able to recognise certain terms as outrightly offensive. In October 2020, actress-turned-politician, Khushbu Sundar called the Congress a “mentally retarded” party. Following a hue and cry by rights group and twitterati, the newly inducted BJP MP had to apologise for her insensitive remarks. It helped that the media was up in arms too. But very often, the media overlooks (and even uses) wrong phraseology, due to its own lack of understanding.

In his first term, Prime Minister Narendra Modi replaced the term ‘viklang’ with ‘divyang’, moving towards a more positive, divine perception. The new Disabilities Act also laid greater emphasis on rights and dignity, with a promise to ‘empower’. In fact, Section 92 (a) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 carries a minimum prison term of six months that may go up to five years for publicly insulting a person with disability. And yet, politicians including cabinet ministers continue using terms like handicapped, physically challenged or mentally retarded, mindless of the damage they cause.

There was a recent Twitter post which pointed out the obnoxious language used by the Karnataka Sports Association for Physically Handicapped. The official poster (image below) called for participants who are blind, dwarf, mentally retarded and physically challenged. There was no mention of politically correct terms like persons with blindness or dwarfism, or intellectual disability.

@ParalympicIndia utter shame to see one of the events sanctioned by you using this disgraceful word ‘Mental Retards’ to refer to persons with intellectual disability. Can I know why in 2021 your leadership still fails to avoid such blunders? @DeepaAthlete care to comment? pic.twitter.com/yIMh7E1VXp

— Dr. Chennapragada (She/Her) (@Jussri) February 23, 2021

Maybe it’s time that establishments, including government bodies, corporates, media, education institutions and disability organisations put together a Code of Conduct and guidelines clarifying the Do’s and Don’ts. I’m still a novice in the domain, but for starters, I have curated my own list.

Words to Avoid

Abnormal: There is nothing abnormal about a person with disability, their condition simply doesn’t fit our general understanding of ‘normal’. The ‘norm’ is relative to people from varied backgrounds and levels of exposure.

Crippled: Unless referred to inanimate objects, crippled is deemed offensive. It’s commonly used for someone with a physical disability, but the word focuses on the deficit rather than the person.

Disadvantaged: It’s true that a person with disability lacks a certain functionality but they might not see themselves as disadvantaged. The ableist usage of this term, automatically puts anyone without a disability in an advantageous position, which need not be true.

Invalid: Just limited by a condition, doesn’t make the person invalid. It sounds hostile. In fact, recently researching for a government rule, I came across the term ‘invalid carriage’ for vehicles that are modified to be used by disabled drivers.

Lame: Used like crippled, for someone who has trouble walking. In urban usage, lame has become synonymous with weak, loser, uncool.

Mentally challenged: If the mental condition is not specified, the acceptable terms are mental illness/disability, intellectual disability or developmental disability.

Patient: If the person is not receiving any active treatment, he or she is not a patient. Their condition, visible or invisible maybe lifelong, but that doesn’t make them a patient at all times.

Retard: A derogatory term which is increasingly used in modern day slang, not restricted to disability.

Specially-abled: There is nothing special about a person with disability. Yes, as a person, he or she may have abilities that are special but that’s true for anyone. Unnecessary heroic references should be omitted.

Victim: There is a tendency to view disabled people as victims to bad karma in past life or suffering punishment from God, and hence the impairment. They are people, born with a medical condition that is part of their being as much as other traits of their personality.

Wheelchair-bound: The word ‘bound’ indicates confinement. On the contrary, wheelchair is an enabler, a mobility aid. So the person is technically a wheelchair user.

While using correct terminology is important, respect and equality emanate from empathy. If we can show compassion and be gracious in our interactions with persons with disabilities, we can organically arrive at our own understanding of what’s right or wrong, patronising or unassuming.

Shruti Pushkarna heads operations of the New Delhi-based Score Foundation where she works as Director-Programmes & Communications. She is a former journalist (part of the founding team of MxMIndia) who has moved full-time to the social sector. Shruti writes for MxMIndia every other Thursday. Her views here are personal. She can be reached via Twitter at @shrutipushkarna

By Shruti Pushkarna

New Year is all about hope. We go to bed on December 31, hoping that there will be something miraculously different about January 1. There is almost a Cinderella feel to it. For a short period, most of us believe that we will wake up to a changed, better scenario. I’ve decided to indulge myself too, and make this last piece of the year, all about what I want to see in 2021.

But a little disclaimer before I pull out my euphoric list that promises to make inclusion somewhat of a reality starting New Year’s day. This piece is written in a lighter vein, any noticeable sarcasm is incidental. 

Accessible news telecast for all

All Indian language news channels launch a special broadcast service accessible to persons with different types of disabilities. People with hearing, speech or vision impairment as well as those with learning or intellectual disability won’t need to seek help from the able-bodied to catch the latest news.

New hiring policy to include Persons with Disabilities (PwDs)

All private media companies introduce a mandatory human resource policy to include PwDs in their workforce. A detailed list of jobs taking into account 21 types of disabilities mentioned in the RPWD Act 2016, has been created in consultation with domain experts. The move has been initiated to generate empathy and raise awareness about the daily challenges faced by the disabled.

A disability-sensitive stylesheet issued by the Broadcast Associations

Acknowledging the often inappropriate and politically incorrect language used by the media, the broadcasting bodies have decided to enforce a new stylesheet with accurate terminology and expression with regards to reporting on disability issues. This will ensure the omission of crude terms like lame, mentally retarded, wheelchair bound, dumb et cetera. 

Disabled representation a must on news debates

Just like the panellists from varied political leanings, caste or gender groups or specific domain expertise, primetime debates on issues of national relevance will include representatives from the disabled community. Discussions on rape law, healthcare, Covid vaccination programmes, politics and business of the day, will voice opinions of persons with disabilities, regarding them as equal citizens of the country.

Special programming on life despite disability

A dedicated series of shows to be produced regularly, helping society understand what it means to live a life with an impairment. The coverage will include challenges, accomplishments, available resources or the lack of it, private and governmental initiatives for better opportunities and so on. The programming will go beyond mere tokenism or unnecessarily heroic portrayal of pathetic situations. 

All news websites to become accessible

Ensure all content and the digital medium of publishing is in line with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines. The W3C Accessibility recommendations are put together after consultation with people from the industry, disability organisations, government and research labs to make digital content accessible to people with auditory, cognitive, neurological, physical, speech and visual disabilities. Most web content developers are unaware of these guidelines and therefore mainstream websites remain out of bounds. For instance, a lot of news websites have pop up ads which interfere with screen reading software used by visually impaired people. The less ignorant techies manage to circumvent such issues, making the content available to a wider audience. 

Post Covid-19 scenario

Journalists will periodically track the Covid-19 aftermath vis-à-vis disabled population. Whether it’s about organising special vaccination camps, tracking the side-effects of possible treatments, inclusive healthcare facilities, challenges of commuting in the absence of a caretaker, food and medicine supply chains for the most vulnerable, newscasts will include all such issues in their daily editorial agenda. 

Disability: new kid on the block

A new beat specifically dedicated to disability will ensure that coverage of issues pertaining to this domain make it to the telecast beyond the good news segment or the striking image of the day. This will eventually encourage journalism schools to include disability studies in the curriculum, promoting sensitivity towards the 2.68 crore population (severely underquoted official figures).

I know what you are thinking. Is all of this even attainable? Are we being led to a delusive perception of a world that treats everyone equally? Or if you are the practical sorts, then maybe you are wondering, what kind of resources will it take to shape this fantastical plan into reality?

It’s possible and it doesn’t take too much. The first step to inclusion is a simple acknowledgment of the ‘other’. Covid-19 has taught us ways of adjusting to a new normal. In the case of disability too, the notion of normal is a bit different, that’s all.

Technology, creativity and some initial financial investments can help us source solutions that can remove barriers. The only real blockade is our ‘exclusionary’ mindset, the tendency to box people out of our lives assuming it doesn’t impact our existence.

But the truth is we are just as vulnerable as the person next door. Thanks to the pandemic and other environmental disasters in the past year, we’ve lived through some horrors we had never imagined. So why not focus on the upside and the stuff we hadn’t put our minds to earlier. Can we start by making the disabled population an intrinsic part of the target group?

Borrowing Alfred Tennyson’s famous lines “Ring out the old, ring in the new…”, let’s ring in the new year with the promise of building a conducive environment for all.

Shruti Pushkarna heads operations of the New Delhi-based Score Foundation where she works as Director-Programmes & Communications. She is a former journalist (part of the founding team of MxMIndia) who has moved full-time to the social sector. Shruti writes for MxMIndia every other Thursday. Her views here are personal. She can be reached via Twitter at @shrutipushkarna