Never been to either of these cons, but out of curiosity I took a look at both WisCon and WorldCon's sites and was not surprised to find a stark difference in the most basic framing. WorldCon uses the term "disability," it takes a few minutes to find that area of the site, and it makes reference to "special needs." Wiscon uses words like "universal design" and "access." I think a lot of people bounce back on the social model of disability if they've never heard of it because folks with no access needs (or with needs that are met by "normal" spaces) are comfortable in the world we live in and don't like the idea of such massive change, rather than a la carte change. But this story about WorldCon makes it pretty clear to me that a la carte just doesn't work.
It was a long time before I recognized my own access needs and their validity because the world is designed in a way that needs are termed "special," and it doesn't always feel like my needs are "important enough" for "special" access. I bet there are a lot of folks like this, who would take advantage of access that was offered just par for the course but wouldn't know to bring it up elsewhere. At a recent con I attended a PWD gathering where we started introductions with name, pronouns, and any access needs--about 1/3 of the group stated that they weren't sure what their access needs were because they were so new to being asked and hadn't had time to think about and name their needs. The first time I used ASL interpretation was at a con where many interpreters were available and some friends encouraged me to ask because I was really frustrated trying to hear in a workshop and couldn't focus on the content. I timidly asked, and though I hadn't requested interpreters, the coordinator was kind, helpful, and figured out a way to get me a team for the day and then hired additional interpreters the next day. My access was far better and I came away with a really good feeling about the event.
Of course, it's not always financially feasible to provide interpreters, and it is usually the more expensive, larger cons that can provide the ideal access of interpreters for every workshop. But even comparing WisCon and WorldCon on this, I notice that WorldCon emphasizes that interpreters may be available for some events and that they will not be paid. WisCon's policy seems to be a "we'll do our best!" which if not ideal is a better approach than "hey, uh, anyone want to volunteer?"
I'm considering saving up to go to WisCon one day, and I'm glad to see that y'all are at least putting forth a serious effort on access and framing it as a natural, common need for the whole con population rather than a "special" thing.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2012-09-03 09:24 pm (UTC)It was a long time before I recognized my own access needs and their validity because the world is designed in a way that needs are termed "special," and it doesn't always feel like my needs are "important enough" for "special" access. I bet there are a lot of folks like this, who would take advantage of access that was offered just par for the course but wouldn't know to bring it up elsewhere. At a recent con I attended a PWD gathering where we started introductions with name, pronouns, and any access needs--about 1/3 of the group stated that they weren't sure what their access needs were because they were so new to being asked and hadn't had time to think about and name their needs. The first time I used ASL interpretation was at a con where many interpreters were available and some friends encouraged me to ask because I was really frustrated trying to hear in a workshop and couldn't focus on the content. I timidly asked, and though I hadn't requested interpreters, the coordinator was kind, helpful, and figured out a way to get me a team for the day and then hired additional interpreters the next day. My access was far better and I came away with a really good feeling about the event.
Of course, it's not always financially feasible to provide interpreters, and it is usually the more expensive, larger cons that can provide the ideal access of interpreters for every workshop. But even comparing WisCon and WorldCon on this, I notice that WorldCon emphasizes that interpreters may be available for some events and that they will not be paid. WisCon's policy seems to be a "we'll do our best!" which if not ideal is a better approach than "hey, uh, anyone want to volunteer?"
I'm considering saving up to go to WisCon one day, and I'm glad to see that y'all are at least putting forth a serious effort on access and framing it as a natural, common need for the whole con population rather than a "special" thing.