![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Dec. 3rd, 2015
Inspiration porn
Dec. 3rd, 2015 02:48 pmOver on ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
alex_antonin's tumblr, he reposted something from someone else.
https://t.co/qOQN93V2Sg
It's about a image being posted by Autism Canada.
It may look fine at first glance.
But when you stop and think about it, it's an example of an all too common with campaigns "for" people with various disabilities.
It's not actually about the people with the disability. It's about the *non*-disabled.
In this case, it's holding them up as an "inspiration". It's about *us* felling good" for "helping" *them*.
Other examples are all the comments about how "brave" people with disabilities are, or how hard their lives are.
They disabled aren't being treated as real people with real problems, but as props for getting an effect.
Thus the phrase "inspiration porn".
In this particular case, it's doubly bad in that by using the phrase "how good we can be" it encourages the people without the disability to "be good" to the people with it.
Why is that bad? Because it encourages people to use their own judgment as to what is "good" for the disabled person.
This almost never goes well. Most blind people have horror stories about people offering unasked-for "help". I know a couple who have been *injured* when some idiot grabbed them to try to steer them away from a hazard they were well aware of (in one case, the attempt to "help" him avoid falling into an excavation next to the sidewalk actually resulted in him falling into it).
With autistics, consider that many of the attempts to "help" them use methods that the ASPCA won't allow to be used in training *animals*. But because it's professional psychologists trying to make them "act norrmal" most non-autistics shrug it off as "they know what they are doing" or "they need to learn to 'act normal'".
Here's an example that may get thru to some people. I've got asthma. As such, I *could* do most of the stuff in PE. But things like running distances were very difficult What was easy of merely "a bit difficult" for non-asthmatics was very, very hard for me, if not impossible.
Using the "logic" used in treating "low functioning" autistics, the PE teachers should have used electric shocks, or withholding food, etc as means to get me to be a better runner.
alex_antonin's tumblr, he reposted something from someone else.https://t.co/qOQN93V2Sg
It's about a image being posted by Autism Canada.
It may look fine at first glance.
But when you stop and think about it, it's an example of an all too common with campaigns "for" people with various disabilities.
It's not actually about the people with the disability. It's about the *non*-disabled.
In this case, it's holding them up as an "inspiration". It's about *us* felling good" for "helping" *them*.
Other examples are all the comments about how "brave" people with disabilities are, or how hard their lives are.
They disabled aren't being treated as real people with real problems, but as props for getting an effect.
Thus the phrase "inspiration porn".
In this particular case, it's doubly bad in that by using the phrase "how good we can be" it encourages the people without the disability to "be good" to the people with it.
Why is that bad? Because it encourages people to use their own judgment as to what is "good" for the disabled person.
This almost never goes well. Most blind people have horror stories about people offering unasked-for "help". I know a couple who have been *injured* when some idiot grabbed them to try to steer them away from a hazard they were well aware of (in one case, the attempt to "help" him avoid falling into an excavation next to the sidewalk actually resulted in him falling into it).
With autistics, consider that many of the attempts to "help" them use methods that the ASPCA won't allow to be used in training *animals*. But because it's professional psychologists trying to make them "act norrmal" most non-autistics shrug it off as "they know what they are doing" or "they need to learn to 'act normal'".
Here's an example that may get thru to some people. I've got asthma. As such, I *could* do most of the stuff in PE. But things like running distances were very difficult What was easy of merely "a bit difficult" for non-asthmatics was very, very hard for me, if not impossible.
Using the "logic" used in treating "low functioning" autistics, the PE teachers should have used electric shocks, or withholding food, etc as means to get me to be a better runner.
tech advice
Dec. 3rd, 2015 10:20 pmOk, Most of my gear can use gigabit ethernet. And I do have an 8-port gigabit switch.
Unfortunately, my router doesn't do gigabit, just 10/100.
This is a problem because I'd really rather have the 4 TB NAS box in the bedroom with the router.
Note, while my modem *can* do gigabit and has a built-in router & wifi, it's a total piece of junk. It is pretty much *not* configurable in any way. So I just have my old router plugged into it so I can (mostly) configure things myself.
So, I'm in the market for a new router.
It needs to be SOHO, not home. That's because some of the things I need either aren't available in home only units, or are poorly implemented.
Also, my experience is that "home" units start failing in various ways after a year or so, while decent SOHO gear lasts for many years.
So, my requirements are that it do 10/100/100 wired, have B/G/N wifi (yes, all my laptops can do N). One WAN port, 4 LAN ports.
Needs to be able to assign LAN addresses based on MAC addresses (so the same box will always get the same address). Being able to do port mapping is useful as well.
Being able to set some stuff to only work on one LAN ports would be nice too (I'd like to be able to set up a machine or two to be accessed from the internet, but still keep folks out of the rest of the LAN Though I could use one of the other ports on the modem for that, except it's so dumb, it'd be fairly useless)
I kind of liked the Cisco unit I had unit I had, an RV120W. And I'd hopefully be able to import most of the config to a different Cisco router. But I'll take some other brand if it'll work well.
Cost *is* an object. But I know that good and cheap are opposing criteria.
So, any suggestions?
(Edited to add)
I've looked over the Cisco routers on their site, and it looks like the ones that meet my specs (gigabit ethernet, wireless B/G/N) are:
RV130W
RV180W
RV220W
RV215W
The 220W is $100 more than the 130W & 180W, so it's out.
The 215W is $50 cheaper than the 130w & 180W, but it also has much lower specs for connections and VPN performance.
So it's a toss between the 130W & 180W. Prices seem to be about the same. I'd appreciate folks looking them over to see if you see significant diffs. If anyone has actual experience working with them that'd be useful too.
Unfortunately, my router doesn't do gigabit, just 10/100.
This is a problem because I'd really rather have the 4 TB NAS box in the bedroom with the router.
Note, while my modem *can* do gigabit and has a built-in router & wifi, it's a total piece of junk. It is pretty much *not* configurable in any way. So I just have my old router plugged into it so I can (mostly) configure things myself.
So, I'm in the market for a new router.
It needs to be SOHO, not home. That's because some of the things I need either aren't available in home only units, or are poorly implemented.
Also, my experience is that "home" units start failing in various ways after a year or so, while decent SOHO gear lasts for many years.
So, my requirements are that it do 10/100/100 wired, have B/G/N wifi (yes, all my laptops can do N). One WAN port, 4 LAN ports.
Needs to be able to assign LAN addresses based on MAC addresses (so the same box will always get the same address). Being able to do port mapping is useful as well.
Being able to set some stuff to only work on one LAN ports would be nice too (I'd like to be able to set up a machine or two to be accessed from the internet, but still keep folks out of the rest of the LAN Though I could use one of the other ports on the modem for that, except it's so dumb, it'd be fairly useless)
I kind of liked the Cisco unit I had unit I had, an RV120W. And I'd hopefully be able to import most of the config to a different Cisco router. But I'll take some other brand if it'll work well.
Cost *is* an object. But I know that good and cheap are opposing criteria.
So, any suggestions?
(Edited to add)
I've looked over the Cisco routers on their site, and it looks like the ones that meet my specs (gigabit ethernet, wireless B/G/N) are:
RV130W
RV180W
RV220W
RV215W
The 220W is $100 more than the 130W & 180W, so it's out.
The 215W is $50 cheaper than the 130w & 180W, but it also has much lower specs for connections and VPN performance.
So it's a toss between the 130W & 180W. Prices seem to be about the same. I'd appreciate folks looking them over to see if you see significant diffs. If anyone has actual experience working with them that'd be useful too.