Sometimes change happens in the in-between times. In the quiet moments. When you stop and listen more than you talk. I know these interactions seem few and far between these days. With social media amplifying polarizing points of view, it sometimes feels like the whole world is just screaming past each other. How can that leave room for growth, reflection, and true coalition-building?

The truth is, it doesn't, or not much anyway. But I believe it can happen, does happen, and in fact, it must happen. We are all just trying to figure things out together here on this spinning celestial object called Earth, doing the best we know how to do. I think we can always do better, though. And that is undoubtedly the standard I set for myself. And for this blog post I want to share a recent learning lesson I had regarding appropriation.

I came upon a conversation on my social media discussing how some members of the disabled LGTBQ+ community feel that the designation of July as Disability Pride Month is an appropriation of June being the LGBTQ+ Pride Month. Some people didn’t think the month itself was so much of an appropriation, but when you add in the use of the LGBTQ+ Pride Rainbow/Rainbow Flag, it definitely is.

Now, I will be honest. I had to sit with this for a minute. The question I first asked myself is, can pride really be appropriated? Isn't pride kind of a personal thing? I mean, I feel pride about being disabled every day. On the other hand, I recognize that Pride Movement, with a capital "P," originated in the LGBTQ+ community, and their symbol for Pride has been the rainbow/rainbow flag dating back to the 1970s.

So, I kept reading the conversation unfolding on Twitter. I kept my mind open, wanting to keep learning and questioning my own subconscious preconceived notions and biases. It was when I learned that the Disability Rights New York had used the rainbow Pride flag in their Twitter promotion of Disability Pride Month in such a way whereas I was like, "Uh-oh, that for sure feels icky." (The Tweets in reference have been taken down). But again, just as I did for the term "pride," I asked myself if a rainbow can be appropriated? Rainbows are a thing of nature, after all. And then there are all the rainbow colors. What if you use the ROYGBIV sequence in something, but it's not a rainbow shape? Is that okay?

The reason part of this is personal for me is that I realized I, myself, was guilty of doing some appropriating. While my intention was not to take possession of another community's identity for my own, at the end of the day, that is precisely what I did. The original color scheme for the heart of my Love Disabled Life logo was rainbow. Part of what I like about rainbows is that they represent diversity. And while the disabled community has a lot in common, we are also very diverse. Plus, I think they are pretty.

After I learned of how some members of the LGBTQ+ community were feeling, I did a gut check. After thinking about it and questioning my choice, I realized that another reason I liked using the rainbow for my logo was that it was easy choice. Or to put it another way, I was being lazy. And lazy isn't good enough, especially when you are doing something that is negatively impacting another person or group. So I went back to the drawing board. I tweaked my logo, and as is often the case, I like the revised version even better.

As a disabled person, I know lazy when I see it, and I don't particularly appreciate how it feels. Lazy happens when I'm at a museum or gallery, and the main elevator is out of service, so I am forced to ride the freight elevator. Lazy happens when I'm at a restaurant, and I can't reach the salad bar, so someone else has to build my salad for me. Lazy happens when I want to go into a store with a step in front, so I have to go through the back door to enter. There are thousands of life experiences that I could share that illustrate how simple laziness to accommodate my disability has deprived me of the ability to be (lawfully, might I add) included in society.

Unfortunately, I think there has been a lot of laziness happening when it comes to public awareness campaigns. I don't know for sure, but I assume that it was a over-worked, underpaid staffer in the Disability Rights New York office who isn't gay or disabled, and thought, "Hmmm... disability pride month, let's just add the rainbow to that!" And if that is not the case, then they definitely should have known better.

One last example of lazy messaging that I wanted to include in this post, mainly because it really irritates me, is the Blue Shield of California commercial that claims racism is a virus. NO! Racism is not a virus. Racism is racism, and a virus is a virus. Viruses are molecular biological agents that replicate off a host organism, often causing disease. Racism is an institutional construct meant to subjugate one race of people over another. You cannot inoculate someone from racism. It's a choice. Not a pathogen. Period.

While a part of me wants to applaud businesses and organizations for raising awareness around the issues affecting marginalized groups, while another part demands that they do better. One way that they do better is by having authentic and genuine conversations with people in those communities. And not when the campaign is in its final phase of completion. They have to do it from the beginning. Otherwise, the message can do more harm than good.

In doing research for this blog post, I learned that there is a Disability Pride Flag. It was created by Ann Magill, a disabled woman in 2016. You can read more about the flag and its design meaning at Flags for Good. Magill released the copyright to the design into the public domain in 2019, and notes that it may be undergoing a simple redesign, as she acknowledges the zig-zag pattern may be sensory triggering for some disabled people. The newly suggested design is the thumbnail for this post.

I want to conclude with this thought: If we are ever going to do actual coalition building, we need to start listening to each other. The social media conversations happening around the topic of appropriation were not one-dimensional. People from all communities had diverse opinions, some from within the same group. But if you take nothing else from this post, please hear this: I genuinely believe if marginalized communities are ever going to unite in solidarity: WE HAVE TO BE AS INCLUSIVE AS POSSIBLE. And part of being inclusive means that we don’t always have to agree, but we can't silence the voices of those who are saying things we may not want to hear. If we silence voices, how are we any better than those who are not inclusive of us?

Let's stop being lazy, okay? Let's be the change we want to see.