Re: Elevators and exclusions
From: Brian Bartholomew (
Date: Sat, 10 May 2008 01:11:22 -0700 (PDT)
> I don't think anyone would suggest the able-bodied are inherently
> privileged. Privilege, as you point out, relates to how social
> systems do or do not advantage certain classes (e.g., special laws
> for the nobility).  If there is accessibility built into the
> community, then there are no privileged classes in that regard. If
> the community has limited accessibility, then the able-bodied are
> privileged by that deficiency through no fault of their own.

I do not wish to confuse the effects of legal systems and social
systems.  Complying with the law is not optional.  Complying with
community cultural expectations that have not risen to the strictness
of enforcement as laws *is* optional.  My claim was that privileges
were granted only by laws.  Aspects of an environment uncontrolled by
law, such as a permitted lack of elevators, could not confer privilege.

If you want to talk about how architectural features disadvantage
various groups, without reference to whether the feature is mandated
or prohibited by law, then perhaps we should use a different word
besides "privilege".

Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.