Some of you probably saw the opinion piece that I wrote for the Argus this week, if you haven’t then clicky clicky because otherwise this blog post is a bit pointless. I tend to not respond to most internet backlash/criticism because in my opinion, people don’t seem to want a response. I think people like to state their negative opinions and then walk away and leave the author of the original piece fuming or crying or laughing or whatever they’re up to. However, I do kind of feel a need to respond to a comment on my opinion piece, which I’ll copy-paste for your enjoyment:
your piece really lets scott backer off with a slap on the wrist. clearly you have not been adversely impacted by the email since you are already very open about your ms, but many people value their confidentiality, and you seem to trivialize their concerns. breaching this all-important privacy is just about the worst thing a dean of disabilities services could do. you also shouldn’t be scouring the list looking for people you know; this action only serves to further undermine everyone’s privacy. on top of that, i disagree with the assertion that backer’s email was “extremely nice and well-intentioned.” it was a boilerplate email, nothing more, nothing less.
In the style of Parents and the Internet (though at a slightly lower maturity level), here are my issues with your comment:
1. I didn’t state his name on purpose. While everyone in the Wes community knows who he is and what happened, partially due to an Argus news article, I enjoyed not including his name since the issue was a breach of confidentiality on his part. He revealed our names, but I don’t feel a need to reveal his in my piece. You revealed it in your comment. This bugs me.
2. What is the adverse impact that other people are suffering? The email was recalled and can no longer be seen by anyone, and as I stated in my piece, the email was not sent to the entire campus in the first place.
3. Why do we expect confidentiality for disability status but not for anything else? That was an issue that I talked about in my piece and you conveniently ignored.*
4. What I said, actually, is that my career plans make it hard for me to hide my invisible disability, not that I want to be very open about it.
5. I am not quite sure how one can “scour” a fairly short list of names. Also I don’t know why everyone freaked out about confidentiality if they didn’t assume that people would read the list.
6. Your use of “boilerplate” kind of makes me nauseous. I’m not going to pretend that this is a valid complaint on my part.
*for some reason, when it comes to sexual orientation, we talk about people being “in the closet” instead of about confidentiality and privacy. Sexual orientation is something that society expects to know, not sure why. I don’t really feel great about this, but it’s weird that sexual orientation and many disabilities are both determined by our genes but we have such different feelings about them.
Now, in case you were like “why is Cade so angry all the time?,” I’ll include a picture of my super adorable kitty. Because who can be angry with Nashi in their life? You can’t. Nobody can.
Oh gosh this makes me miss home. Circle stained glass window + kitty + upstairs couch. Hi, family. Hi, home.