More intentional access; a brighter future for all students with disabilities

I would like to take this space to respond to the column published in the April 25 issue, “Ways CSB+SJU can do more to be inclusive to students with disabilities.” I agree that we should have more comprehensive services for disabilities at this school. We are long overdue for them. However, to say in your original article that “Able-bodied and disabled-bodied students should have the opportunity to enroll in the same classes” is problematic.

I am disabled. I am receiving the same education as you. I am in your classes, infiltrating the common order. It is already happening. To say disabled people “deserve” or “should have” anything is an ableist reflection that assumes accessibility is a gift instead of a need. To deserve is to dream.

We must instead demand a better education. It’s noble to want accessibility. I commend you for it. I would argue that asking for it through the Integrations Curriculum is a lost cause. I say this not to overlook the tireless work Student Accessibility Services does for our students and staff; I am instead referring to what we cannot change.

The Integrations Curriculum has already shown countless difficulties in four years, something that I think cannot be patched any longer.

Along with this, a campus separated by binary sex is going to have a hard time accepting any perceived differences.

We divide everything into “Johnnie” and “Bennie.” We are already marked as different in every way. You mention momentarily that “St. John’s is more hilly than St. Ben’s.”

Not only does a hill separate us from getting to classes, so does a tall set of outdoor stairs and packed stairwells that go up to four floors.

St. Ben’s students are also relegated to the Flynntown lot on the other side of campus while St. John’s students are a stone’s throw away from the HAB. Many of the buildings at St. John’s are also from the 1800s.

They have since been remodeled, but working from a model that old means it will always be an inaccessible model. What happens as a result is buildings that are uncomfortable for everyone, including wasps in the summertime and no central air. It is a frustratingly inaccessible campus. Making it more accessible will be a difficult task.

I also encourage you to consider access from an “everyone wins” lens. If campuses are more accessible, that means people won’t have to walk unimaginable lengths to get to class. People can park and not worry about getting a ticket.

They can feel a sense of safety. They can feel accepted. All these factors can be applied universally. If you’re going to consider access needs, you must look beyond disabilities that are easily identifiable. It’s only a sliver of what access can be.

Disability challenges us to go beyond what we already know, to question the way we live, to topple patriarchal, ableist, and authoritative structures. Structural change is necessary to create a welcoming place for disabled people.

That alum’s daughter, if they desire it, will not “be offered the opportunity to be a Bennie,”, they will be a Bennie.If you hope for a brighter, more accessible future, don’t talk about us passively.