Single Status Update
I admit, without shame, that outside a recent work, I haven't written anyone who is paraplegic or in the commonly called disabled ranks. Does this mean disabled people shouldn't have a place in afrofuturism or any genre ? of course not.
Does this mean I need to make an effort to place so called disabled people in my work? no, cause I don't believe in pushing agenda in my fiction. I speak agenda writing prose. My fantasy worlds are not built for agenda, they are built for fun. I enjoy my fantasy worlds. ... A woman with one leg can be stronger, more abled than superman, yes running with one leg faster than he can run with two. She isn't in my fantasy worlds, but I can't believe she isn't in any.
I quote the article in brackets <
According to the Cooperative Children’s Book Center’s 2019 study, only 3.4% of children’s books have disabled main characters. Compare this statistic with the CDC’s finding that 26% of Americans have disabilities, and it’s easy to see there’s a problem. The children’s book industry is failing to portray the many myriads of ways bodies and people exist and interact with the world. These are ways that many children experience themselves or will experience in the future.
The article author ask an important question but leads to a false answer. The question is, how can representation of fictional characters with disabilities have greater quantity in books published in a year? The answer isn't in the industry but in the members of the industry. The author suggest the publishing houses need to modify their yearly quota of published books to make sure certain characters are in them. But that goes against fiscal capitalism. If the publishing houses do as she suggest and then their accountants say they lost money compared to the prior year, what then?
The answer is for the government to make its own publishing house. Said publishing house has two costs: costs of infrastructure, revenue from books. Book authors get a percentage of revenue from sales. The rest goes to infrastructure for the publishing house and any extra goes to a financing growing infrastructure. But, the publishing house chooses stories reflecting demography. so the characters in books as well as the quality of characters in books have to equate to the average in the population. so, if 58 percent of the people in the usa are women then 58 percent of the characters in the combined books published for a year need to be 58 percent women, give or take a five percent shift, forward or back. To use the statistic above, 26 percent of the stories need to be people deemed disabled. In the women or disabled, it is wise to make sure, half are positive while half are negative. HAving every female character a villain is dysfunctional or negatively biased at the least.
the article end with explaining how industries dominated or owned by one community do not cater to the other. In the same way, white owned firms do not cater to black fantasy. Abled, meaning no disability << even though every human has disability, which is why I prefer extrachallenged over disabled, cause every human can overcome any challenge if they believe in themselves, but we all have disabilities >> people, own or dominate the publishing industry so why will it be natural to support the commonly called disabled. Blacks/Women/Extrachallenged/each from the LGBTQ+ need to OWN THEIR OWN FIRMS to produce content for them. THe USA allows anyone to own today. That is the closest to an aracial morality you can get in fiscal capitalism. But asking every human heart to be aracial is not only silly, it will never receive 100% positivity in reply.