Listening today to the first panel I was confused and slightly offended that they were discussing “Mad” Studies. I was not sure if it was just terminology that I did not understand or if their terminology of Mad did not have the same connotation that it does in America. When they opened it up for question and answer they explained that “Mad” comes from the motivation and movement to reclaim the terminology. It was compared to the reclaiming of “gay.”

I find this pretty progressive. I think terminology and be controversial and causes a lot of problems when trying to come together and discuss disabilities. Not to be insensitive but I think we try so hard to be politically correct that we waste time and lose the important concepts. I think that reclamation of words are so important because it does not matter what we call people, there are people out there that are going to give it a negative connotation, and it’s up to us to move beyond that. It’s clearly easier said than done but I was impressed to experience something like that at this conference. I expected them to facilitate discussion around the principle of being politically correct. I still being they are doing that, but I love the reclamation.

Also, I wish I had asked but I didn’t but I am very interested in learning more about this magical realism that was discussed. I’ve learned about magical realism in high school, I took a literature class in high school that looked as the way magical realism was used to illustrate African American oppression.  It seemed so close to what I have learned but I’m missing the connection to disabilities.