In this op-ed, Kate Smither, AKA The Tall Planner, explores what real inclusion looks like when disability isn’t always visible, and why accessibility might be the key that unlocks it.
The first time I ever heard “you can’t be something you can’t see” it was at a Geena Davis talk at the Opera House over a decade ago. She was presenting findings from The Genna Davis Institute, an organisation she founded to “enhance on-screen diversity and ensure nuanced portrayal” in media.
Then, the phrase seemed dangerously simple, now it seems dangerously essential.
Today every discussion around diversity and inclusion comes back to this dangerously essential phrase. You have to see the possible, you have to show the diversity that you should be seen and in turn force the change in perception that is needed. That’s because ultimately, visibility normalises diversity. It normalises inclusivity, and it changes how we as a society define and interact with disability and difference.
I love seeing the initiatives of organisations like Inclusively Made and their many partners; the project with Thinkerbell was a particular standout. I love that they are forcing a change and opening up conversations. In part I love it because I never feel like I have the words to have the “right conversation” about inclusivity, diversity and disability. Maybe there is no right conversation so I guess with that in mind… everything that follows is just an opinion to add to the conversation done in the theorist that more conversation is better than none. It is not in any way coming from expertise, instead it comes from lived experience.
Studies say as many as 90 per cent of Australians live with an invisible disability. I am one of the 90 per cent, and with a number that high I am definitely not alone in Australia, let alone in advertising.
I have thought a lot about the visible and the invisible sides of the issues, how do they match? Differ? What can be done to make both visible in a productive way?
The tough truth is that making them equally visible is nearly impossible.
On the one hand you have a permanency, and on the other a situational or “dynamic” disability that will be present and hugely impactful one day more or less than it will be the next.
But when you start from the place that the visible disability is the only perspective people haven’t seen, it runs the risk of making people feel “not disabled enough” to be included in that perspective. Theirs is the invisible disability already and it only feels more invisible. It can actually create disability imposter syndrome. If disability is defined as the ”visible” kind, it gives you a representation of inclusivity that you can easily say “that’s’ not me” I am not excluded
So, how do we untangle the complications of classifications, representation and language? How do we promote inclusivity that incorporates every identity?
It’s all the big messy words that overwhelm the conversation.
If we sidestep the messy, and in the words of Coldplay “go back to the start,” we start very differently. We don’t start with complex we start with the basic, simple foundational right… the right to access.
If we start by looking for the best ways to deliver accessible places and spaces to all, we have to work from the most extreme need to the least and adopt systems that crossover in their delivery of benefit. Because if we get accessibility right we facilitate greater diversity, inclusivity and visibility. And ultimately that helps everyone.
“Accessibility benefits everyone, not just people with disabilities. This concept, known as the “curb-cut effect,” refers to how features designed for specific groups can help a broader audience. For example, closed captions on videos are not only useful for individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing but also for people watching videos in noisy environment”
Epic Assist outlines two models to change perspectives and challenge the barriers to true inclusion:
- The Medical Model: A traditional view that sees disability as a problem inside the person. The “problem” is caused by a health condition, disease, or accident. It focuses on “fixing” the person to make them more “normal.” In this model, the solution is cure, treatment, or rehabilitation.
- The Social Model: This model completely changes the perspective. It argues that a person’s impairment is not the problem. Instead, it is society’s physical, attitudinal and systemic barriers that “disable” them. A wheelchair user is not disabled by their inability to walk but by a building that lacks a ramp. A person who is deaf is not disabled by their hearing but by a movie theatre that doesn’t provide closed captions. The Social Model shifts the responsibility of inclusion from the individual to society.
The social model is the one where the creative industry can be the most impactful.
Of all industries, the advertising one is uniquely set up to make a difference. In a large part it’s because we work with every industry from government to FMCG, banking, insurance, retail, telcos and everything in between.
It’s also because creative minds are naturally better at empathy. They look at the world from another perspective more intuitively. We are in the business of creative problem solving and that demands an empathetic mind.
It is why we see crossovers in lived experiences that often a governmental body (for example) won’t. The Sydney ferries story illustrates this perfectly.
If you ask Transport NSW, the ferries are accessible. If you ever watch a person with a baby, multiple bags of luggage, in a wheelchair or even on crutches, the empathetic mind will see that the crossover problem to solve is not the access on the ferries, it is the access to the ferries. Having a boat that is accessible means nothing if the physical wharf has no universal access for mobility.
Equally, if you took this same group of people from both extremes of mobility challenges and mapped them across the City of Sydney on some basic journeys, getting into the Rocks for example, or into the Grounds on George Street, or Pitt Street mall.
If you try to take cabs or walk any of these distances, you will quickly discover that the city of Sydney is almost exclusively designed for fully mobile bike riders and that it technically discriminates against anyone with even the slightest challenges. The city makes you plan how close you can get to places, and makes you lock out which ones are just out of reach
But what about our own social model? As much as we can impact inclusivity and bring an empathetic and creative mind to bear on social/governmental campaigns what about our spaces? We’re known for a fascination with sexy warehouses and buildings of character but are we making them as invitingly accessible as possible? Are we making it possible for our workforce to be diverse and to show up in all their individuality? Can clients who need access, access the spaces we work in? and when was the last time, we really looked at it? Perhaps that could be a point of industry accreditation.
In her talk entitled “Radical Accessibility,” Molly O’Connor states that to “understand accessibility, we need to reframe our perception of disability… Because the onus doesn’t fall on the person with the disability, because it is more than a health issue… it is a social construct, It is context dependent. Disability happens at the point of interaction between the individual and society… physical, cognitive and social exclusion are the result of mismatched interactions.”
There lies the key: Thinking about the intersection points with an empathetic mind could just be the inclusivity answer for everyone. Breaking it down will identify the crossover experiences and tighten up the problem to creatively solve.
Who knows, it might even mean the “curb effect” becomes the standard for applying creativity to the places and spaces we live in. It might just be the change we need to change what we see.
After all, if we work from the edges in, we change the whole picture.
