The Largest Minority

The US Office of Disability Employment Policy states:

Although the term is most often used to refer to differences among individuals such as ethnicity, gender, age and religion, diversity actually encompasses the infinite range of individuals' unique attributes and experiences. As the nation's largest minority — comprising almost 50 million individuals — people with disabilities contribute to diversity, and businesses can enhance their competitive edge by taking steps to ensure they are integrated into their workforce and customer base. (Emphasis added)

Comment: You'd never know it. The nation implements justice for minorities by several means: Protected class. Affirmative action. Heightened scrutiny concerning the effect of presumably neutral laws. Lawsuits concerning harassment, defamation, bullying, unequal pay, inequity in hiring practices, social exclusion. It is not that all these things necessarily belong in a liberal democratic society. In some cases they are inferior substitutes for justice. Protected class and heightened scrutiny look suspiciously like privilege.* Affirmative action, with its relationship to quotas and its adverse effect on merit hire and promotion, looks like favoritism.

But these are the currently operative ad hoc substitutes for actual justice. It is telling that people with disabilities are excluded. A news article from late 2012 concerning a child with cerebral palsy noted:

There's case law out there regarding people commenting and gesturing against race and religion. But ... there's nothing out there regarding disabilities. - Jennifer Fitzsimmons, the chief assistant city prosecutor in a rare case where legal action was taken

A year ago a courageous young woman with cerebral palsy wrote about the discriminatory reaction she often experiences in a supposedly progressive city:

I was born with cerebral palsy, and though I'm 30 years old, I didn't really accept that until I moved to Seattle last June. It was something I hid from, something I denied, and it was relatively easy to do so, because a lot of people seemed to notice other things about me before they noticed that. ... In Seattle, though, a lot of people seem to be a little unnerved by my disability, ... But I was caught entirely off guard by this sudden understanding that being alive in the only body I've got apparently makes some people uncomfortable in 2014, in one of America's most progressive cities. I moved here for books, coffee, writing, nature, food, even rain—not a daily crusade.

If she had been a member of the recognized minorities—a protected ethnicity, race, gender, or sexual orientation—the response would have included a lot of people saying, in effect, Yes, we still need to do more about the civil rights of minorities. Instead, there was a lot of backlash.

Many of those who quickly object to minority discrimination deny disability discrimination even as it is happening right in front of them. As commenter jacalope observes "The prevailing attitude seems to be that":

1. My disability isn't real
2. My disability is my own fault
3. If I tried harder I could just get over it
4. I'd magically get over it if I only tried my new acquaintance's latest diet/supplement/acupuncturist/exercise regimen

Why are these discriminatory attitudes alive and well in what Sarah Nielson called a "progressive city?" Because, since the civil rights revolution, discrimination against the minorities addressed by that revolution is subject to punishment under the laws. Social attitudes followed. "No colored need apply" notices were replaced by affirmative action. Society got the message. No one would think of telling a person of color, who described a discriminatory incident or attitude, to "just get over it."

Who is covered and who isn't covered sends a message. There's no affirmative action for cerebral palsy, for cleft palate, for little people, or for all those who are born different (unless the difference is race or gender). "There's nothing out there regarding disabilities," said Assistant City Prosecutor Jennifer Fitsimmons, above. That is, there has apparently never been a landmark civil rights case regarding a disabled person.

Again, society got the message. anonymous:

So you reject:

empathy
normal Seattle passive-aggressiveness
an obviously crazy homeless person
someone who mistakenly talks to your boyfriend instead of you
a mother who was caught in a sudden confrontation

Honey, those are all things we all deal with. It's called the real world.

An article defaming those with birth defects has resided on the Time.com website for over a decade:

Another six months of Monica, have mercy; I don't care if it harelips the Governor. - Molly Ivins, Time.com

Again, the double standard is evident. Would the public have stood for the above remark if Ms. Ivins had used the n-word instead of the h-word? For that matter, would Time have published the article unedited with the n-word?

It's unthinkable. But in the case of the largest minority, it attracts no attention.
 
 (*) "Privilege": "Private Law"