3 ms·
> "Virtual choirs" are divisive and ableist. Only those who have the "proper technology" can even consider admission to these groups. I could not disagree more
by pavel_lishin 2y ago
> "Virtual choirs" are divisive and ableist. Only those who have the "proper technology" can even consider admission to these groups.
I could not disagree more.
I play D&D, and I strongly prefer in-person games to online games, to the point where I won't really entertain an online one without exceptional circumstances.
But it feels silly to suggest that this is ableist. I'm glad you were able to find a community when you were homeless, but for a lot of people, a car is required to show up in person, and costs a hell of a lot more than a basic laptop, or a cellphone. (And that's before we get to the fact that this study seems to focus explicitly on people with dementia, for whom traveling anywhere is likely more difficult than it is for you!)
Yes, latency is an issue, but I don't think these people are trying to put on professional performances; they're just looking for something social to do together, and singing is that thing for them.
- AStonesThrow 2y ago[flagged]
- Den_VR 2y ago[flagged]
- pavel_lishin 2y ago> It is abuse to rope people into an impossible activity. It would be crazymaking to me, if my church or our volunteer leadership, would force me into a virtual singing activity. Then I suppose it's a good thing that nobody forced these people into it. > They will not understand the technological limitations, and they will not understand that no matter what they do, they will not succeed in synchronizing their voices or instruments. And yet, from the article: > “We found virtual group singing could provide emotional, cognitive and social support through accessible, engaging music programs for diverse aging populations.”