Read on Twitter
So, I pulled out of this reading, which isn't something I do lightly. Let me tell you why. https://twitter.com/NeptunesGHouse/status/1334920377244540929
There are no captions for this reading series. One thing you can do if you're too skint to afford a captioner is to screenshare the poems or make what's going to be read available beforehand, so Deaf audience members can, at the very least, follow along.
Reportedly, every poet reading at this event refused to screenshare or make the poems available to viewers. It is one thing to simply be ignorant and not know about access, it is another to be told what you can do to make your work accessible and actively refuse to do so.
Every poet reading at this event may as well hang a sign around their neck which says, 'disabled people not welcome here.' Each poet might as well open their reading by saying, 'I don't care about disabled people, and my work isn't for them.'
I have no desire to read alongside poets who actively refuse to provide basic access, so reluctantly I've pulled out of the event. Reportedly, each poet has been told what they can do to improve their pitiful access, and they refused. It's nothing less than purely malicious.
Do you know what annoys me more than your standard, run of the mill ableism? Ableism in marginalised communities that should know better. The Glitter House is a queer reading series, and the fact that the queer poets simply don't care about disabled queer people is crushing.
I would have hoped that the queer poets reading at the event would understand that access is not a courtesy, but a right. Evidently, I was wrong. The event is billed as a 'queer extravaganza.' But this means nothing, absolutely nothing, if disabled people aren't included.
Disabled people are excluded from literary events all the time. You'd hope that the Glitter House event, as a queer space, would be a reprieve from constant exclusion. Instead, this queer space which should know better simply emboldens the ableist status quo.
No one can claim ignorance, as reportedly, each poet was told how to improve the accessibility of their reading and actively refused to alter their practices. What a damn disappointment. Disabled people deserve better.
Apparently, the readers 'didn't feel' like sharing their poems to make them accessible. Well, I'm sure disabled people don't 'feel like' being excluded either. In conclusion, if the poets could yeet themselves into the sun at the earliest convenience, I'd be very grateful.
Unsurprisingly, the organiser has jumped into my DMs, policing the tone of this thread. It should go without saying, but a disabled person addressing systematic ableism and inaccessibility can use any tone they choose.
Here's a direct quote for you: 'if you want to get anywhere with your message you'll have to learn diplomacy.' Now, I can stand up for myself. But what if the organiser had said this to a younger disabled poet, someone who was just starting out?
I can fend for myself, and I can recognise this BS for what it is. But a different disabled poet would see this garbage and just walk away from poetry, and I wouldn't blame them. Poetry/Queer spaces and queer people being this ableist is crushing, infuriating and a damn shame.
Do you know what else might make a disabled poet walk away from poetry for good? An event organiser saying, 'may I actually be so bold as to ask how sex works for you? Hope this doesn't bother you. I'm genuinely curious.'
Disabled people have to put up with this invasive tripe all the time. Another thing that would make a disabled poet give up? When an event organiser is asked whether a poet using images will provide images descriptions, and they reply, 'how should I know?'
I wasn't going to add these tweets to the thread, but frankly poets should know what kind of utter trash disabled people put up with from event organisers, day after day.
What message would a young queer disabled poet receive if they tuned into this reading? They would be told that poetry doesn't include them, because the poets haven't bothered to accommodate disabled people.
The poets reading at this event, by being told how to provide access and simply refusing to provide it, are endorsing the message that poetry isn't for disabled people. That queer people who participate in ableism so happily is disgusting.
So friends, how do we think the organiser reacted to this thread? Here are some direct quotes: 'You've proved yourself quite the snake. And I did not deserve that. Good luck getting ahead in poetry with your low blows.' And, 'Consider any future invitation to read rescinded.'
I mean, the poets reading at Glitter House are unpaid, so...I've lost literally nothing? 
Apparently, my 'tones have been reproachable.' And as a result, 'you have lost an ally.' Yes, I've lost an 'ally' who is rude and ableist, who is so much of an ally that none of their reading series videos are captioned or interpreted. A really stunning ally right there.
I've lost the ally that produced this invasive and gross chestnut. I'm sure the world of disabled poetry is weeping at such an enormous loss. /s https://twitter.com/Inadarkwood/status/1335352750109036546?s=19
In case you need a laugh after the awfulness of this thread, after this thread was posted, the Glitterhouse account suddenly confirmed there would be captions. Lol. Also tweeted this, 'Karl's message is right, but the way he goes about it isn't my cup of tea.'
When I was told about people refusing to provide access, the organiser said, 'I would ask you to not make too much noise about it.' Did they really think I, as a disabled person, would be quiet about inaccessibility? Really?
At the end of the day, I don't really care about how I'm treated. But what I do care about is how ableist incidents like these effect disabled poets who are just beginning to explore poetry. This repulsive behaviour sends one message to disabled poets: 'You're not welcome.'
It should be a given, but poetry is for everyone. I want a queer disabled poet who's starting out to feel like their work is welcome, appreciated and needed. Blatantly ableist behaviour as described in this thread excludes people, plain and simple, and I will not stand it.
What a bloody mess. I'll end this thread now. Thank you to everyone who has sent love and support. I see and appreciate you. Goodnight 
This will be my final word about this utter trash fire. How do you think the Glitterhouse responded to disabled people yesterday? Let me show you. Thank you to everyone who notified me of what was being said, and thank you to everyone who tweeted in response to these gross tweets
Documenting these as they'll undoubtedly be deleted soon.
Some more utterly charming replies. This is the tone that's been prevalent in this person's DMs to me.
Finally, here's an 'apology.' Why are only 'some of the tones' used being apologised for? Do you apologise for some and stand by others? Worth noting that the episode can't be 'full of magic' if disabled people have been routinely ignored, dismissed and ridiculed.
Thank you to everyone who is replying to the screenshotted tweets. I can't actually see your responses myself as I'm blocked, but they're being sent onto me. I see and greatly appreciate you all.
So, how do you think the event organiser responds to people criticising their ableism? Apparently the disabled people calling out ableism are 'right cunts.' Really lovely stuff, that tells you all you need to know, really. I'm logging off for the day. Have a good evening y'all!
