In every city, near and far,

Live souls that shine like guiding stars.

Some may walk, some roll instead,

Yet dreams still dance within their heads.

Why shed tears in sorrow deep?

Why let pity steal your sleep?

Lift them up, help them grow,

Watch their talents brightly glow.

Teach with love, with kindness, share,

Show them that the world can care.

Don’t be lame, don’t just conform,

Blindly following societal norms.

See their strength, their will, their grace,

A world for all—our shared space.

So take their hands, don’t turn away,

Together, build a brighter day.

Empowering Voices: Hope for the Voiceless in Our Communities

In a world where many individuals still face barriers to inclusion, a profound and thought-provoking article on Simerg titled “The Straight Path and the Disabled: Hope in the Voiceless Community” invites us to reflect on the challenges experienced by differently-abled individuals and our collective role in empowering them.

This article highlights how compassion, inclusivity, and understanding can transform lives, build unity, and foster hope for those who are often left unheard. As members of a global community, we share a responsibility to create environments where everyone—regardless of ability—can thrive.

📖 Read the full article here: https://t.ly/shortened-link

As we continue to advocate for inclusion and equality, this article serves as an inspiring reminder of the power of hope and collective action. Let us work together to make a difference—starting with awareness, dialogue, and empathy.

Join the Conversation

We’d love to hear your thoughts! How can we, as individuals and as a community, better support differently-abled individuals? Share your comments below or get in touch with us to collaborate on initiatives that foster inclusivity and empowerment.

📩 Contact Us: www.gbgoodwillmovement.com

📱 Follow Us on Social Media: https://www.facebook.com/GBGWM

Working with Donors: Challenges and Difficulties

Engaging with donors is vital for non-profit organizations, as they provide the financial foundation necessary to drive meaningful change. However, working with donors often comes with its own set of challenges, requiring careful planning, persistence, and the ability to align their interests with the mission of the organization.

When I started the Gilgit Baltistan’s Goodwill Movement, the primary objective was to create a platform that could effectively engage donors and rally support for a greater cause: empowering marginalized communities, especially those with disabilities, in one of the most remote and underserved regions of Pakistan. The mission was born out of the realization that the existing support systems were inadequate and that sustainable change could only be achieved through collective responsibility and the involvement of compassionate contributors.

While supporting individuals like Amjad and many others facing daily struggles, I witnessed firsthand the transformative power of donor engagement. Every contribution, no matter how small, became a lifeline for individuals who had lost hope. However, the journey was not without hurdles.

Establishing trust with donors required consistent transparency, accountability, and storytelling that highlighted the real impact of their contributions. At the same time, navigating cultural differences, limited resources, and the logistical challenges of working in a geographically isolated area often tested the resilience of the movement.

Yet, these challenges also underscored the importance of perseverance and the need for innovative approaches to donor engagement. By creating awareness through social media campaigns, fostering personal connections, and demonstrating measurable outcomes, the movement was able to inspire a growing network of supporters dedicated to uplifting the disabled community in Gilgit Baltistan.

In reflecting on this journey, it’s clear that the heart of donor engagement lies in shared values and the belief that even the smallest acts of generosity can create ripples of change.

That being said, a significant challenge we faced was building trust with donors who contributed through platforms like Facebook. While their generosity was instrumental in supporting our efforts, many of these donors expressed hesitation about the long-term impact and legitimacy of our work. This skepticism stemmed largely from the lack of formal organizational structure at the time.

To address this, it became clear that transforming the Gilgit Baltistan Goodwill Movement into a formal registered charity was essential. Establishing a structured and transparent framework would not only enhance credibility but also provide donors with the assurance that their contributions were being managed responsibly and effectively. A formal charity would allow us to implement rigorous accountability measures, present detailed financial reports, and demonstrate the tangible impact of their support on the ground.

This realization marked a pivotal moment for the movement. By transitioning into a formal entity, we aim to bridge the trust gap, foster stronger donor relationships, and attract sustainable funding for our initiatives.

The ultimate goal remains unchanged: to empower the marginalized, especially individuals with disabilities, and to ensure that every donation creates lasting change in Gilgit Baltistan.

Understanding the Roots of Societal Disregard for Disabled Individuals

This morning, I explored the question of why able-bodied individuals often undervalue disabled people. The response, structured with subheadings, illuminated a troubling reality: the undervaluation of disabled individuals is not only rooted in societal attitudes but is compounded by actions that perpetuate systemic exclusion. This article delves into the reasons behind these dynamics, exploring how society itself becomes a disabling force for disabled individuals.

---

Societal Stereotypes: A Foundation of Misconceptions

A major factor in the marginalization of disabled individuals is the persistence of societal stereotypes. These stereotypes often frame disabled people as dependent, incapable, or burdensome, leading to assumptions about their lack of ability to contribute meaningfully to society. Such perceptions create a self-reinforcing cycle: undervaluation leads to exclusion, which in turn prevents disabled individuals from proving their potential or accessing opportunities.

But this raises a critical question: if dependency is perceived as problematic, why are other groups with similar dependencies treated differently? For instance, society invests heavily in drug rehabilitation centres, mental health clinics, and other support services. These initiatives aim to empower individuals and facilitate their reintegration into society. However, such systems are often not extended to disabled individuals, whose needs are met with fragmented, underfunded, or stigmatized responses.

---

The Hypocrisy of Selective Support

This inconsistency highlights a troubling hypocrisy. The issue isn’t dependency itself—it’s society’s selective perception of and response to different types of dependency. For drug users or individuals with mental health conditions, dependency is often framed as a temporary hurdle deserving of robust intervention and empathy.

In contrast, disabled individuals are frequently categorized as permanently “other,” leading to systemic neglect. They are excluded from opportunities that could challenge the narrative of their supposed incapacity. This dichotomy reflects a deeper societal failure: an unwillingness to view disabled individuals as equal participants in the social and economic fabric.

---

Fear and Misunderstanding

Underlying much of this disparity is fear and misunderstanding. Disability challenges societal norms of productivity, independence, and physical perfection. Many able-bodied individuals are uncomfortable confronting their own vulnerability, and this discomfort often manifests as avoidance or prejudice.

Disabled people are not inherently limited by their disabilities; they are disabled by society’s barriers—physical, attitudinal, and systemic. By failing to address these barriers, society perpetuates cycles of exclusion and dependency that need not exist.

---

Shifting the Narrative: From Disregard to Empowerment

Breaking this cycle requires a fundamental shift in how we view disability. Rather than framing it as a deficit or burden, society must recognize the inherent value and diversity that disabled individuals bring. This includes investing in inclusive infrastructure, creating equitable opportunities, and challenging harmful stereotypes.

Empowerment begins with acknowledgment: society itself often creates the limitations that disabled people face. By addressing these limitations, we can move toward a more inclusive future where disability is no longer a reason for disregard but an opportunity for growth and collective progress.

The purpose of migration, immigration, or emigration is, at its core, a pursuit of better socioeconomic circumstances and improved quality of life. Whether driven by financial necessity, educational aspirations, or personal growth, the act of leaving one’s homeland is inherently tied to the hope for opportunity. According to a recent report by The Friday Times, based on an analysis by Pulse Consultants titled “An Overview of Pakistani Emigration Patterns (2008-2024),” over 10 million Pakistanis have emigrated since 2008, primarily in search of work. This wave of migration has brought significant financial benefits to Pakistan, with overseas workers contributing $30.251 million in remittances.

However, while remittances offer an undeniable boost to the national economy, they also expose a more complex reality. The economic potential of a nation like Pakistan is often undermined by a reliance on remittances rather than fostering sustainable development within the country. The low economic output highlighted in yesterday’s blog suggests a broader issue: the departure of so many individuals in search of better opportunities reflects a failure to address structural inequities at home. It also reveals an undercurrent of biased ignorance or arrogance that can arise among those who leave, often unaware of—or disconnected from—the struggles of those left behind.

The Disconnected Margins

The remittance figure of $30.251 million demonstrates the tangible benefits of migration for individuals and their families. Yet, it also raises critical questions about collective responsibility. Even if migration improves individual circumstances, it does little for the marginalized populations who remain in Pakistan, particularly the disabled. By definition, the most marginalized—those lacking the financial resources, networks, or physical ability to emigrate—will always remain within the country. This includes individuals with disabilities, who often experience exclusion not just from opportunities but also from the broader narratives of progress fueled by emigration.

As emigrants settle abroad, their focus on personal and familial gains often sidelines the systemic issues back home. This ignorance or arrogance, while unintentional, becomes evident in the diaspora’s limited engagement with those who are most in need. The disabled community, already marginalized within local frameworks, suffers further from this disconnect. For them, the question becomes not just about opportunity but about survival, equity, and the recognition of their potential.

Where is Home?

For many emigrants, “home” becomes a fluid concept, defined more by where they find economic stability than where they were born. But what does “home” mean for those who cannot leave? For disabled individuals, home is both a place of belonging and a site of struggle—a space where they fight daily to prove their worth and capabilities in the face of societal biases. Their existence challenges the very notion of home as a safe or nurturing environment, as they confront barriers to education, employment, and dignity.

Disabled people, by their very nature, often possess a profound desire to outperform, to prove to the world—and to themselves—that they are just as skilled, capable, and deserving as anyone else. They harbor a quiet determination to break stereotypes and exceed expectations. Yet, this potential often goes unnoticed or unsupported, both by local systems and by overseas communities who might otherwise champion their cause.

Why Are We So Afraid?

Why, then, do we as a society shy away from embracing the contributions of the disabled? Is it fear of confronting our biases? Is it the discomfort of acknowledging that true progress requires dismantling deeply entrenched inequalities? Or perhaps it is the unwillingness to challenge the status quo, which too often defines success in narrow, able-bodied terms.

The fear may also lie within the disabled community itself—not of failure, but of a world that continually underestimates them. The courage it takes to step forward in such a world is immense, yet it is often met with apathy or resistance. For emigrants, engaging with this reality requires both humility and a willingness to confront the privilege their mobility affords them.

Bridging the Divide

To truly address the inequities left in the wake of emigration, the diaspora must redefine their understanding of home. Home is not merely where opportunity lies; it is where responsibility begins. By acknowledging the struggles of those left behind—particularly the disabled—diaspora communities can transform their remittances from transactional to transformational. This involves not just financial contributions but also advocacy, mentorship, and investment in systems that empower the marginalized.

Disabled individuals, in turn, need platforms that amplify their voices and showcase their skills. They are not mere recipients of aid but active contributors to society, capable of driving innovation, inspiring change, and redefining what it means to succeed.

In this reimagined vision of home, no one is left behind—not the emigrant chasing dreams abroad, nor the disabled person proving their worth against all odds. Together, these narratives can converge to create a world that values equity over ignorance and potential over prejudice.

Human emotions and feelings often play a critical role in shaping our understanding of power, but what is the actual value of this power when it is perceived as ineffective. The notion that a particular abled model of working and employment will inevitably lead to increased productivity and slower economic growth is not only flawed but inherently inefficient and unsustainable. Such an ideology fails to account for the nuances of local contexts and the unique challenges faced by regions like Gilgit Baltistan, where 80,000 of, us, disabled people reside

In the context of Gilgit Baltistan, where socio-economic structures are deeply rooted in cultural and geographical realities, adopting rigid, externally imposed employment or economic models can be counterproductive. While the ideology might hold theoretical merit in different scenarios, it does not align with the specific needs, resources, and aspirations of the people in this region. Instead, a more localised, inclusive, and adaptive approach is essential—one that respects the lived experiences of the community and harnesses their unique strengths for sustainable growth.

The accurate measure of a successful model lies in its ability to integrate emotional intelligence, community engagement, and practical innovation into its core, ensuring that the power wielded is meaningful, equitable, and capable of fostering genuine progress.

Evaluating Disability as a Source of Competitive Advantage

In their article,  Luisa Alemany and Freek Vermeulen cite that disability should be used as a competitive advantage rather than a barrier to employment. To quote a particular case near Pakistan, Consider the Gran Estación shopping mall in Bogotá, Colombia, which employs many people with physical disabilities in a variety of roles—for example, customer relations. People who want to meet with someone in customer service are often upset and angry. Disabled employees seem better able to defuse such emotions, according to the mall’s general manager. It may be that the social model has contributed to it, but in turn, employers get more satisfied with their choices.

Colombia, like Pakistan, has an insecure political climate. It does not mean that they are violating the rights of their disabled citizens.

To what do I owe the Pleasure?

Drafting this article for this review was challenging, but it also shows that to err is to be human. Each day that we do not change this, each day, disabled people are more socially excluded, who are unused workers, that have more productivity than their non disabled counterparts. Why do we still make the same mistakes? Are we really selfish as Freud’s ID seems? Do we not want to better ourselves?

I do not feel the same way as a disabled person does.

Human nature is often driven by a selfish individual perspective, with emotional feelings shaped as social constructs that reflect how an individual is perceived and behaves within society. Inside that social construct, the “I, Me, Myself” drives our inner emotions of happiness, anger, and joy.

The psychologist Sigmund Freud explored this phenomenon through his theory of the human psyche, dividing it into three components: the id, ego, and superego. These components work together to influence human behavior and emotions:

1. The Id:
   • Represents the primal, instinctual part of the psyche.
   • Operates on the pleasure principle, seeking immediate gratification for desires and needs, such as happiness and joy.
   • Is inherently selfish and unconcerned with societal norms or consequences.
2. The Ego:
   • Acts as the rational, conscious part of the psyche.
   • Balances the desires of the id with the constraints of reality and societal expectations.
   • Manages inner emotions and helps navigate social constructs by aligning personal happiness with acceptable behavior.
3. The Superego:
   • Represents the moral conscience and internalized societal rules.
   • Often in conflict with the id, as it strives for ideal behavior that aligns with cultural and ethical standards.
   • Influences feelings like guilt or pride, shaped heavily by social constructs.

Freud’s framework suggests that the “I, Me, Myself” is a reflection of the ego’s negotiation between personal desires and societal expectations. Emotional states such as happiness, anger, and joy emerge as responses to this dynamic interplay. While our inner emotions may feel personal, they are often deeply rooted in the cultural and social frameworks in which we exist. We tend to think that the disabled – the less abled in some aspects of life are not influenced by this, and somehow, we tend to go into that social, medical, generous model of support.

While these emotions and feelings are valid, time and time again, to quote psychologists there are false premises that we as individuals have or keep.

Psychosis and disabled people

The Charity, Mind UK refers to Psychosis as Psychosis (also called a ‘psychotic experience’ or ‘psychotic episode’) is when you perceive or interpret reality in a very different way from people around you. Applying this to our study, it seems humanity may have entered an episodic state, failing to recognize that disabled individuals are human beings, equal in dignity and worth, rather than perceiving them as separate entities. Why?

Why, what, who and where?

Different traditions can have different contexts, but it is the WHO we are interested it in and why? One Reason is power, another reason could be fear, but more importantly it seems like that our emotions are dominated who we are. Yesterday, we had a discussion with someone, who says you and I share the same values, but it might not reflect others? While Freud’s work has been criticized as unscientific in modern psychology, it still offers valuable insights into the interplay between emotions, power, and societal constructs.

Toward a New Understanding

If we aim to break free from this episodic state, we must move beyond outdated perceptions and biases. Recognizing disabled individuals as integral members of our shared humanity requires re-examining the emotions, constructs, and power dynamics that shape our worldview. Only by doing so can we build a society that values equality, inclusivity, and mutual respect.

Introduction

Many people engage in the habit of smoking, releasing smoke into the air. Over time, the use of vapes and e-cigarettes has become so widespread in the West that it seems almost universal—young kids, teenagers, and older adults alike participate in this trend. While the act of smoking may seem harmless or insignificant to the larger world, the underlying reality reflects a different story.

For disabled individuals, the metaphorical “smoke” of this behavior symbolizes neglect. The act of smoking—releasing vapor or smoke into the air—serves no purpose beyond satisfying an individual’s craving. It mirrors the way society often overlooks the needs of disabled people, doing little to address structural barriers or create meaningful change. In this sense, just as smoking into the air is an unproductive habit, societal inaction can be similarly ineffective in tackling disability issues.

At its core, smoking and vaping are addictive behaviours driven by a craving for nicotine. Addiction can distract people from actively engaging with broader issues, including supporting those who are disabled or differently-abled. When energy is channelled into habitual, self-serving actions like smoking, it leaves little room for reflection on collective responsibility or making an impact in areas that truly matter, such as fostering inclusivity or advocating for marginalised groups.

In essence, this comparison highlights how ingrained habits—whether it’s smoking or societal indifference—can perpetuate cycles of neglect.

To break free from this, society must confront its “addiction” to complacency and instead channel its energy toward empowering and supporting those in need, such as the disabled community.

The act of doing but not saying

---

The Overlooked Needs of Disabled People Amid Societal Distractions

Disabled individuals face a daily struggle for visibility, resources, and inclusion. However, their needs are often overshadowed by societal behaviours and issues that, while significant in their own right, divert attention and energy away from creating systemic change

1. The False Prioritization of Personal Habits Over Collective Responsibility:
   Smoking, vaping, and similar habits symbolize how individuals often focus on immediate gratification or personal coping mechanisms rather than broader, more pressing societal issues. Similarly, governments and communities may prioritize addressing high-visibility concerns, like smoking-related health campaigns, while sidelining efforts to improve accessibility, promote disability rights, or reduce barriers for disabled individuals. For instance, while anti-smoking campaigns receive widespread funding and support, many disability initiatives remain underfunded and underrepresented in public discourse.
2. Distraction Through Debate:
   Controversial issues like smoking, vaping, or other health-related behaviors dominate public debate, consuming resources and attention that could otherwise be directed toward neglected groups. For example, while legislative bodies argue over e-cigarette regulations, policies ensuring workplace accessibility or funding for disability-inclusive education languish in bureaucratic limbo. These distractions not only delay progress but also signal to disabled individuals that their concerns are not a societal priority.
3. The Cost of Neglect:
   The financial burden of addressing smoking-related health issues is enormous, yet disability advocacy often struggles for funding. This reflects a systemic imbalance: resources are poured into mitigating self-inflicted problems like smoking while preventable barriers for disabled people—such as inaccessible infrastructure or lack of employment opportunities—are ignored. The societal cost of neglecting disability rights is immense, leading to increased dependency, unemployment, and healthcare costs for disabled individuals, which ultimately burdens society as a whole.
4. Reinforcement of Marginalization:
   When issues like smoking dominate societal focus, they reinforce the marginalization of disabled people. The message is clear: issues impacting able-bodied individuals are deemed more urgent or important than the fundamental rights and needs of disabled people. This perpetuates cycles of exclusion, as the societal narrative consistently places other priorities above inclusivity and equity for disabled communities.
5. Breaking the Cycle of Neglect:
   Just as smoking cessation requires intentional action to break an addictive cycle, addressing the neglect of disabled people requires a collective shift in priorities. Society must move away from reactive problem-solving, which addresses visible issues like smoking, to proactive inclusivity, which tackles the invisible struggles of marginalized groups. This shift demands a reallocation of resources, greater awareness, and a commitment to making disabled people a focal point of policymaking and societal discourse.

---

A Call to Action

The focus on issues like smoking symbolises a more profound truth about society’s complacency—an addiction to maintaining the status quo rather than confronting harder, less glamorous challenges like disability rights. To truly foster an inclusive society, we must challenge this complacency and redirect our collective energy and resources toward empowering disabled individuals.