That isn't the point really. The point is that such physical characteristics get mentioned as the defining ones - they garner such remarks. How does this reporter know what people think of the man's physical state? The reporter is putting his own colored tainted view of the physical characteristics onto the story -- and in the first paragraph.
By medical standards, they would be. Speech pathologists would be called in, and opthomologists consulted. (Not that disability rights people would necessarily call that a good thing.)
>is having buck teeth an impairment?
Do the buck teeth prevent one from engaging in a major life activity? Do they prevent one from eating, for instance? Some might group it as a disability if the buck teeth cause discrimination or prejudice. Or -- one prong of the ADA defines disability as regarded as having an impairment.
So personally,would you take a buck teeth woman out for dinner or to the movies? Or would you take her off the list for that sort of thing. This is sort of along the lines of burn victims. Scarring of the face and such.
Marta
>
-- Marta Russell Los Angeles, CA http://www.disweb.org