Why Crip Camp is Important

The film Crip Camp is a storytelling showpiece about the roots of disability rights and disability rights activists. While the documentary centers around the story of how the ADA came to be and activism in general, it offers an important theme of community and accessibility embedded in. We begin the film with a nostalgic 70s scene of campers at Camp Jened. Camp Jened is an all-inclusive camp for young teens with a disability. At the camp, the audience gets to see disability in a different light than usual as campers build friendships that stand the test of time as we see later on. As a student who never received education about disabilities or disability rights, this film struck a chord with me. I wish my high school had this built into the curriculum in some way. I believe it could fit really well into a history class and teach students to think deeper into human rights and politics.  

After establishing a community in Camp Jened the film jumps to a different time in campers lives as they’ve grown up and find one another again. The story mainly includes three campers named Judith Heumann, Stephen Hoffman, and Larry Allison that retell their story and how they all became close friends from beginning of camp to later in life. Not only is history important in this film for the obvious reason of laws being passed, but there is first a history of relationships that allowed there to be protests pushing for legislation to be passed. At Camp Jened, it was clear the space the entire time was about helping one another out beyond just physically. To create an atmosphere as such is not a difficult feat, but it is difficult to keep it going outside those safe walls. Authors Susan Burch and Kim E. Nielsen emphasize a social-relational model of disability for historians to refer to in their chapter appropriately titled “History.” With this model disability can be seen as shaped by the environment the person is in (Burch, Nielsen, 96). That is to say that if a person with a disability is around a culture not only inclusive to others like themselves but also a culture that is open for them physically and socially then they will thrive. Unfortunately, America has not been successful with that goal and that is where protests began which ignited the ADA.  

Coming from a small town with small minds, I can see how this might not always execute well when shown to high schoolers. The issue I believe just lies in the belief systems and how strong they are (always have been) surrounding disability. I will promise you that there will always be at least one or two students that will be open minded and that can change a classroom environment entirely. This film is going to be necessary for those environments. Another issue with rhetoric surrounding disability is the fact that most stories told about folks who are disabled are told by able-bodied people. The film can offer aspects of teaching that should and need to be acknowledged when discussing history such as psychological issues, sociological impacts, culture, and intersectionality. As Burch and Nielsen said, “Disability rights movements in all of their manifestations share central themes in history: struggle, citizenship, labor, power, violence, health, representation, and community.” (Burch, Nielsen, 97). In high school I believe it’s important to realize the power that groups create. If teens had more exposure to civil rights knowledge and more specifically how they came to be (like this film) I think it can be easier to see how they themselves can create change in the world when it’s needed.  

Something big I personally took from this film is how the community helped shape every part of action that was taken. I could be wrong, but I feel like if one is almost thrust into the world of politics because it’s demanded it can be exhausting quickly. By that, I mean when your rights are at risk, you feel the need to act because no one else will. However, Judy Heumann our main leader of the protests, had community all the way back from camp helping her. In their adult life they still found one another taking care of each other mentally and physically to better the whole nation.  

The Philosopher’s Dilemma: Why Different Bodyminds Deserve The Right To Live

Summary: 

In the piece, “Unspeakable Conversations” author Harriet McBryde Johnson recounts her experience with meeting infamous philosopher and professor at Princeton University, Peter Singer. Johnson is a disabled rights activist a part of the organization Not Dead Yet and lives with a neuromuscular disease herself. Familiar with his ideologies relating to infanticide and mirroring beliefs in modern-day eugenics, Johnson was intrigued yet reluctant to meet Singer. Their first interaction is intriguing because Johnson sees some of her own peers chatting with Singer, the man that believes anyone with a disability should not be born/be able to live. They get introduced and suddenly start exchanging emails for a while until Johnson is invited to speak at his university to a group of students with a follow-up Q and A. Upon arrival Johnson notes the attentive audience nodding along to the illogical, quite frankly horrid arguments Singer presents to them. He is professional, respectful, and calm. When Johnson speaks, she adds more of a personal touch while keeping the same professionalism. Afterwards, the two end up going on a walk as they also say their goodbyes and it seems Johnson’s opinion of his character has changed a bit. The chapter closes with thoughts running through Johnson’s head about Singer, about how ignorant people can be when it comes to disability in general. She feels content with concluding that Singer is extremely misguided but truly believes he is doing something helpful. She cannot hate him or violently argue because the world is filled with Singer’s unfortunately, but she was able to make some important dialogue with him that could alter others’ minds.  

Quotes: 

“But I have trouble with basing life-and-death decisions on market considerations when the market is structured by prejudice” (Pg. 10) 

“Within the strange limits of this strange assignment, it seems Singer is doing all he can to make me comfortable” (Pg. 18) 

“If I define Singer’s kind of disability prejudice as an ultimate evil, and him as a monster, then I must so define all who believe disabled lives are inherently worse off or that a life without a certain kind of consciousness lacks value.” (Pg. 26) 

Reflection: 

This reading wasn’t one of my favorites, but I think the writing got away from me towards the end. The theme that stuck out to me the most and seemed one of the most important was the power of rhetoric here. Since Singer had a professional, calm tone about him he would/will always have an attentive audience. Not to mention his status as a professor and famous philosopher. Singer has the privilege of painting his atrocious beliefs as something admirable because not only does he believe he is coming up with a real solution, but his status and demeanor demand interest and respect. If Johnson or anyone with Not Dead Yet were to speak out against Singer in a “aggressive” way that would be completely rational, an audience would see it as irrational depleting the other sides view immediately. Johnson knew for that reason she must remain calm but still added her personal touches in and also was professional. As we are all aware, many people similar to Singer exist in our world and they exist through their usage of rhetoric.