disability

RAB: O’Toole’s Insight on Celebrating Crip Bodyminds

unsureunderwaterobot1 Comment

Celebrating Crip Bodyminds
By: Cobett Joan O’Toole

An objective summary of the reading:

O’Toole begins by summarizing their book, explaining their first-hand experience being disabled, and years of studying disability studies. They give anecdotal evidence of just how complex disability is, through a story about a group of women, unable to commit to the term “disabled”. Then they explain the importance of disabled communities and why disabled circles are so important. O’Toole emphasizes the idea that disability is not a monolith, yet it is a communal experience.

O’Toole explains the terms and labels they use throughout their writing and give the reader a literary ground to stand on. Additionally, they provide cultural context, discussing how nondisabled society has determined what “normal” is and how disabled folks navigate this false ideology. From there, O’Toole dives into the misconceptions nondisabled folks have, emphasizing on the erasure or idealization of disabled people.

Later, O’Toole goes back to the language of disability, both in their own life and an academic setting. They give tools and tricks for identifying people based on their intersectional identities.

3 or more quotations (with page numbers):

The page numbers included are the pages from the dox. document!

“Being disabled is a cultural experience which shares many commonalities, even with others with very different disabilities” (pg. 7)

“Normal” is an artificial construct built upon the white, middle-class, male, nondisabled bodymind” (pg. 10) “Nobody is normal” (pg.12).
“Acknowledging that there is no ‘normal’ doesn’t mean that everyone experiences disability as a political and social identity. Acknowledging that there is no ‘normal’ creates a society where difference can be recognized without being diffused or ignored. It does not take away the culture of disability, only adds an opportunity and awareness for us to be more integrated into society as a whole” (pg. 12)

“What do you call a disabled person?” I don’t know the ‘right’ answer, but may I suggest calling him by his name, Bob? But I digress.” (pg.39)

“Was I going to use the academic language? Was I going to use the language of service professionals? Was I going to use the disabled peoples’ self- and community-identifiers? How should the time (late 20th century) and place (United States, more specifically Berkeley, California) shape the language choices?” (pg.37)

“So while I am widely known as being queer in disability, I was much quieter about being queer when negotiating school services for my disabled daughter. I was no less queer, but the school environment was significantly less friendly to queer parents than to non-queer parents. So I prioritized my daughter’s need for services over my own need to educate them about queer and disabled parents.” (pg. 41) Codeswitching and intersectionality

Thoughts:

Something that stuck with me was the way the author wrote. It was a beautiful combination of rightfully unapologetic and understanding of the readers’ potential ignorance. I was struck by some of the language I didn’t know, as someone who is part of the disabled community. Primarily, I had never heard the term “consumer” for a mental disability. I’m eager to learn more about disability studies and the language used both within and outside of the disabled community. I have always found language to be so important, when identifying people; I value language that leaves a baseline for humanness, while making space for differences to be seen and valued. I included a quote about calling a disabled man “Bob” because that’s his name and I found that so grounding!

Identifiers span cross identities, both chosen and culturally given. I admired how the author explained their experience with intersectionality. In the final quote I included, they explain an instance when they code-switched to protect themselves and their daughter. No human fits into a box, we are all combinations of privilege, lack thereof, and positionality. It is so humanizing to recognize these combinations and have the language for them. Language also leaves space for like-bodyminded folks to feel supported and not alone. #intersectionalityordie

Piss on Pity

unsureunderwaterobot2 Comments

The Kids are Alright is a short documentary breaking down the inappropriate and dehumanizing nature of Jerry Lewis’ Labor Day Telethon for folks with Muscular Dystrophy. Mike Ervin, an ex-poster child for Jerry’s fundraiser, speaks up about being exploited as a source of pity to raise money. The conflict of this film is the mistreatment of disabled folks and the saviorism that exasperates this mistreatment. The rhetor of this film, Ervin, explains his first hand experience in the field of disability activism – as a disabled person. Ervin tries to amplify the voices of folks living with MD in hopes of abolishing pitiful fundraisers like those held by Jerry Lewis and the MDA. Throughout the film Ervin uses storytelling as a means to get his point across. He addresses his own ethos, as a man living with muscular dystrophy. He uses pathos, by expressing his human reaction to being pitied. Ironically, the fundraisers he fights against use a false pathos (pity) in order to sell charity. Ervin’s logos show up through statistics of poorly used MDA funds and the wrong “cure”. What I mean is, the telethon only supplies 30% of the MDA’s annual funds and of that so much is allocated to fancy scientist conferences and advertising campaigns. Ervin questions the viewer what “a cure” for MD even looks like and how do we get there. Is it funneling money into politically charged conferences? Or is it providing disabled folks with chairs, ramps, autonomy, and resources? This film really had me questioning where “charity” funds are going and from whom they are requested. I couldn’t help but think, if this is how a white, seemingly financially stable, man is treated in the world, how are QTPOC disabled folks feeling. As mentioned in the film, disability is not a monolith, every disabled person is a human with individual complexities, and I’d love to continue to learn more from different facets moving forward.

Overall the film was 4/5 due to only focusing in on one man, rather than getting a few perspectives. Although, it almost feels backwards for me, as someone without MD, to be rating how MD is portrayed in a film. Hmph.

Unintended Orphans

turtle1 Comment

The film The Kids Aren’t Alright gives us an inside look at what it is like to suffer from a disability and get unwanted and unhelpful assistance. The film centers the story of a telethon created by Jerry Lewis and the Muscular Dystrophy Association (MDA) that is meant to raise money and donations to help look for a cure to this condition. The film highlights that this telethon is counterproductive. The telethon is created to get people to pity and feel bad for people with Muscular Dystrophy, to guilt them into donating. Jerry Lewis and the MDA paint this unrealistic picture that people with this condition are suffering, that they are not able to live life to the fullest. That these people desire a cure for their condition, as if it is a requirement to live a full life. Jerry’s Orphans challenge this perception that Jerry Lewis and the MDA has created. They bring to light the fact that they can live happy lives full of love, happiness, and fulfillment and they are not looking for anyone’s pity.

The rhetor in this documentary is the creator, Mike Ervin, and his goal with this film is to bring to light the misconceptions and truths of living with Muscular Dystrophy. Ervin establishes his personal authority by speaking about his personal experience as someone with Muscular Dystrophy, he gets people to empathize with him by sharing personal stories of discrimination and hardships he has faced while bringing to light a corrupt system and organization. Him, and the rest of Jerry’s Orphans, go about trying to accomplish this by leading non violent protests during these telethons, handing out pamphlets, making phone calls to people in power, and simply educating people on what it is to be a person with this disability and what we can do to actually help them.

I give this film a four out of five stars. I think the film did a great job highlighting the voices of those with Muscle Dystrophy and explaining what is offensive, disrespectful, and ignorant about Jerry Lewis’s yearly telethon. It did a wonderful job depicting the actions and success but also the obstacles that Jerry’s Orphans have experienced and taken. The one thing I wish the film did was tell the viewer how to be of assistance. By watching the film I am know educated and enlightened on these people’s struggle and experience but the film does not tell me how to take action or in what way they would like us to help them with their cause.