Linton

Reflective Annotated Bibliography: “Reassigning Meaning”

CloverLeave a comment

Title and Author(s):

Simi Linton, “Reassigning Meaning”, second chapter of Claiming Disability.

Summary:

In this reading, Linton provides a theoretical framework that re-centers disability within the discussion on health and society, while considering other intersectional factors of race, gender, and sexual orientation as belonging on an axis with points of privilege. First, Linton introduces the audience to many of the terms typically used to discuss disability⁠—ableism, special, abnormality, overcome, person with disability⁠—going as far as to deconstruct that dis- into its “semantic consequences” (31) of diminutive separation. Through naming oppressive language (i.e. “dying of AIDS”), describing the conflict (the implication that those with AIDS are incapable of living active lives), and providing a helpful alternative (i.e. “living with AIDS”), Linton demystifies the myriad of options for describing disability, recommending the terms disabled and nondisabled among them (27). At the center of Linton’s framework is the idea that the nondisabled position is not the “universal, neutral position from which disabled people deviate” (32), but simply possible outcomes of human variation.

Quotations: 

“This new language conveys different meanings, and, significantly, the shifts serve as metacommunications about the social, political, intellectual, and ideological transformations that have taken place” (9).

“When disabled people are able to pass for nondisabled, and do, the emotional toll it takes is enormous” (20).

“Saying that someone is suffering from a condition implies that there is a perpetual state of suffering, uninterrupted by pleasurable moments or satisfactions. Afflicted carries similar presumptions” (26).

Reflections:

More than anything else from this text, I am grateful to have a layman’s-terms toolkit for discussing disability as the quarter draws on. There is so much power in language, and as Linton points out, language itself is a driver and a shaper of conversation. Knowing exactly why certain colloquial terms have been intentionally abandoned by disability advocates, and which alternatives are preferable, makes me more comfortable in charting the waters ahead.

However, I was pretty confused by some of the language in this reading, specifically about nondisabled perspectives. Linton wrote “The nondisabled stance, like the white stance, is veiled” on page fourteen. What exactly does this mean? That the “nondisabled stance” is an undertheorized stance? What is a “white stance”, anyhow? At first, some of Linton’s phrasing might seem inflammatory, but that in itself helped me to generate thought as I worked to dispute whatever I disagreed with at first. Another example: Linton described the nondisabled on page 32 as “a category of people whose power and cultural capital keep them at the center”. This ordering of words makes it seem as though the nondisabled could wield this “power” as a tool to force their way into higher positions in society. However, I believe what Linton means to say is that the absence of ableist oppression among the nondisabled—whether that may be incurred medical bills, workplace discrimination, an increased difficulty in accessing resources, or imposed stigma—allow the nondisabled to come to the “center” of the discussion on disability, through the osmotic pressures of privilege in society. 

It’s clear from this reading that Linton is as deeply critical of the linguistic structures enforcing ableism as our popular slang, which to me is refreshing, as it adds a layer of depth. Linton argues that only through the use of humanizing, accurate, and warranted language towards disability may academic discussions on ability and society be facilitated respectfully and appropriately. Personally, I couldn’t agree more.

Linton and Terminology

turtle8 Comments
  • “Reassigning Meaning” By Simi Linton
  • In this excerpt, Linton lists the different terminology to refer to or speak of people with disabilities. She goes through all the terms and their different categories, explaining exactly why they are problematic, frowned upon, and used, “The present examination of disability has no need for the medical language of symptoms and diagnostic categories.”(2). They argue that almost all words and phrases can be oppressive or offensive. First, she opens up with the claim that disability and the medical significance is unnecessary. From there, Simi points out all the problems with different words such as ‘ableism’ or ‘overcoming a disability’ and why these need to be addressed, “To say that I am physically challenged is to state that the obstacles to my participation are physical, not social, and that the barrier is my own disability”(14). Finally, she concludes that with the spreading of knowledge and awareness there will be better and more accurate terminology for disabled people as well as the power abled people have over this, “Similarly, it is important to examine the non disabled position and its privilege and power” (32). Overall, this was a very informative and interesting excerpt.
  • I think what stuck with me the most was the fact that almost every phrase or term that I use is offensive in some way. I had not thought deeply about these terms, I just accepted them as they were and maybe that was due to the exposure I grew up with and what I learned from parents, family, and just people in my community. It made me mad realizing that not only have we put these people in a group but we have created terms that are inappropriate and no one seems to care to understand that. It makes me upset that this is not something that is taught in schools or studied closely. We learn about racism, sexism, yet this does not qualify for some reason? In a way, I feel as if the education system has failed me in this way. My lack of knowledge and the fact that I had not realize that my lack of knowledge was present on this topic, makes me upset. I make it a goal to be as informed and respectful about topics like these and I feel like I have failed here.
  • Language and labels are so important. In my personal opinion, words are the most powerful thing in the world. They cannot be taken back and people remember them for the rest of their lives. Words start wars and forms relationships. Something that can do such drastic things holds power. This reading really reminded me of that opinion. The way that words effect people and can change a generation, or a group. These terms influence how people view themselves in terms of self image as well as society. This is something that needs to be addressed, finding ways to respect people should be a priority and in this case, it feels like it is not.