RAB

De-Centering Whiteness to Make Room for Black Joy

unsureunderwaterobot1 Comment
  1. The title and author of the source 

Keh Brown, “Nurturing Black Disabled Joy” 

  1. An objective summary of the reading 

Brown begins by identifying themselves as a Black woman with CP, who strives toward joy in a world that assumes its absence. She states her argument that emphasizes inclusion within (and outside) the disabled community, in a way that de-centers whiteness. Popular culture sees disability through the lens of a cishet white man who is a wheelchair user and hates his life. This image is a monolith and erases the author; she aims to combat this. Her end goal is joy and the agency to live fully. Using the hashtag #DisabledAndCute, Brown broadcasted her joy. She says that her perspectives often leave people angry or confused, but that. The quote is included below, but she states that days in which joy is absent, it is important to remember, feeling at all is a gift. 

  1. 3 or more quotations (with page numbers) 

“No one should have to be happy all the time- no one can be, with all the ways in which life throws curveballs at us. On those days, it’s important not to mourn the lack of joy but to remember how it feels, to remember that to feel at all is one of the greatest gifts we have in life.” (Brown pg. 119) 

My joy is my freedom—it allows me to live my life as I see fit. I won’t leave this earth without the world knowning that I chose to live a life that made me happy, made me think, made me whole. I won’t leave this earth without the world knowing that I chose to live.” (Brown pg. 120) 

In response to readers who were confused, frightened, or angry, “… reacted defensively because they’re not centered in my story– because I am calling for inclusion that decenters whiteness.” (Brown pg. 118) 

  1. A personal reflection naming 2 or 3 take-aways from the reading 

I thought this reading was a brilliant depiction of intersectionality (intersectionality or die). The author takes note of their identity and experiences, then forms an educated notion that centers the lives of those who most frequently experience marginalization. She is aiming to reframe thinking; away from cishet white guys, to Black disabled womxn; away from the despair life may throw at you, to the joy that exists! I hate commenting on this, but this piece was very accessibly digestible (even my old-fart of a father could read this and gather something from it). Brown successfully drops knowledge and encouragement, while challenging the reader to be better. 

We Can’t Go Back -RAB response

Djellibeybi2 Comments

An essay derived from a statement presented before the United States Senate Committee on Health, education, Labor and Pensions on June 21 2012 from Ricardo T. Thornton Sr. Ricardo discusses his life experience in an institution, Forest Haven in Washington D.C.. He and many of his family and loved ones had been placed in institutions like Forest Haven, and he was very familiar with the abuses that take place when rights are not respected between client and caretaker. When he was able to leave Forest Haven, he lived in group homes where he met his future wife, Donna, and began to develop a good life for himself because he lived in a community which encouraged him to succeed. When given the opportunity, Thornton believes the disabled can succeed in society and that it is not good to separate the disabled from the community and any opportunity to succeed.

Quote:

“In the institution, I didn’t get to think for myself. The Staff thought for me and made all of my decisions. For a long time, no one expected anything of me.” Pg. 85

“I hear people say that some people are too disabled to live in the community, but I’ve seen people just like the people just like the people still in institutions who do so much better in the community – because no one expects you to do anything in the institution but survive.” Pg. 87

“Segregating people is always bad; people never grow in those places and are safer and happier in community.” Pg. 89

I thought that this essay was very well written. I would have loved to listen to this guy read his speech. Maybe it’s available online. The guy seems like an amazing person, and I wouldn’t mind meeting him, to be honest.

Nurturing Black Disabled Joy -RAB response

DjellibeybiLeave a comment

A short essay into the personal experience of Keah Brown, a black woman with cerebral palsy. She talks about feeling joy and happiness as a black person with disabilities. She explains a little about her personal life, having written a book about her personal experiances, called “The Pretty One: On Life, Pop Culture, Disability, and Other Reasons to Fall in Love with Me” as well as being a progenitor of the hashtag #DisabledAndCute in 2017. She points out that she chooses to be happy as a disabled person. She wants to be remembered and noticed for the joy that she left in this world.

Quotation:

“Embracing my own joy now means that I didn’t always.” -Pg. 117

“I wondered why this positive message would elicit such negative reactions, and I could come up with only one reason: these readers, both disabled and not, reacted defensively because they’re not centered in my story – because I’m calling for inclusion that decenters whiteness” -Pg. 118

“Calling out ableism, racism, and homophobia in marginalized communities through my writing. It means that I’ve literally stopped apologizing for the space I take up on stages or in the airport.” -Pg. 118-119

Reflections:

While I can appreciate the sentiment that she is trying to make, there’s some things in this essay that kind of got to me. One is her idea that people are uncomfortable with her being a happy disabled person because she is black. Why should that be a problem? There are plenty of black people with disabilities – I know a few personally. And then she talks about how black people are represented in the media. I’m generally one who doesn’t care about representation in the media. Since when has media been an accurate reflection of human life? It gives the whole essay a narcissistic tone that is difficult for me to enjoy or ignore. Even so, I’m glad Keah Brown was able to share her thoughts – it’s obviously making a difference in the lives of many disabled people, and I can appreciate that.

In Sickness and In Difference

DellFrogLeave a comment

(I apologize in advance but I am doing two essays. I figured a few of us might choose one of them, but I still wanted to give my thoughts on it!)

CW: Sex toys

Keisha Scott’s “Last but Not Least- Embracing Asexuality”

Jamison Hill’s “Love Means Never Having to Say… Anything”

“Love Means Never Having to Say… Anything” begins with Jamison Hill’s desire to say “I love you” to his partner, Shannon. Hill recounts the times when he thought he was in love with previous partners, when he could still speak and have conversations with them, before defining his condition of myalgic encephalomyelitis, a condition that keeps him bedridden and unable to speak. Hill continues by speaking about how he had met Shannon and how their shared condition turned into a relationship, and how that relationship between two sick people can be just as good as a relationship between a sick person and a healthy person. He talks about the way they take care of each other and share their lives together without vocal conversation and he ends with his painful attempt to vocalize his love. The essay finishes with his failed attempt, but Shannon’s understanding of what he wanted to say.

“Last but Not Least- Embracing Asexuality” begins with Keisha Scott’s recounting of always being the last person to hit milestones. From her blindness, to getting her period late, Scott tells of how she felt different from everyone around her, but she desperately wanted to be a woman. She continues with talking about how all of her friends were interested in children, boys, and having sex, being jealous of the attention that her friends got from men, and the desire to gain respect by finally becoming a woman via getting her period. She talks about how she had started by conforming to gender norms for women but was still late in the process, how she first experienced desire to when she first saw porn and masturbated. Scott recalls being disillusioned with the concept of sex, how nothing felt right and that she took a while to understand the sensation of sex. Scott then talks about buying sex toys, dodging questions about sex and relationships, and feeling a “wrongness” that she didn’t align to societal norms. Scott continues by talking about how she took a course on feminism and sexuality and how a conversation about sexuality and disability made her to begin questioning the meaning of “asexuality”. Scott ends the essay by researching asexuality, finding peace in the narratives she read and explaining that she has no desire for sex or children, contrary to what the world around her says.

Quote Bank:

“When we are together, we spend weeks in bed, mostly holding each other, our bodies aligned like two pieces of broken plate glued back together” (Hill, 263)

“These failed romances remind me of the baffling incompatibilities two people can have, but also how love can transcend even the most insurmountable obstacles when you find the right person” (Hill, 264).

“I had never thought about it like that- the possibility of two sick people being in a successful relationship together” (Hill, 265).

“I started to read more on asexuality, read personal stories of others- both disabled and able-bodied – who were completely fine: some were married, some had kids, some have sex once in a blue moon, some have never had sex, some were single” (Scott, 127).

“I already faced discrimination and ableist views from society in so many other ways; I couldn’t bear it if my sexuality ended up being determined by my disability” (Scott, 127).

Reflection:

I chose to do two analyses because I identified so strongly with one, but I also understand that it might be a popular choice in our cohort. So firstly, I will talk about Jamison Hill’s “Love Means Never Having to Say… Anything”. There is a societal pressure that in relationships, certain things *have* to be performed. A romantic first kiss, a declaration of love, a passionate urgency in the early stages that gets rekindled over time. I think that Hill does a great job in subverting these expectations through his writing of his relationship with Shannon. He acknowledges that kissing next to your expended body fluids is not the most romantic thing, but for two sick people, it works because there is a mutual understanding of illness. He might not be able to vocally say “I love you”, but the ways in which they take care of each other are acts of love in themselves, not needing to be spoken aloud. As someone who is a hopeful romantic, I understand to the depth of his definition of “two broken plates glued back together”. There is a fascination with perfection in relationships as well, everything has to appear perfect at all times to the world because no one should know if you have tension in your relationship. However, Hill defines the two of them as broken plates, something deemed by society as “apart”, but together they are “whole”. While they might not be “broken” in the same way, it is through that brokenness that they find wholeness together. The art of *kinstugi*, or repairing broken pottery with gold, allows the artist to highlight the brokenness through something beautiful, and I think that is exactly what Hill has done in this essay. He has taken the brokenness and uniqueness of two people and shown how together, their love and understanding is so beautiful it is beyond words or expectations.

“Last But Not Least- Embracing Asexuality” is one of the most relatable pieces of writing I have read all year. Aside from being blind, the bulk of Scott’s essay was a reflection of my own experience with having chronic illness and discovering my sexuality. As a whole, Scott talks about the dual struggle of being different from her blindness, but then also not having the same feelings and desires as her peers. I have written about the concept of asexuality and disability before, but I will reiterate the point that those who identify as asexual are even more likely to be ostracized in the spaces they occupy. For one, if they are in heteronormative spaces, it is possible they will be ostracized for being disabled. But in disabled spaces, where people with disabilities have fought to be seen as regular sexual beings, asexuals are more likely to be ostracized for not pushing the sexual narrative. There is a unique difficulty that presents itself in these spaces as is, but to have a sense of dual-difference is even more challenging. Despite all of this, I cannot help but feel so validated in Scott’s narrative that she created. In a world that is simultaneously so sex-forward but prudish towards the expression of sexuality, to have any sort of dual-identity with asexuality can be a very lonely process. I can certainly identify with her finding peace in the stories that she read of other asexuals, and it brings me peace to read her narrative. From a disability studies standpoint, I would absolutely recommend anyone studying the intricacies of intersectionality to read this essay. It does a fantastic job at weaving together the truths of gender performance, societal expectations, sexuality, disability, and the general sense of belonging that plagues our existence.

RAB Reflection of “Keyword for Disability Studies”- Chapter 47: “Queer”

Turnip FriendLeave a comment
  1. “Queer” by Tim Dean from Keywords for Disability Studies

2. Summary:

Dean starts this section of the book explaining that in the past, the term “queer” didn’t just apply to people in the LGBTQ+ community. It was also a word used to describe people with physical or cognitive impairments. He then explores how the term “queer” doesn’t oppose heterosexuality, which many people assume. It actually opposes heteronormativity, “the often unspoken assumption that heterosexuality provides the framework through which everything makes sense.” Coined by Michael Warner in the early 1990’s, the term “heteronormativity” was invented to supplement the existing concept of “compulsory heterosexuality” which had been coined by feminist writer Adrienne Rich in the early 1980’s. Dean then explains that “compulsory heterosexuality” is dependent on “compulsory able-bodiedness” because heteronormativity first requires that the participants adhere to the idea of a standard “normal” body. This idea created by disability theorist Robert McRuer, lead to a combination of Disability Theory and Queer Theory to develop “Crip Theory.”

The author states that, “The central claim of this area of scholarship is that, beyond examining the bodily conditions or the physical environments that produce disability, disability studies should also examine those less tangible but profoundly distorted social expectations that presume what bodies should look like and be able to do.” When thinking about disability and sexuality through a queer theory lens, we come to the conclusion that the human body and its capacities are not biologically determined, but are formed and influenced by the process of normalization. Likewise, sociologist Erving Goffman describes how everyone has the potential to fail to adhere to identity norms, and therefore even the so-called “normal” people are put at risk by the system they perpetuate and benefit from. Next, Dean brings up medical historian Georges Canguilhem’s idea that “significant variations from what is statistically normal for a population need not imply pathology.” This concept is important because our perception of variation equating sickness is only upheld when mathematical norms and evaluative norms are conflated together.

Dean then moves onto the AIDS crisis, which he describes as a time when social and medical norms intersected more powerfully than ever before. He references a quote from literary scholar Ellis Hanson’s idea that the origins of Queer Theory came from disability studies due to the activism during the AIDS crisis which centered on the concept that the disease was not isolated to groups such as IV drug users and gay men, though the groups were severely impacted. Dean’s final idea surrounds the idea that queer studies and disability studies are interconnected in many ways that future scholars should look into to form their own theories.

3. Quotations:

-“In recent decades, sexual minorities have reclaimed “queer” as a badge of pride and a mark of resistance to regimes of the normal, mirroring the embrace of terms like “crip” (Dean, 143).

-“Power in modern society is exerted less through channels of regulation and prohibition than through those of normalization and rehabilitation” (Dean, 144).

-“Sex itself, in its effects on coherent selfhood, may be regarded as disabling” (Dean, 145).

4. Reflection:

The idea that most intrigued me from this reading was the assertion that queerness and heterosexuality aren’t opposing concepts in their basic form. The term “queer” has a much wider scope than just a descriptor of sexualities that are non-heterosexual, and instead battles the social standard of heteronormativity which primarily negatives influences the lives of everyone regardless of sexuality and gender. Being a queer person myself, for a long time I was uncertain of whether or not to accept the label because of its negative origins. However, this way of viewing the term is very unifying and inspiring to me.

I also really liked Dean’s emphasis on the idea that these theories are still being expanded and each scholar he referenced has influenced the minds of those involved in the communities, and the other scholars who develop their own theories based off of prior theorists work. It really emphasized that this ideas are built by living, breathing groups of people who want to make the world better both for themselves and the wider culture in relation to the structures that oppress them.

Disability and Race

turtleLeave a comment
  • Race by Nirmala Erevelles
  • This essay is about the direct connection people make between the experience of people of color and the experience of people with disability. Erevelles walks the reader through the pros and cons of this. The author’s argument is that essentially by saying ‘disability is like race’ people are trying to push disability into a broader social recognition as a political minority. Erevelles continues to explain how this has assisted the Disability Rights Movement in moving forward but at the same time created violent and oppressive overtones for disability. She then comes to a conclusion, “Thus, more robust and complex analyses of race and disability are necessary for us to move beyond the initial conceptual space of analogy.” (Erevelles, 148).
  • I found this essay intriguing, especially as a person of color. I thought it was interesting how the history of disability and race lined up in some ways. For example, Erevelles writes, “They were transformed into spectacles for popular consumption and economic profit” (Erevelles, 146). The best example I can think of this is circuses, originally the circus was a compiled group of ‘freaks’ from around the world. These so-called freaks were people of color and people with disability, put on stage for people to make fun of or laugh at, even sexualizes, so others could make money. I understand why disability and race should not be made a direct analogy, in my mind it belittles both group’s experiences, but I do see how making connections like this help us empathize, learn, and understand each other further. I think another thing that stood out to me was the fact that institutions mix race and disability into one big category, specifically in schools. Erevelles writes, “Special education classes became the spaces where African American and Latino students were ghettoized” (Erevelles, 147). This was something I could connect to because people with color and disability were immediately grouped into the special education classes, and that is one thing that I experienced throughout my life that I look back on now and see as problematic.

“Sexuality” by Robert McRuer

DellFrogLeave a comment

“Sexuality” by Robert McRuer, selected from “Keywords for Disability Studies”

Summary:

McRuer begins by acknowledging that the word “sexuality” is already intertwined with words like “freakish” and “abnormal”. He introduces Michel Foucault’s concept of the “cures” and “visibility” of sexuality as a system of control, often to obtain a sense of normalcy or correction. McRuer then compares Foucault’s views of “sexuality” as being similar to “ability” and what resulted in sexuality being pathologized, or specifically linked to a disability. McRuer acknowledges that sexuality is a social construction, which brought out the emergence of heteronormativity and ableism. Because the two were so linked, McRuer talks about how homosexuality led to “feebleminded” diagnoses and stricter regulation for control. He bridges the link between an “abnormal” sexuality being caused by illness or disability, which creates the conception that people who are disabled have an excessive sexuality. These two “excessive” notions led to violent treatments, misinformation about both sexuality and disability, and eventual ruling by the Supreme Court for sterilization. McRuer discusses a shift in the 20th-century from excessive sexuality and disability to the notion that people with disabilities are without sexuality at all. He mentions the link between poor and people of color being seen as “excessive” while white and middle-class are seen as “without” sexuality. Following this, he talks about the idea of people with disabilities having alternate sexual experiences outside of what was understood, which leads into modern day rebellion of both “excessive”, “innocent” and “alternative” sexuality. McRuer ends with discussing the efforts of disability activists against prior notions, and the acknowledgement that efforts are still ongoing and a source of conflict for the modern day person with disabilities.

Quote Bank:

“…in other words, sexuality was endlessly talked about, managed, pathologized, and (often) “corrected” ” (167).

“In 1927, for instance, the U.S. Supreme Court famously ruled that Carrie Buck, who had been deemed “feebleminded” and institutionalized for “incorrigible” and “promiscuous” behavior and who became pregnant after being raped, must be compulsorily sterilized” (168).

“Disabled people often have been discursively constructed as incapable of having sexual desires or a sexual identity, due to their supposed “innocence” ” (168).

Reflection:

In all of my academic studies I have come to understand that if there is one thing that white men love to do, it is to control others. The author does a fantastic job at digging into the intertwined history of sexuality and disability and how they cannot truly be analyzed without the other. The pathologization of sexuality as a disability is in itself offensive, but it also gives the people in power the ability to declare someone “of unsound mind” and to strip them of all autonomy altogether. The development of the “correctional” treatments like shock therapy or sterilization was an inhumane way to tell people with disabilities that they had no choice in life, not even a choice to love and be loved without it being controlled. The case of Carrie Buck is not new to me, and I am fully aware that sterilizations like this continue to the present day. Often people assume that if someone has a severe disability, whether of the body or mind, others assume that the person is “too disabled” to have desires to seek out relationship, sexual or romantic. This concept is widespread enough that growing up and seeing people in wheelchairs or people with Down Syndrome in relationships was a televised phenomena, including shows like “Little People, Big World”. Episodes of medical dramas are committed to showing people with disabilities who are in relationships as “strange” or just straight up ill, especially if the other partner is not disabled. But I chose this chapter specifically because I was curious about the idea that people with disabilities are often seen as “innoccent” or “lacking sexuality”. There is a modern day movement to take back sex and sexuality for people with disabilities, not in an excessive or alternative notion like the text discusses prior, but as a sort of “this is me” kind of mentality. But I wanted to address a very specific point of tension within the disabled community on the base of sexuality. While there is a danger of being “too loud” (read: excessive), or “too kinky” (read: alternative), there is an even finer line between the concept of innocence or being without sexuality. Specifically, there is a subgroup of the asexual community who have an inner struggle of recognizing their sexuality (asexuals being people who experience no sexual attraction) and being ostracized. On one end, the LGBT community will always look at them as “disabled”, and sometimes not in a positive context, but the disabled community, especially those fighting to be recognized as sexual, look at them at perpetuating the “innocent/without” stereotype. So not only do people with disabilities walk a fine line to even be recognized as human at times, but they are also often denied their true lives, living and loving who they want because there is even added pressure being LGBT+ and disabled.

Citation:

Adams, R., Reiss, B., & Serlin, D. (Eds.). (2015). Keywords for disability studies. “Sexuality”. McRuer, R.

RAB O’Toole Reflection

Turnip FriendLeave a comment
  1. Title and Author: 

“Fading Scars: My Queer Disability History” by Corbett Joan O’Toole

  1. Summary:

O’Toole begins their piece first with the statement, “I love being disabled.” They explain that this statement is something most people don’t hear outside of disability circles because nondisabled people have a tendency to think of disabled people only in terms of “Sickness, diagnosis, and aberration.” They then brings up an anecdote from when they were a part of a women’s conference of a progressive national organization where chose small topics, O’Toole’s being disability. The women put up three signs, “Disabled,” “Nondisabled,” and “Not Sure.” Every single of the women who placed themselves in the “Not Sure” category could have easily been considered disabled, but were too “isolated in their own worlds… and working intensely to hide the fact of their disabilities from the people around them.

The section on isolation from others with disabilities nicely transitions into understanding how to have a successful life as a disabled person. O’Toole references research that says that support from peers and resourcefulness are the most important things a disabled person can have in order to live fulfilling lives, because the majority of people with permanent disabilities face enormous social and economic barriers.” Next O’Toole describes the ways societal views on people with disability affect their everyday lives in terms of lack of representation. They state that, “The current U.S. media representations of disabled bodyminds demonstrate a profound failure of imagination.” The messages surrounding disabled people in popular culture are simplistic and easy to swallow, and confirm negative biases about those with disabilities.

When disabilities are seen as primarily a bad thing that parents should test for so they can abort “abnormalities,” the numbers of people with say, Down’s Syndrome decrease. O’Toole takes issue with this because they know and have enjoyed the company of people with Down’s before and absolutely doesn’t believe the world would have been better if they hadn’t been born.” They uses the example of how changes have been made in the treatment of people with Down’s Syndrome and how when once they were routinely institutionalized, they are now treated with more human respect in our culture and are more able to lead rewarding lives. 

Next O’Toole goes into the idea that “normal” isn’t real, and shouldn’t be something that we strive to emulate, especially when it leads to ableism. They says that, “a society that leans toward “normal” creates significant disenfranchisement for everyone who is ‘not normal.’” Part of the issue with the desire for normalcy is the implication that competency is tied to it. Disabled people are routinely assumed to have less competence in various areas than they really do, and are forced into educational tracks that they don’t belong in because incompetence is seen as an overarching label for disabled people despite the variety of disabilities that exist in the world. They states that presuming incompetence leads to fewer disabled people being hired in nondisabled work environments because bosses assume they will not be able to effectively do their jobs despite little to no evidence of that idea. 

  1. Quotes:
  • “For many of us, the reality of being disabled, the way our bodyminds function, is cause for celebration. (O’Toole, 13-14).”
  • “The forty women who joined the “Not Sure” group were all women that Marj and I would easily consider to be disabled (O’Toole, 14).”
  • “Disabled people who are connected through disability circles have a much higher quality of life.’9‘ Notice that I did not say that they have fewer impairments. Their quality of life goes up because, often for the first time, they are surrounded by people who see their wholeness, in contrast to the medical system that primarily sees their brokenness” (O’Toole, iy).
  • “All bodyminds are on a continuum. At different points in our lives, we have more and less function and move closer or further from the “normal” end of the spectrum” (O’Toole, ig).
  1. Personal Reflection:

The most important message I took away from this reading was the idea that although it takes creativity to live a rewarding life with disabilities, that doesn’t mean that a life without disabilities is inherently better, in fact, “You get proud by practicing,” (Hershey, 14). I also really like how O’Toole described the example of the women’s conference and how very few of the disabled women were willing to describe themselves as such due to a variety of factors, the main one being shame. It seems that if were are able to eliminate the origins of this shame, a lot of people would be able to access the resources they need instead of being forced to deal with their difficulties by themselves. 

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

“Reassigning Meaning”: Redefining the Disability Community

DellFrogLeave a comment

Linton, Simi. “Reassigning Meaning”. Claiming Disability: Knowledge and Identity. (New York: New York University Pressm 1998).

Summary

Linton begins by informing the reader of the disabled community’s efforts to reclaim what it means to be disabled and the terminology involved. She talks about the oppression of the disabled community, how the previous way of defining and identifying the community no longer serves purpose, accompanied by a brief discussion of how the medical definitions of disability form certain stigma in practice. Linton continues by looking at the term “disabled” as an identity marker and how the definition creates a separation between “disabled” and “non-disabled”, which should remain as a way to identify community but not to exclude others. She covers the concept of people without disabilities creating alternative language to boost the views of people with disabilities, including the term “special education” for children. Linton also discusses how “nasty words” have also been used for the disabled community and how the concept of overcoming denotes an inferiority compared to others without disabilities. In discussing the concept of “passing”, Linton covers how exhausting and minimizing that can be for someone with disabilities, and how the concept of normal vs. abnormal creates a dichotomy of self-worth and identity. She also talks about how people with disabilities are often seen as passive “victims” of their conditions, rather than in control of how they live their lives. Linton then discusses how some words have double meaning and can ascribe hurtful ideas to people with disabilities and how the connotations of the prefix “dis” come with the concept of “to be apart”. Linton concludes the writing by talking about the need to denote a socio-political axis category for which disability can be separated from its medical origins.

Direct Quotes:

The decision to assign medical meanings to disability has had many and varied consequences for disabled people (11).

Because it is physically impossible to overcome a disability, it seems that what is overcome is the social stigma of having a disability (17).

The message that I read in this action: You are like everyone else, but only as long as you hide or minimize your disability (21).

Reflection:

There is a certain desire for people to be able to put a name to something, whether to then identify with the name or to use it as a way to define and separate two entities. While this desire is natural, it certainly can create some problematic situations, as it has for the disabled community. As someone who understands science, I understand the need to create medical definitions of conditions that people have as a means to discover treatments or accommodations that can be created to give them greater access. However, I do understand that the point was lost along the way and it has instead devolved into a means of separating the abled from the disabled. I have never appreciated the exclusionary efforts of people to created spaces where people exist “within or without”, and efforts like this drive me up the wall. That people with disabilities are asked to “overcome” is a failure within itself. People with disabilities have been the other for so long that it is absolutely possible that the only time an abled child or teen has had interactions with someone who is disabled is through inspiration porn. All they know are the “overcoming” narratives instead of stories of the lives of people with disabilities or the stories they have to tell that are not specifically about their disability. And where is the humanity in that? Why do people with disabilities have to prove themselves “normal”? When growing up there is such an immense pressure to be “normal” or to “fit in” that parents have to tell a child, “It is okay to stand out!” Then when people do stand out, they are scrutinized until they feel the pressure to conform, or “pass”. As a society, we have created a mainstream understanding of how a person should look, act, think, and exist, and when someone doesn’t fit the mold, or God forbid they have a disability, they are “abnormal”. I appreciate the author’s emphasis on redefining these terms that have for so long been used as inherently ableist definitions for a faux state of being. Not only will this effort require a reshaping of the understanding of disabilities, but it will also require a redefinition of how we view normalcy. People deserve the choice to put a name to something they experience, but they also deserve the right to be seen as they are: whole.

**Note: I use the term “disabled community” because “community of people with disabilities feels disingenuous. However, I currently stand by using “people with disabilities” as opposed to “disabled people”.