Showing posts with label critique of ableism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label critique of ableism. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 12, 2008

Words and Able-ism

Is the title of this post over at the Feminist Philosophers blogspot. Its good to see disability perspectives being discussed at a feminist blog. And there's lots of discussion going on in the comments.

Here is an excerpt:

... This reminded me of Shelley’s argument that terms like ‘double-blind’ are offensive (see the comments here). But it also reminded me of one of the things I promised to discuss eventually– a talk at the recent SWIP conference by Jackie Leach Scully. Part of Scully’s discussion was about the many metaphors based on bodily abilities. Her focus was on the different ways that these metaphors may be understood by people whose bodies work in different ways. Scully, for example, is profoundly deaf, and reported that she spent many years misunderstanding the phrase “I hear what you’re saying”. It’s meant to convey a fairly deep level of understanding, but for Scully, hearing is about piecing something together very uncertainly from fragmentary clues– leading to a very different understanding of the metaphor. She listed many other such metaphors: “stand on your own two feet”; “stable”, and so on, noting each time how the metaphor might be understood by people with various different sorts of bodies. I thought of both the very widespread feminist discussion of ’silencing’. Interestingly, Scully explicitly did not want to argue that all metaphors like these were offensive, despite the fact that they present being able to stand and being stable as positive, and being unable to speak audibly as negative (and equivalent to being unable to communicate). Instead, her take was that the experience of one’s own body is so fundamental that basing metaphors on it is inevitable; but that we should be aware of the potential for miscommunication when we do this. It’s perfectly compatible with this thought, of course, to find some particular such metaphors offensive, and I imagine that she does, though this wasn’t her focus. How to distinguish between the offensive and non-offensive metaphors would then become an important issue.

Friday, July 04, 2008

The Australian Media Culture Journal has a special issue focussed on disability

The current issue of the Australian M/C Journal is titled 'Able' and it focusses on the exploration of "ability from a disability perspective, rather than disability from an able-ist perspective." It's edited by Liz Ferrier and Viv Muller, and its articles are available online.

Here is the table of contents:

. EDITORIAL: Disabling Able - Liz Ferrier, Viv Muller
. FEATURES: Refusing Able(ness): A Preliminary Conversation about Ableism - Fiona Kumari Campbell
. Mobilising the Monster: Modern Disabled Performers’ Manipulation of the Freakshow - Bree Hadley
. Disability, Heroism and Australian National Identity - Martin Mantle
. Enabling the Auteurial Voice in Dance Me to My Song - D. Bruno Starrs
. Ars Moriendi, the Erotic Self and AIDS - Catalina Florescu
. Creating Visible Children? - Nicole Mathews
. Shattering the Hearing Wall - Donna McDonald
. Amniocentesis and Motherhood: How Prenatal Testing Shapes Our Cultural Understandings of Pregnancy and Disability - Fiona Place
. Able to Live, Laugh and Love - Veronica Wain
. iTunes Is Pretty (Useless) When You’re Blind: Digital Design Is Triggering Disability When It Could Be a Solution - Katie Ellis, Mike Kent
. Innovation and Disability - Gerard Goggin
. Is There an End to Out-Able? Is There an End to the Rat Race for Abilities? - Gregor Wolbring