disability biometrics aff - cndi 2015-4

7/21/2019 Disability Biometrics Aff - CNDI 2015-4

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-biometrics-aff-cndi-2015-4 1/41

Disability Biometrics Af – CNDI

2015



1AC



1ACThe post-9/11 secrity e!"iro!me!t #it!esse$ a massi"e

e%pa!sio! o& biometric sr"eilla!ce tech!olo'ies( as a

historical tech!i)e o& social co!trol to e!&orce the

!ormali*atio! o& bo$ily i$e!tities+Clar,so! 1 [Nicholas L. Clarkson (PhD candidate in Gender Studies @ IndianaUniversity) !"io#etrics$ Duke University Press %S& 'olu#e Nu#ers *+ ,ay+- htt/011ts2.duke3ournals.or41content115+167.8ull9

%he events o8 Se/te#er +-- o:ered a ratio!ale &or e%pa!$i!' a!$

le'itimi*i!' sr"eilla!ce /ractices already in use or under develo/#ent in the United

States. "io#etrics < technolo4ies that #easure the ody o8ten =ith the intent o8identi8yin4 individuals < 8eatured si4ni>cantly in that e?/ansion. hile 8ull5ody scanners atair/ort security check/oints have een the #ost /ro#inent 8ace o8 this e?/ansion 8or

#any US residents other io#etric technolo4ies such as >n4er/rint scans iris and retinal

scans 8acial and hand 4eo#etry analyAers and 4ait si4nature analysis a#on4others also 8eature in security discussions and /ractices. Pro/onents o8 these technolo4ies o8ten

ar4ue that o3ective co#/uter analyses /rovide etter security than hu#an a4ents =hile avoidin4 the liaility o8

racial /ro>lin4. Bo=ever cultural critics o8 io#etrics have ar4ued that these machi!es are

.i!&rastrctrally e!co$e$ #ith assmptio!s abot race( 'e!$er( a!$

ability a!$ thereby co!ti!e to e!&orce bo$ily !orms co!siste!t #ith

proli!' practices (Pu4liese +-- +--). %he analo4 antecedents o8 conte#/orary

di4itiAed io#etrics hi4hli4ht the le4acy o8 io#etrics as techni2ues o8 su3u4ation .+

or e?a#/le "ritish colonists used >n4er/rintin4 to distin4uish Indian su3ects =ho#

"ritish oEcers could not other=ise tell a/art (Pu4liese +--0 +-). urther#ore /ractices o8#easurin4 the ody arose 8ro# the racist science o8 anthro/o#etry a ranch o8

/hysical anthro/olo4y that sou4ht to deter#ine intelli4ence 8or e?a#/le throu4h asyste# o8 cranial #easure#ents. %hese cranial #easure#ents =ere used to su//ort ar4u#ents that

=hite #en =ere #ore intelli4ent and civiliAed than =o#en and the !other races$ (Pu4liese +--F #oore and Ball+--HF ,a4net +-). %hou4h anthro/o#etry is =idely discredited io#etrics researchers continue to citeanthro/o#etric #ethods (,a4net +-0 6H). Sir rancis Galtons use o8 the ter# io#etry additionally hi4hli4hts theconnection et=een anthro/o#etry and conte#/orary io#etrics. In H- Galton used this ter# to descrie the/rocess o8 collectin4 #easure#ents in service o8 anthro/o#etric hy/otheses.6 %hou4h /ractices o8 #easurin4 theody have a lon4 history the conte#/orary #eanin4 o8 io#etrics a//eared in the early HJ-s. %he K?8ord n4lishDictionarys >rst noted use o8 the ter# a//eared in #erican "anker in HJ in =hich authors ho/ed thatio#etrics =ould /rove use8ul 8or uns/eci>ed !ankin4 o/erations.$ %his is consistent =ith Melly Gatess (+-)

clai# that io#etric surveillance syste#s /roli8erated in tande# =ith neolieralre8or#s e8ore their e?/onential e?/ansion under the ruric o8 !ho#eland security.$In the #idst o8 the continuin4 /roli8eration o8 io#etric technolo4ies trans4ender theory and trans odies /rovide auni2ue vanta4e /oint 8ro# =hich to criti2ue such develo/#ents. In /articular =hen trans odies con8ound ody

scanners and individuals =ith dark skin tones reveal the racialiAed calirations o8 8acial 4eo#etry analysis =e arere#inded that 4ender and race re#ain central to conte#/orary identity /ro3ects in s/ite o8 clai#s to the contrary

y the io#etrics industry.7 Gates ar4ues that biometric systems respo!$ to the !ee$ to

bi!$ i$e!tities to bo$ies =hile our identity in8or#ation su//osedly circulates

untethered throu4h co#/uter net=orks. "ecause our vocaularies o8 4ender and race have such

li#ited aility to /rovide use8ul in8or#ation aout an individual one #i4ht think that atte#/ts to secure identities

to odies =ould e #ini#ally invested in 4ender or race. Nevertheless #anu8acturers /ersistently

e!co$e !ormati"e assmptio!s aout 4ender and race into io#etric syste#s even as

http://tsq.dukejournals.org/content/1/1-2/35.full

http://tsq.dukejournals.org/content/1/1-2/35.full



they clai# to /roduce o3ective technolo4ies. "eyond the utility o8 trans odies 8or hi4hli4htin4 the

4endered and raced assu#/tions o8 io#etrics it is also crucial 8or the lives o8 trans/eo/le that =e continue toinvesti4ate and theoriAe these develo/#ents. s Dean S/ade e#/hasiAes in Nor#al Li8e (+-) the #ostvulnerale trans/eo/le are the ones #ost e?/osed to #echanis#s o8 surveillance. "io#etrics are not only de/loyedto /rotect e?/ensive /rivatiAed resources (such as ankin4 assets)F these techni2ues are 8re2uently i#/osed u/on

the #ost vulnerale /o/ulations in the #ost coercive relationshi/s. %his includes #andated >n4er/rintscannin4 8or =el8are reci/ients retinal and >n4er/rint scannin4 8or /risoners and>n4er/rint scannin4 8or #i4rants to the United States throu4h the De/art#ent o8 Bo#eland

Securitys US5'ISI% /ro4ra# (,a4net +-F De/art#ent o8 Bo#eland Security +-6). or trans theory thenio#etrics are a 8ocal /oint 8or e?a#inin4 the io/olitical ne?us o8 4endered raced and se?ualiAed concerns.

%plori!' the co!!ectio!s bet#ee! or e%perie!ces o& biometrics a!$

those o& other( similarly tar'ete$ 'rops re"eals the bo$ily !orms

e!co$e$ i!to a!$ e!&orce$ by these tech!olo'ies+

This reects a lar'er tr! to#ar$s the bo$y i! sr"eilla!ce

practice as assembla'es o& sr"eilla!t tech!olo'y rea$ the

bo$y as pre i!&ormatio! – this abstractio! &rom e%perie!cere!$ers the bo$y ope! to i!terpretatio! a!$ $iscrimi!atio!+

3a''erty 4 ricso! 2000 [Mevin D. Ba44erty (Pro8essor o8 Cri#inolo4y Sociolo4y @ University o8 lerta) Oichard '. ricson (Pro8essor o8 Cri#inolo4yand Sociolo4y @ University o8 %oronto) !%he surveillant asse#la4e$ British Journal

of Sociology 'ol. No. 7 Issue No. (Dece#er +---) //. -7*++htt/011i4o.A4eist.or41students1readin4s1IPS+-1J1Ba44ertyQ+-ericsonQ+-+---./d89

A 'reat $eal o& sr"eilla!ce is $irecte$ to#ar$ the hma! bo$y+ %he

oserved ody is o8 a distinctively hyrid co#/osition. irst it is roken do=n y

ein4 abstracte$ &rom its territorial setti!'+ It is then reasse#led in di:erent

settin4s throu4h a series o8 data Ro=s. %he result is a decor/orealiAed ody a datadouleT o8 /ure virtuality. %he #onitored ody is increasin4ly a cyor4F a Resh5technolo4y5in8or#ation a#al4a# (Bara=ay HH). Surveillance no= involves an inter8aceo8 technolo4y and cor/oreality and is co#/rised o8 those sur8aces o8 contact or

inter8aces et=een or4anic and non5or4anic orders et=een li8e 8or#s and =es o8in8or#ation or et=een or4ans1ody /arts and entry1/ro3ection syste#s (e.4. keyoards screens)T ("o4ard

HH0 66). %hese hyrids can involve so#ethin4 as direct as ta44in4 the hu#an odyso that its #ove#ents throu4h s/ace can e recorded to the #ore re>nedreconstruction o8 a /ersonTs haits /re8erences and li8estyle 8ro# the trails o8in8or#ation =hich have eco#e the detritus o8 conte#/orary li8e. %he surveillant asse#la4e is a

visualiAin4 device that rin4s into the visual re4ister a host o8 hereto8ore o/a2ueRo=s o8 auditory scent che#ical visual ultraviolet and in8or#ational sti#uli. ,uch o8 the visualiAation

/ertains to the hu#an ody and e?ists eyond our nor#al ran4e o8 /erce/tion. Oousseau o/ens %he SocialContract =ith his 8a#ous /rocla#ation that ,an =as orn 8ree and he is every=here in chainsT. %o e #ore in

kee/in4 =ith the hu#an1#achine realities o8 the t=enty5>rst century his senti#ent =ould etter read0 Bu#ansare orn 8ree and are i##ediately electronically #onitoredT. I8 such a slo4an see#s unduly

des/airin4 one #i4ht consider the ne= electronic ankle racelet 8or in8ants trade#arked BUGS =hich is ein4#arketed to hos/itals as a 8ully su/ervised and ta#/er5resistant /rotection syste# that auto#atically activatesonce secured around an in8antTs ankle or =rist. Sta: [are9 i##ediately alerted at a co#/uter console o8 the ne=lyactivated ta4 and can enter /ertinent in8or#ation such as na#es and #edical conditions. Pass=ord authoriAation is



needed to #ove in8ants out o8 the desi4nated /rotection area and * i8 an in8ant is not read#itted =ithin a/redeter#ined ti#e li#it * an alar# =ill sound. n alar# also sounds i8 an in8ant =ith a Bu4s ta4 is rou4ht near ano/en door at the /eri#eter o8 the /rotected area =ithout a /ass=ord ein4 entered. %he dis/lay console =ill thensho= the identi>cation o8 the in8ant and the e?it door on a 8acility #a/. lternatively doors #ay also e >tted =ith#a4netic locks that are auto#atically activated. s =ell Bu4s can e con>4ured to #onitor the /ro4ress anddirection o8 the aduction =ithin the hos/ital. ei4hin4 3ust 16 o8 an ounce each er4ono#ically desi4ned in8antta4 o:ers a nu#er o8 other innovative 8eatures includin4 lo=5attery =arnin4 the aility to easily inter8ace =ithother devices such as CC%' ca#eras and /a4in4 syste#s and ti#e and date sta#/in4. (Canadian Security HHJ)Pro8essor Mevin ar=ick o8 Oeadin4 University is the sel85/roclai#ed >rst cyor4T havin4 i#/lanted a silicon chi/trans/onder in his 8orear# ("evan HHH). %he surveillance /otential o8 this technolo4y has een ra/idly e#racedto #onitor /ets. #icrochi/ in a /etTs skin can e read =ith an electronic device =hich connects a uni2ueidenti8yin4 nu#er on the #icrochi/ to details o8 the /etTs history o=nershi/ and #edical record. ar=ick has/ro/osed that i#/lanted #icrochi/s could e used to scrutiniAe the #ove#ent o8 e#/loyees and to #onitor #oneytrans8ers #edical records and /ass/ort details. Be also su44ests that anyone =ho =anted access to a 4un could doso only i8 they had one o8 these i#/lants . . . %hen i8 they actually try and enter a school or uildin4 that doesnTt=ant the# in there the school co#/uter =ould sound alar#s and =arn /eo/le inside or even /revent the# havin4

access. (ssociated Press HHJ) %hese e?a#/les indicate that the surveillant asse#la4e relies on#achines to #ake and record discrete oservations. s such it can e contrasted =iththe early 8or#s o8 disci/linary /ano/ticis# analysed y oucault =hich =ere lar4elyacco#/lished y /ractitioners o8 the e#er4ent social sciences in the ei4hteenth and

nineteenth centuries. Kn a #achine1hu#an continuu# surveillance at that ti#e leaned

#ore to=ard hu#an oservation. %oday surveillance is #ore in kee/in4 =ith thetechnolo4ical 8uture hinted at y Kr=ell ut au4#ented y technolo4ies he could

not have even had ni4ht#ares aout. The sr"eilla!t assembla'e $oes !ot

approach the bo$y i! the rst i!sta!ce as a si!'le e!tity to be mol$e$(

p!ishe$( or co!trolle$+ irst it mst be ,!o#!( a!$ to $o so it is bro,e!

$o#! i!to a series o& $iscrete si'!i&yi!' o#s+ Surveillance co##ences =ith

the creation o8 a s/ace o8 co#/arison and the introduction o8 reaks in the Ro=sthat e#anate 8ro# or circulate =ithin the hu#an ody. or e?a#/le dru4 testin4 striates Ro=s o8

che#icals /hoto4ra/hy ca/tures Ro=s o8 reRected li4ht=aves and lie detectors ali4n and co#/are assorted Ro=s

o8 res/iration /ulse and electricity. The bo$y is itsel8 then a! assembla'e comprise$ o&

myria$ compo!e!t parts a!$ processes #hich are bro,e!-$o#! &or

prposes o& obser"atio!+ Patton (HH0 7J) su44ests that the conce/t o8 asse#la4e #ay e

re4arded as no #ore than an astract conce/tion o8 odies o8 all kinds one =hich does not discri#inate et=eenani#ate and inani#ate odies individual or collective odies iolo4ical or social odiesT. It has eco#e aco##on/lace a#on4 cultural theorists to ackno=led4e the increasin4 8ra4#entation o8 the hu#an ody. Such ana//reciation is evidenced in GrosATs (HH70 -J) sche#atic su44estion that =e need to think aout the relationshi/et=een cities and odies as collections o8 /arts ca/ale o8 crossin4 the thresholds et=een sustances to 8or#linka4es #achines /rovisional and o8ten te#/orary su5 or #icro54rou/in4s . . . their interrelations involve a8unda#entally disuni>ed series o8 syste#s a series o8 dis/arate Ro=s ener4ies events or entities rin4in4

to4ether or dra=in4 a/art their #ore or less te#/orary ali4n#ents. Like=ise the surveillant asse#la4estandardiAes the ca/ture o8 Resh1in8or#ation Ro=s o8 the hu#an ody. It is not so#uch i##ediately concerned =ith the direct /hysical relocation o8 the hu#an ody

(althou4h this #ay e an ulti#ate conse2uence) ut =ith tra!s&ormi!' the bo$y i!to pre

i!&ormatio!( sch that it ca! be re!$ere$ more mobile a!$ comparable+Such /rocesses are /ut into o/eration 8ro# a host o8 scattered centres o8 calculation(Latour HJ) =here ru/tures are co5ordinated and to=ard =hich the suse2uent in8or#ation is directed. Such

centres o8 calculation can include 8orensic laoratories statistical institutions /olice stations>nancial institutions and cor/orate and #ilitary head2uarters. In these sites thein8or#ation derived 8ro# Ro=s o8 the surveillant asse#la4e are reasse#led andscrutiniAed in the ho/e o8 develo/in4 strate4ies o8 4overnance co##erce andcontrol. In the >4ure o8 a ody asse#led 8ro# the /arts o8 di:erent cor/ses ,ary ShellyTs rankenstein s/oke to

early5#odern an?ieties aout the /otential conse2uences o8 unrestrained science and technolo4y. Conte#/orary



8ears aout the i#/lications o8 #ass /ulic surveillance continue to e#/hasiAe the dark side o8 science. %oday

ho=ever #e are #it!essi!' the &ormatio! a!$ coalesce!ce o& a !e# type o&

bo$y( a &orm o& becomi!' #hich tra!sce!$s hma! corporeality a!$

re$ces esh to pre i!&ormatio!+ Culled 8ro# the tentacles o8 the surveillant

asse#la4e this ne= ody is our data douleT a doule =hich involves the #ulti/lication o8 the

individual the constitution o8 an additional sel8T (Poster HH-0 H). Data doules circulate in a host o8di:erent centres o8 calculation and serve as #arkers 8or access to resourcesservices and /o=er in =ays =hich are o8ten unkno=n to its re8erent. %hey are also increasin4lythe o3ects to=ard =hich 4overn#ental and #arketin4 /ractices are directed (%uro=

HH). nd =hile such doules ostensily re8er ack to /articular individuals theytranscend a /urely re/resentational idio#. Oather than ein4 accurate or inaccurate /ortrayals o8

real individuals they are a 8or# o8 /ra4#atics0 $ifere!tiate$ accor$i!' to ho#

se&l they are i! allo#i!' i!stittio!s to ma,e $iscrimi!atio!s amo!'

poplatio!s. Bence =hile the surveillant asse#la4e is directed to=ard a /articular

cyor4 Resh1technolo4y a#al4a#ation it is /roductive o8 a ne= ty/e o8 individualone co#/rised o8 /ure in8or#ation.

Bt these sr"eilla!t assembla'es brea, $o#! #he! &ace$

#ith $isability – the !o!-!ormati"e bo$y is cate'ori*e$ as a!

i!here!t secrity ris, sb6ect to biopolitical co!trol+ The

ableist co!strctio! o& biometric tech!olo'ies &!ctio!s as a

!ormali*i!' tech!i)e to ma!a'e a!$ e%cl$e $isable$ bo$ies+

7altes 18 [Natasha Saltes (PhD Candidate in De/art#ent o8 Sociolo4y @ &ueenTsUniversity , in Critical Disaility Studies) !nor#alT "odies on the "orders o8Inclusion0 "io/olitics and the Parado? o8 Disaility Surveillance$ Surveillance &

Society (1+)0 7756 +-6 htt/011lirary.2ueensu.ca1o3s1inde?./h/1surveillance5and5society1article1vie=1anor#al19

ritin4 in the conte?t o8 racis# and se?ual o//ression ,chorter (+--H) hones in on the conce/t o8 anor#alityT

and /rovides a co#/ellin4 a//ro/riation o8 oucault. In e?/lainin4 ho= /sychiatry eca#e atechnolo4y o8 anor#alityT (oucault +--6 2uoted in ,chorter +--H0 6-) she =rites0 [I9t identi>ed/ersons =ho it su//osed could not e assi#ilated into the li8e o8 the co##unityand then it =ent to =ork to ca/ture those individuals disci/line the# and thereyde8end society 8ro# the threat they /osed. In the /rocess the /ulic eca#e sensitiAedto ne=ly reco4niAed dan4ers0eccentrics and noncon8or#ists o8 all kinds. Such/eo/le<anor#al /eo/le<=ere not only /role#s 8or those =hose inti#ate lives they shared ut =erethreats to the 4eneral /ulic and ri4ht8ully su3ect to surveillance and constraints i#/osed

throu4h /sychiatry and other #eans y or on ehal8 o8 society as a =hole. (,chorter +--H0 6-56) In the sa#e

=ay that /sychiatry eca#e a technolo4y o8 anor#alityT (oucault +--6a0 6) so too did the io#edicalde>nition o8 disaility in that it identi>ed and cate4oriAed /eo/le =ith i#/air#ents asunhealthy de8ective and inca/ale renderin4 the# social urdens and there8ore athreat to the nor#aliAin4 society. or /eo/le =ith i#/air#ents the /ath to a nor#aliAin4 society is one

#arked y a se2uence o8 dividin4 /racticesT (oucault HJ+0 ) that e4ins y classi8yin4 anor#al odiesthrou4h the i#/le#entation o8 aleist /olicies and /ractices and the de#arcation o8 s/aces as those desi4nated 8ornor#alT (ale) and anor#alT (i#/aired) odies (Bansen and Philo +--H). Mitchin (HHJ) reco4niAes the =ays in

=hich disaility is s/atially /roduced throu4h /o=er relations that =ork to or4aniAe



/eo/le =ith i#/air#ents. Be clai#s that the social relations that e#er4e throu4h socio5s/atial/rocesses serve to isolate and #ar4inaliAeT /eo/le =ith i#/air#ents (HHJ0 66). In the

conte?t o8 the e?cessive de#and clause the /olitical tactic o8 #ana4in4 odies throu4h theuse o8 #edical data to cate4oriAe desirale i##i4rants 8ro# undesiralei##i4rants in accordance =ith /erceived e?cessive de#and on health and social

services illustrates the o/eration o8 io/olitics (iee +--J +--H). %he use o8 this data to

deter#ine =ho =ill e 4ranted /er#anent residency also illustrates ho= socio5s/atial /rocesses =ork throu4h

/o=er relations to e?clude /eo/le =ith i#/air#ents. ccordin4 to iee (+--J) io/olitical a4endas thatre4ulate health in order to o/ti#iAe econo#ic /ros/erity inevitaly construct anarro= conce/tion o8 citiAenshi/ e?tended only to those dee#ed healthy and/roductive. iee adds that surveillance derives 8ro# a 8ear o8 the unkno=n =hichtranslates into the stateTs a#ition to conduct risk #ana4e#ent /racticesT (+--J0 66).

ritin4 on the the#e o8 surveillance as io/o=er Ceyhan (+-+) echoes ieeTs senti#ent re#arkin4 that

sr"eilla!ce operates as a tech!olo'y o& biopoliticali*e$ secrity: (+-+0 6H)

as a mea!s o& miti'ati!' !certai!ty+ Indeed it is the Canadian stateTs assu#/tions

aout i#/air#ent and its inclination to=ard #ana4in4 econo#ic riskT anduncertainty that the /ur/ose o8 conductin4 disaility surveillance at the order

eco#es evident. "io/olitics at the "order0 Social Sortin4 and leist "io#etric %echnolo4ies %he/ervasiveness o8 surveillance and its inherent discri#inatory characteristic o8identi8yin4 and classi8yin4 certain individuals and 4rou/s as riskyT have 4iven riseto the notion o8 surveillance as social sortin4T. ccordin4 to Lyon surveillance as social sortin4

centres on the social and econo#ic cate4ories and the co#/uter codes y =hich /ersonal data is or4aniAed =ith a

vie= to inRuencin4 and #ana4in4 /eo/le and /o/ulationsT (+--60 +). It is the /rocess o8 pre$icti!'

a!$ pre"e!ti!' ris, by classi&yi!' sb'rops o& society $eeme$ to pose a

threat (Lyon +--6). Lyon attriutes social sortin4 and di4ital discri#inationT to the /revalent use o8 net=orked

technolo4y (+--60 J) and the risin4 attention /aid to the ody itsel8 as a source o8 surveillance dataT (+--0 77).

%he conce/t o8 social sortin4 and the e#/hasis on the ody as a source o8 data ises/ecially relevant in the conte?t o8 disaility surveillance in that the collection and

docu#entation o8 in8or#ation aout the ody reduces /eo/le =ith i#/air#ents toi#/aired odiesT and 8urther still to i#/aired dataT. %he data doule there8ore caneco#e disaledT in #uch the sa#e =ay as the individual inso8ar as it is not

/erceived vie=ed #onitored and treated e2ually as non5i#/airedT data doules. %he datadoule itsel8 #ay include io#etric details or other 8or#s and 8ra4#ents o8in8or#ation that allude to or si4ni8y the e#odi#ent o8 i#/air#ent. %he i#/lication o8 this

is that the anor#alityT o8 the ody is e?tended to the di4ital and =hat serves to #ark

lael and sti4#atiAe the ody in the /hysical environ#ent no= has the aility to

#ark lael and sti4#atiAe the ody di4itally. Oe8errin4 to electronic /atient records (PO) as an e?a#/le

o8 the di4italiAation o8 the ody van der Ploe4 considers the data they contain to e e?tended 8or#s o8 !uni2ue

identi>ers$T due to the /ersonal in8or#ation they contain includin4 io#etric dataT (+--60 +). %he increaseduse o8 io#etric identi>ers in POs (as =ell as in other conte?ts such as i##i4ration) aresu/eri#/osin4 traditional 8or#s o8 identi>ers such as na#e and irth date as theyare considered a #ore reliale re/resentation o8 identity (van der Ploe4 +--6). In challen4in4

the 4endered neutrality o8 surveillance ,onahan ar4ues that re/resentations o8 data render adise#odied and hi4hly astract de/iction o8 the =orldT y re#ovin4 social conte?t

(+--H0 +J). ,onahan contends that surveillance syste#s arti>cially astract odiesidentities and interactions 8ro# social conte?ts in =ays that oth oscure anda44ravate 4ender and other social ine2ualitiesT (+--H0 +J). Be considers the e#odiedconse2uences that arise 8ro# surveillance /ractices that o/erate on a level o8



astractionT (+--H0 +J). "uildin4 8ro# ,onahanTs ar4u#ent on the socially de5conte?tualiAed collection o8

data and a//lyin4 it to disaility surveillance /rovides a use8ul #eans =ith =hich toconte?tualiAe the conse2uences o8 conductin4 disaility surveillance =ithin aio#edical /ers/ective. use8ul startin4 /oint is to consider the =ays in =hich certain surveillancestrate4ies such as io#etric technolo4ies se/arate the social 8ro# the ody.

"io#etric technolo4ies o/erate y ca/turin4 /hysiolo4ical #arkers o8 odiesincludin4

>n4er/rints 8ace or voice reco4nition iris and hand=ritin4 authentication. %he data /roduced y the

ody is then used to veri8y identity (,addern and Ste=art +--). Bo=ever biometric

systems $o !ot o!ly "eri&y i$e!tity( bt they also play a si'!ica!t role i!

assi'!i!' i$e!tities+ %his is =orth considerin4 in li4ht o8 the 4overn#entTs

reliance on io#etric data =hich ste#s 8ro# the elie8 that io#etric technolo4y isin8allile (,addern and Ste=art +--). %he use o8 io#etric technolo4y at the Canadian order is ein4 touted

y CitiAenshi/ and I##i4ration Canada (+-+) as a hi4hly reliale =ay to reduce identity 8raudT. In a /ulic noticereleased online announcin4 the scheduled i#/le#entation o8 io#etric technolo4ies in +-6 CitiAenshi/ andI##i4ration Canada (+-+) states that io#etrics =ould stren4then the inte4rity o8 CanadaTs i##i4ration/ro4ra# y hel/in4 /revent kno=n cri#inals 8ailed re8u4ee clai#ants and those /reviously de/orted 8ro# usin4 adi:erent identity to otain a visaT and that io#etrics =ill stren4then and #oderniAe CanadaTs i##i4ration/rocessesT. In laudin4 the collection o8 io#etric data as /art o8 the i##i4ration /rocess the Canadian 4overn#ent

ne4lects to consider ho= the technolo4y #i4ht have a discri#inatory i#/act 8or certain4rou/s. Pu4liese (+--) 2uestions the in8alliility o8 technolo4ies that >lter odies throu4h a racialiAed lens. Be

looks in /articular at the =ays in =hich io#etric technolo4ies 8ail to accurately ca/ture thedata and i#a4es o8 odies that do not con8or# to the 8eatures o8 =hiteness =hich

io#etric technolo4ies =ere desi4ned to acco##odate. Si#ilarly by "irte o& their

ableist $esi'!( biometric tech!olo'ies also lter bo$ies thro'h a

!ormali*e$ le!s+ %rials have sho=n that biometric systems are !ot $esi'!e$ to

co!&orm to $isable$ people( bt that $isable$ people are e%pecte$ to be

able to co!&orm to the system:s $esi'! (,addern and Ste=art +--). %he aleist =ay

in =hich they collect /hysiolo4ical data inherently carries out the 8unction o8 social

sortin4 y classi8yin4 and cate4oriAin4 those =ho are not ale to /ass easily throu4hthe syste#. %he /assa4e elo= illustrates this /oint0 or so#eone in a =heelchair i8 you canTt /er8ectly ada/t

your /osition it could e diEcult. or lind /eo/le it certainly can e diEcult ecause they canTt seeVou donTtactually have to 8ocus ut you do have to kee/ a constant relationshi/ =ith the ca#erathatTs =hy =e couldnTt 4etacce/tale enrol#ent (in a recent trial) 8or a 2uite a lar4e selection o8 /eo/le =ith disailities. (res/ondent andio#etric technolo4y user 2uoted in ,addern and Ste=art +--0 +) %his 2uote reveals the challen4es that

io#etric technolo4ies /resent 8or so#e /eo/le =ith i#/air#ents. %he inaility to navi4ate throu4hio#etric syste#s not only i#/edes #oility ut reduces /eo/le =ith i#/air#entsto deviant odiesT that do not con8or# to /reconceived standards o8 ontolo4icalnor#ality. ccordin4 to Ba44erty and ricson %he oserved ody is o8 adistinctively hyrid co#/osition. irst it is roken do=n y ein4 astracted 8ro# itsterritorial settin4. It is then reasse#led in di:erent settin4s throu4h a series o8

data Ro=s. %he result is a decor/orealiAed ody a data douleT o8 /ure virtuality. (+---0 )

or so#e/eo/le =ith i#/air#ents their odies are in a sense already decor/orealiAed e8ore theyare even reasse#led due to the io#etric syste#sT inaility to acce/t and /rocess

their varied /hysiolo4ical traits. Si#ilarly Gar>nkel su44ests that biometric tech!olo'ies

are problematic i! that they $o !ot i$e!ti&y people( they i$e!ti&y bo$ies:

(+---0 7 e#/hasis in ori4inal). Bere =e can e4in to see that the surveillance 4aAe is si#ilar to that o8

the #edical 4aAe in that it calls anor#alT odies into 2uestion. In e?a#inin4 io#etrics

throu4h a 4overn#entality /ers/ective /stein oserves that io#etric dataases o/erationaliAe t=o ty/es o8 riskyodies0 !4uilty$ odiesT understood as trans4ressors o8 the la=T and i##i4ration violatorsT understood as



destructive odiesT (/stein +--0 -). or /eo/le =ith i#/air#ents io#etric technolo4ies see# to

o/erationaliAe a third ty/e o8 risky ody understood as nonnor#ative odiesT. "y 8ailin4 to/rocess the data 8ro# odies that do not con8or# to the syste#Ts aleist desi4nio#etric technolo4ies also 8unction as a technolo4y o8 anor#alityT (oucault +--6a0 6).

In rein8orcin4 cor/oreal nor#s biometric tech!olo'ies operate as part o& a

broa$er biopolitical pro6ect aime$ at elimi!ati!' ab!ormality:+ "io#etrictechnolo4ies es/ecially =hen used in co#ination =ith /rovisions that e#/hasiAe ontolo4icalnor#ality such as the e?cessive de#and clause do not account 8or the social construct o8disaility. Conse2uently it is not aleist and discri#inatory social structures

syste#s and attitudes that are dee#ed Ra=ed ut the ody. The a#e$ bo$y: is

the! e"alate$ a'ai!st !ormati"e corporeal sta!$ar$s used to deter#ine

citiAenshi/ o8ten resultin4 in an undi4ni>ed i8 not outri4ht e?clusionary i##i4ration /rocess.

Ableism is &o!$atio!al to all oppressio! – cate'ori*atio!

base$ o! !ormati"e biolo'ical sta!$ar$s 6sties e"ery &orm o&

$iscrimi!atio! a!$ "iole!ce+7iebers 9 [%oin Sieers (Pro8essor o8 Literary and Cultural Criticis# @ Universityo8 ,ichi4an)

!%he esthetics o8 Bu#an Dis2uali>cation$ -1+J1H Lecturehtt/011disailities.te#/le.edu1#edia1ds1lecture+--H-+JsieersestheticsWULL.doc9

K//ression is the syste#atic victi#iAation o8 one 4rou/ y another. It is a 8or# o8

inter4rou/ violence. %hat o//ression involves !4rou/s$ and not !individuals$ #eans that it concerns identities and

this #eans 8urther#ore that o//ression al=ays 8ocuses on ho= the ody a//ears oth on

ho= it a//ears as a /ulic and /hysical /resence and on its s/eci>c and various a//earances. K//ression is 3usti>ed #ost o8ten y the attriution o8 natural in8eriority<=hat so#e call !in5uilt$ or!iolo4ical$ in8eriority. Natural in8eriority is al=ays so#atic 8ocusin4 on the #ental

and /hysical 8eatures o8 the 4rou/ and it >4ures as disaility. The prototype o&

biolo'ical i!&eriority is $isability+ The represe!tatio! o& i!&eriority al#ays

comes bac, to the appeara!ce o& the bo$y a!$ the #ay the bo$y ma,es

other bo$ies &eel+ %his is =hy the study o8 o//ression re2uires an understandin4 o8 aesthetics<not only

ecause o//ression uses aesthetic 3ud4#ents 8or its violence ut also ecause the si4n/osts o8

ho= o//ression =orks are visile in the history o8 art =here aesthetic 3ud4#ents aout the creation anda//reciation o8 odies are o/enly discussed. Kne additional thou4ht #ust e noted e8ore I treat so#e analytic

e?a#/les 8ro# the historical record. irst des/ite #y state#ent that disaility no= serves as the#aster tro/e o8 hu#an dis2uali>cation it is not a #atter o8 reducin4 other #inorityidentities to disaility identity. Oather it is a #atter o8 understandin4 the =ork done

y disaility in o//ressive syste#s. In disaility o//ression the /hysical and #ental/ro/erties o8 the ody are socially constructed as dis2uali8yin4 de8ects ut thiss/eci>c ty/e o8 social construction ha//ens to e inte4ral at the /resent #o#ent tothe sy#olic re2uire#ents o8 o//ression in 4eneral. In every o//ressive syste# o8

our day I =ant to clai# the oppresse$ i$e!tity is represe!te$ i! some #ay as

$isable$ and althou4h it is hard to understand the sa#e /rocess otains =hen disaility is the o//ressed

identity. !Oacis#$ dis2uali>es on the asis o8 race /rovidin4 3usti>cation 8or the



in8eriority o8 certain skin colors loodlines and /hysical 8eatures. !Se?is#$dis2uali>es on the asis o8 se?14ender as a direct re/resentation o8 #ental and/hysical in8eriority. !Classis#$ dis2uali>es on the asis o8 8a#ily linea4e andsocioecono#ic /o=er as /roo8 o8 in8erior 4enealo4ical status. !leis#$ dis2uali>eson the asis o8 #ental and /hysical di:erences >rst selectin4 and then sti4#atiAin4

the# as disailities. %he o//ressive syste# occults in each case the 8act that thedis2uali>ed identity is socially constructed a #ere convention represe!ti!' si'!s o&

i!compete!ce( #ea,!ess( or i!&eriority as !$e!iable &acts o& !atre+ s

racis# se?is# and classis# 8all a=ay slo=ly as 3usti>cations 8or hu#an in8eriority <

and the criti2ues o8 these /re3udices /rove /o=er8ul e?a#/les o8 ho= to >4ht o//ression<the /re3udicea4ainst disaility re#ains in 8ull 8orce /rovidin4 see#in4ly credile reasons 8or theelie8 in hu#an in8eriority and the o//ressive syste#s uilt u/on it. %his usa4e =illcontinue I e?/ect until =e reach a historical #o#ent =hen =e kno= as #uch aoutthe social construction o8 disaility as =e no= kno= aout the social construction o8

race class 4ender and se?uality. Disability represe!ts at this mome!t i! time

the !al &ro!tier o& 6stiable hma! i!&eriority+

Ths #e a$"ocate resista!ce to $omestic sr"eilla!ce "ia a

politici*atio! o& the bo$y+

;!ly rei!tro$ci!' the bo$y i!to sr"eilla!ce st$ies ca!

&ormlate efecti"e strate'ies &or resista!ce to this !e#

tech!olo'ical mo$e – the a<rmati"e:s rhi*omatic

characteri*atio! o& bo$ily sr"eilla!ce is ,ey to accrate

$ia'!oses o& mo$er! po#er+Ball 5 [Mirstie "all (Pro8essor o8 Kr4aniAation @ %he K/en University "usinessSchool PhD in Kr4aniAation Studies 8ro# ston University) !Kr4aniAationSurveillance and the "ody0 %o=ards a Politics o8 Oesistance$ Organization Xanuary+--7 vol. + no. JH5-J htt/011or4.sa4e/u.co#1content1+11JH.short9

Oecent theori*i!' abot sr"eilla!ce practices has tr!e$ to the ce!trality o&

the bo$y not least in those at the =ork/lace. lthou4h #any ackno=led4e oucaultTs nod to=ards the

rehailitated ody o8 the incarcerated su3ect in the /ano/ticon and the /olitical technolo4ies o8 the ody identi>edin %he Bistory o8 Se?uality (oucault H) the theoretical inclination is to=ards Latourian and DeleuAian ideas.

%hese a//roaches hi4hli4ht the dis/arate arrays o8 /eo/le technolo4ies and or4aniAations

that eco#e connected to #ake surveillance asse#la4esT in contrast to the static

unidirectional /ano/ticon #eta/hor. Indeed Gandy (HHJ) asserts that it #ol$ be a

mista,e to assme that sr"eilla!ce i! practice is as complete a!$

totali*i!' as the pa!optic i$eal type =ould have us elieve. Si#ilarly Oule (HHJ0 J) oserves

that the pa!optico! alo!e ofers little help: i! !$ersta!$i!' !e# &orms o&

electro!ic sr"eilla!ce /articularly i8 the 2uestion is =hether /eo/le are su3ect

to #ore or #ore severe 8or#s o8 control. ,oreover "oyne (+---) oserves that disci/linary/o=er =ith its /er8ection throu4h technolo4y and the resultant docile acce/tin4



sel85disci/linin4 /o/ulation are the e?ce/tion rather than the nor#. It is rather ho=individuals or4aniAations state odies and the #edia connect to thesetechnolo4ies that inRuences =hose data are collected =here they 4o and =hatha//ens as a result. "all (+--+) e4ins to address this /oint. In a /a/er entitled le#ents o8 SurveillanceT

she descries 8our ele#ents in a surveillance do#ain. Oe/resentationT re8ers to the technolo4ical ele#entackno=led4in4 ho= surveillance technolo4ies can re5/resent data that are collected at source or 4athered 8ro#

another technolo4ical #ediu#. ,eanin4T re8ers to the /otential o8 ne= surveillance technolo4ies to enale di:erentinter/retations o8 li8e to e #ade as =ell as inter/retations o8 surveillance itsel8. t least three co##on #eanin4sare attriuted to surveillance /ractice0 surveillance as kno=led4eF surveillance as in8or#ationF and surveillance as/rotection 8ro# threat. ,ani/ulationT re8ers to the inevitaility o8 /o=er relations under surveillance not least

ecause surveillance /ractices ca/ture and create di:erent versions o8 li8e as lived y surveilled su3ects. Po=errelations are evident in the =ay in =hich =atchin4 institutions or 4rou/s are ale tore4ulate the Ro= o8 in8or#ation and kno=led4e aout the surveilled do#ain

et=een various /artiesF resista!ce strate'ies co!cer! brea,i!' or

$isrpti!' those o#s a!$ creati!' spatio-temporal 'aps bet#ee!

#atcher a!$ #atche$+ inally "all re8ers to actors =ithin a surveilled do#ain as

inter#ediariesT< =here #eanin4 is inscried =here technolo4ies re5/resentin8or#ation =here /o=er1resistance o/erates and =here net=orks are ound

to4ether. ach /arty at each level o8 analysis assu#es a role in a surveillancenet=ork and eco#es inscried as such throu4h e#odied co#/liance thee?chan4e o8 #oney the inscri/tion o8 te?t and the use o8 arte8acts (,ichael HH). "all

ar4ues that inter#ediation is an i#/ortant socio5technical /rocess in the /er/etuationo8 surveillance /ractices. Usin4 DeleuAe and GuatarriTs (HJ) conce/t o8 the asse#la4eBa44erty and ricson (+---) also descrie the conver4ence and s/read o8 data54atherin4 syste#s et=een di:erent social do#ains and at #ulti/le levels. %heir

ar4u#ent centres on the notion that the tar4et o8 the 4eneric surveillance asse#la4eT is thehu#an ody =hich is roken into a series o8 data Ro=s to the end o8 8eedin4 the

in8or#ation cate4ories on =hich the surveillance /rocess is ased (Bier +--6). %hus it

is !ot the i$e!tity or sb6ecti"ity o& i!$i"i$als that is o& i!terest( bt

rather the $ata i!$i"i$als ca! yiel$ a!$ the cate'ories to #hich they ca!

co!tribte= these are the! reapplie$ to the bo$y as part o& the

i!e!ci!' a!$ ma!a'i!': process to =hich Lyon re8ers. ccordin4ly Ba44erty and ricson

ar4ue that sr"eilla!ce has a rhi*omatic character> it has ma!y a!$ $i"erse

i!sta!ces co!!ecte$ to a! !$erlyi!'( i!"isible i!&rastrctre( #hich

co!cer!s i!terco!!ecte$ tech!olo'ies i! mltiple co!te%ts+ Ba44erty and ricson

(+---) /ose a ne= challen4e =hich concerns ho= resistance is to e conce/tualiAed.Unlike or4aniAational conce/tions o8 resistance =hich are uilt around so#earoreal centraliAin4 do#inant 8orce Ba44erty and ricson su44est that #ore =ides/readand decentred notions are to e e#/loyed. It is no lon4er su8>cient to resist

surveillance /ractices y restrictin4 or controllin4 one technolo4yF one #ust alsoconsider the i#/ulse to inte4rate si#ulate and a//ly dis/arate in8or#ation cate4oriesacross a ran4e o8 conte?ts that intersect at those sur8aces o8 contact or inter8aceset=een or4anic and non5or4anic orders et=een li8e 8or#s and =es o8in8or#ation or et=een or4ans1 ody /arts and entry1/ro3ection syste#sT ("o4ard HH0 66). %hey

characteriAe the hu#an ody as Resh #ade in8or#ationT dra=in4 on ar4u#ents that e#/hasiAe hyridity andcyor4is# (Bara=ay HH) /ositionin4 it as a #ar4inality a state o8 in5et=een5nessT o8 technolo4ies and thelocal (Lei4h5Starr HH). %his is a /oint to =hich I shall return. lthou4h Ba44erty and ricson ar4ue that

rhi*omatic sr"eilla!ce ope!s more opport!ities &or scrti!y o&



sr"eilla!ce practices they /rivile4e the reakin4 o8 the ody into Ro=s to 8eed the asse#la4e over

the reconstitution o8 the ody =ith such Ro=s (Bier +--6) and thus the 2uestion o8 resistance is not su8>ciently

addressed in their analysis. %he #ain advanta4e o8 Ba44erty and ricsonTs =ork is that they shatter thenotion underlyin4 #any o8 the clai#s #ade y /ro/onents o8 iodata that the odyis a source o8 truth. %his enales a criti2ue o8 these /ractices as so#eho= de>nitiveT asoluteT or >nalT to

e estalished. Bo=ever Ba44erty and ricson do not venture 8ar enou4h0 the de4ree o8 tension and inet=een5

ness characteriAin4 the hyrid or cyor4ian su3ect (Bara=ay HH) is undere#/hasiAed. In a #anner si#ilar to"all (+--+) the identi>cation o8 the ody is #ore akin to CallonTs (HH) inter#ediaryT<a hyridentity that /oints ackT to the net=ork o8 =hich it is /art and de>nes roles 8or other

actors =ithin it (,ichael HH). A politici*atio! o& the co!stitti"e i!stability o&

the bo$y is !ee$e$ to a'me!t a practical a!$ a!alytical !$ersta!$i!' o&

ho# resista!ce to sr"eilla!ce practices mi'ht be co!ceptali*e$+ In order to

address this ar4u#ent a rie8 revie= o8 develo/#ents concernin4 a sociolo4y o8 the ody =ill e revie=ed and itscontriution to an understandin4 o8 resistance to surveillance =ill e considered.

7pecically( bil$i!' a politics o& $ifere!ce ce!tere$ o!

embo$ie$ e%perie!ces o& $isability is ,ey to o"ercome theabstracti!' limitatio!s o& the social mo$el a!$ $estabili*e

ableist $iscorse+

?o6a et al 18 [#a Lo3a (Oesearcher ello= @ University o8 Leeds Center 8orDisaility Studies PhD in Psycholo4y 8ro# University o8 Porto) ,aria #Ylia Costa(Pro8essor o8 Psycholo4y @ University o8 Porto) "ill Bu4hes (Pro8essor o8 Sociolo4y@ Glas4o= Caledonian University) Isael ,eneAes (ssociate Pro8essor inducation @ University o8 Porto) !Disaility e#odi#ent and aleis#0 stories o8resistance$ Disability & Society 'olu#e +J Issue + +-6htt/011===.tand8online.co#1doi18ull1-.-J-1-HJ7HH.+-+.-7-79

@hat co!ts as a le'itimate bo$y (Shillin4 HH6 7) is a 2uestion that has een atthe core o8 disaility discourse. Disaled /eo/le have stru44led =ith a cor/orealidentity that is /redo#inately de>ned y a #edical #odel that reduces it toanor#ality (ZitAelser4er +--7) stressin4 the need 8or correction or nor#aliAation

(d=ards and I#rie +--6). %he #edical 4aAe /lays a crucial role in invalidatin4 odies thatdo not con8or# to the nor#. I#/aired odies are re4arded as anor#al deviant in8erior and even su5

hu#an (Ca#/ell +--J). urther#ore the /ro#inence o8 io5#edical ideas in the /ulicdiscourse on disaility #ono/oliAes not only /hysical ca/ital ut also /oliticalsy#olic and social ca/ital loosely corres/ondin4 to and o/erationalised on di:erent social >elds

(Gott8ried HHJ 7H). 7b6ects are pro$ce$ a!$ place$ #ithi! a hierarchy o&

bo$ily traits that $etermi!es the $istribtio! o& pri"ile'e( stats( a!$

po#er (Garland %ho#son HH ). s "raidotti (HH 6 cited in ,eekosha HHJ) states so#e odies

#atter #ore than others0 so#e are 2uite 8rankly dis/osale. Disaled odiese/ito#iAe the latter. %he social #odel o8 disaility #akes a clear distinction et=een i#/air#ent and

disaility. It re3ects #edical cate4ories 8ocusin4 on the eli#ination o8 /re3udice and discri#ination and de8ends sel85

deter#ination social inte4ration and the civil ri4hts o8 disaled /eo/le. The bo$y is the site o&

physical $isability (Stoer ,a4alhes and Oodri4ues +--7) ut a nu#er o8 acade#ics have ar4ued

that the social mo$el o& $isability has e%cl$e$ it &rom $isability $iscorse



(,orris HHF Bu4hes +---F Patterson and Bu4hes +---). In 8act the social #odel considers thei#/aired ody untouched unchallen4ed0 a taken58or54ranted >?ed cor/oreality (,eekosha HHJ 7) and =ithin disaility studies the ter# !ody$ tends to e used=ithout #uch sense o8 odiliness as i8 the ody =ere little #ore than Resh andones (Paterson and Bu4hes HHH --). Bo=ever deate aout the ody and i#/air#ent is re5

e#er4in4 =ithin the disaility #ove#ent (8or e?a#/le Shakes/eare HH+F rench HH6).

%he#ove#ent has een recoverin4 this lost cor/oreal s/ace and as Bu4hes and Paterson (+--

-) e#/hasiAe0 $isability is e%perie!ce$ i!( o! a!$ thro'h the bo$y( 6st as

impairme!t is e%perie!ce$ i! terms o& the perso!al a!$ cltral !arrati"es

that help to co!stitte its mea!i!'+ To bri!' bo$ies bac, i! (Zola HH ) or

to reco'!i*e ho# corporeal practices pro$ce a!$ 'i"e a bo$y its place i!

e"ery$ay li&e (%urner +-- +7H) are )estio!s &!$ame!tal to the $isability

pro6ect . In order to validate the i#/aired ody =ithin disaility studies Ca#/ell (+-- ) has de>ned

aleis# as0 a net=ork o8 elie8s /rocesses and /ractices that /roduces a /articular kind o8 sel8 and ody (thecor/oreal standard) that is /ro3ected as the /er8ecct s/ecies5ty/ical and there8ore essential and 8ully hu#an.

leis# i#/oses a cor/oreal standard the 8allin4 a=ay 8ro# =hich re/resents the

/ath=ay to disaility (Ca#/ell +--H) =hich 8or disaled /eo/le /roduces t=oconse2uences0 the distancin4 o8 disaled /eo/le 8ro# each other and the e#ulationy disaled /eo/le o8 aleist nor#s (Ca#/ell +--J). %he ody /olitics o8 Critical Disaility

Studies that aleis# envisa4es o:ers valuale =ays to theoriAe disaility and challen4e

disaility o//ression (8or e?a#/le Corker HHHF Bu4hes HHH). urther#ore the politics o&

$ifere!ce ca! be a! importa!t le!s &or $estabili*i!' ableism becase it

le'itimates !ot same!ess bt hma! "ariatio! (Xones +--). s %aylor (HH 7) says

the /olitics o8 di:erence is aout reco4niAin4 the e2ual value o8 di:erent =ays o8ein4 and #ovin4 to a tradition concerned =ith ri4hts to secure /ositive reco4nition aleit sy#olically 8or

#inority identities (Galeotti +--+). %he social stru44le o8 disaled /eo/le understood as astru44le 8or reco4nition (Bonneth HH7a HH7) e#odies the deconstruction o8 aleis#

and the celeration o8 di:erence.

Co!sta!t i!terro'atio! o& ableism is critical – the specter o& the

$isable$ bo$y permeates or cltral ima'i!ary a!$

&o!$atio!ally i!&orms or epistemolo'y+

7!y$er 4 itchell 1 [Sharon L. Snyder (assistant /ro8essor in the De/art#ento8 Disaility and Bu#an Develo/#ent at the University o8 Illinois at Chica4o) David %. ,itchell (associate /ro8essor and director o8 4raduate studies in the Ph.D. inDisaility Studies Pro4ra# at the University o8 Illinois at Chica4o) !Oe5en4a4in4 the

"ody0 Disaility Studies and the Oesistance to #odi#ent$ Public Culture 6(6)06*6JH +-- htt/011/ulicculture.duke3ournals.or41content161616.8ull./d8 9

Conse2uently disaility studies has 8or#ulated the /role# o8 the #edicaliAed ody in a #anner si#ilar to thatundertaken earlier in ody studies takin4 u/ #edical institutions (and the ancillary ad#inisterin4 o8 dia4nosis

se2uestration and case study) as the /ri#ary locus o8 its criti2ue. %he /atholo4iAation o8 hu#andi:erences is theoriAed as an i#/osition on the ody<a re4ulatory e:ort tostandardiAe inherent dyna#is#. "ut =hile ody studies /rovided a 8oundation 8or a#ore 4eneral #odel o8 criti2ue around the cate4ories o8 illness health /atholo4y

http://publicculture.dukejournals.org/content/13/3/367.full.pdf

http://publicculture.dukejournals.org/content/13/3/367.full.pdf



and even ioethics disaility studies #oves eneath these ter#s to encounterdisaility directly in the e?/eriences o8 hu#an /o/ulations =hich =ere #erelyre8erenced eu/he#istically y those #ore 4eneral ter#s. Disaility studies narro=s the 8ocus

o8 its investi4ation to the social i#/lications 8or odies dee#ed e?cessively aerrant. In doin4 so scholars havee?/anded the do#ain o8 cultural understandin4s aout disaility eyond the =alls o8 its scienti>c #ana4e#ent.

or disaility studies the disaled ody is neither a #atter o8 individual #al8unction

<as cast y #edicine<nor an e:ect o8 the astraction o8 the ody =ithin the health/ro8essions. Instead $isability tra!slates i!to a commo! $e!omi!ator o&

cltral &asci!atio! i& !ot $o#!ri'ht obsessio!Eo!e that i!ltrates

thi!,i!' across $iscrsi"e re'isters as a share$ re&ere!ce poi!t i!

$eci$i!' matters o& hma! "ale a!$ comm!al belo!'i!'+ In this e#er4ent

>eld the ale ody is no lon4er characteriAed as #erely a 8alse 2uantitative idealas it had een in ody studies ut rather as an aesthetic /roduct o8 cultural 8orcesthat o//ress those cate4oriAed as disaled. %his sutle shi8t in e#/hasis allo=shu#anities scholars in disaility studies to e?tend the discussion o8 odily deviance8ro# the conte?t o8 rehailitative institutions to that o8 =ider ran4in4 culturallocations. or instance Lennard X. Davis (HH7) analyAes the role o8 institutions 8or the Dea8 in the historical

develo/#ent o8 disaility activis# and co##unity in ei4hteenth5century uro/e. ,artin Pernick (HH) analyAes theinRuential role o8 /ulic health >l#s in the /ro#otion o8 eu4enics in Chica4o /rior to orld ar II. %hrou4h readin4so8 nineteenth5 and t=entieth5century U.S. literary te?ts and cultural s/ectacles such as the 8reak sho= Oose#arie

Garland %ho#son (HH) ar4ues that $isable$ people:s bo$ies ha"e bee! represe!te$

as !assimilable #ithi! a !ormali*i!' biolo'ical i$eolo'y that #arks the

disaled ody as the in8erior contrast to an ale5odied =hite #asculine citiAenry.Paul M. Lon4#ore (HH) assesses television 4enres such as disease5o85the5=eek #ovies and telethons to dissect#ainstrea# re/resentations o8 disaility as tra4edies in need o8 eradication or overco#in4. In our o=n NarrativeProsthesis (,itchell and Snyder +---) =e theoriAe the /ervasive utility o8 disaility to literature in uro/e and theUnited States y discussin4 the lon4standin4 artistic recourse to disaility as a sta/le 8eature o8 characteriAation.

Disaility studies scholars have also analyAed the o//ortunistic use o8 cor/oreal #eta/hors to

e#le#atiAe societal =eaknesses in literary and /hiloso/hical >4urations o8

disaility. Ulti#ately these analyses o8 the /ervasive de/endency u/on te?tual andvisual re/resentations o8 disaility in various cultural #edia have 8orced are8or#ulation o8 a theory o8 #ar4inality itsel8 =ithin disaility studies. %his is onesite at =hich disaility studies diver4es 8ro# the a//roach estalished y other civilri4hts*ased /ro4ra#s. hile #any #inority #ove#ents have ar4ued that their social devaluation occurs

as a result o8 their #ar4inal /resence in re/resentational #edia disaility studies has 8or#ulated ananalysis o8 social de/reciation tar4etin4 the /er/etual recourse to i#a4es o8disaility in narrative and visual #ediu#s. s a result disaility studies 8ollo=s a >4uration o8

#ar4inality as the e?/ression o8 an !overheated sy#olic or4anis#$ that conveys /otent #eanin4s as a result o8 its/ali#/sest5like discursive history (c8. Ste=art HH6). %heaters o8 Oe/ression %he =ork o8 disaility studies scholars

consolidated the ar4u#ent that bo$ily a!$ co'!iti"e $ifere!ces #ere i!te'ral to

"arios re'isters o& mea!i!'-ma,i!' #ithi! cltre+ hile the earliest research in the

>eld ke/t returnin4 to a denunciation o8 three /ro#inent literary >4ures<Shakes/eareTs Oichard III ,elvilleTsCa/tain ha and DickensTs %iny %i#<the 4ro=in4 ody o8 historical research called 8or =ider ran4in4

#ethodolo4ies. s =ith later develo/#ents in race and 4ender studies disaility studies out4re= its

denunciations o8 stereoty/esF instead theorists e4an to ar4ue that $isability

represe!te$ a $eep-seate$( yet !i!terro'ate$( cltral co!ict+ I8 the ale

ody /roved a uto/ian >ction o8 astract odily nor#s $isable$ bo$ies occpie$

the pha!tasmic recesses o& the cltral ima'i!ary+ %he di:erent ody =as



#ore than a site 8or /ulic sca/e4oatin4<co'!iti"e a!$ physical aberra!cies

acte$ as remi!$ers o& ;thers i! or mi$st #ho challe!'e$ belie&s i! a

homo'e!eos bo$ily or$er+ Kut o8 these e:orts to elucidate the constructed

nature o8 disaled odies in history disaility studies set out to dia4nose theinvest#ents o8 an aleist society in disailityTs various incarnations. Cultural e:orts

to #edicaliAe or do#esticate disaility e:ectively re/ressed the /o=er o8 aerrancyto un#oor notions o8 the ody as a #atter o8 nor#s avera4es and deviations.Locatin4 disaled odies as rare e?a#/les o8 e?traordinary deviance essentiallycordoned o: disaility 8ro# the di:erences that characteriAe ty/ical iolo4icaldiversity. or disaility studies the i#/ersonal =as the /olitical. Such a se2uestration

evidenced the #ainstrea# desire to reduce the di:erent odyTs (or #indTs) aility to destailiAe nor#ative #odelso8 health.



2AC Case %te!sio!s



%t – 7ol"e!cyThe a<rmati"e:s embo$ie$ i!ter"e!tio! i!to $isability st$ies

is ,ey to re"erse "iole!t cltral !ormali*atio! a!$ biolo'ical

cate'ori*atio!s o& "ale+

7!y$er 4 itchell 1 [Sharon L. Snyder (assistant /ro8essor in the De/art#ento8 Disaility and Bu#an Develo/#ent at the University o8 Illinois at Chica4o) David %. ,itchell (associate /ro8essor and director o8 4raduate studies in the Ph.D. inDisaility Studies Pro4ra# at the University o8 Illinois at Chica4o) !Oe5en4a4in4 the"ody0 Disaility Studies and the Oesistance to #odi#ent$ Public Culture 6(6)06*6JH +-- htt/011/ulicculture.duke3ournals.or41content161616.8ull./d89

e e4in =ith "yronTs %he De8or#ed %rans8or#ed as an alle4ory 8or the e:orts o8 U.S. disaility studies >rst to

disen4a4e 8ro# and then to re5en4a4e =ith disaled odies. In the dra#a re3ection o8 the a//arentlyvisceral li8e o8 disaility 8or the evidently social ideal o8 a !classical$ and !ale$ody enca/sulates the doule ind that con8ronts those =ho inhait disaledodies0 one #ust either endure the cultural slander hea/ed u/on odily di:erence

or seek to evade the o3ect o8 derision. Such erasures o8 disaled /eo/le havehistorically een achieved throu4h such cultural !solutions$ as institutionaliAationisolation 4enocide cure conceal#ent se4re4ation e?ile 2uarantine and/rosthetic #askin4 a#on4 others. s a theatrical e:ort to desti4#atiAe the disaled ody "yronTs /lay<

#uch like research in disaility studies over the /ast t=enty years<ai#s to deunk the >ctions o8 desiraility that

invest the !ale$ ody. In criti2uin4 the /resu#ed desiraility invested in ale odiesdisaility studies has sou4ht to desti4#atiAe disaled odies only y de8ault. In the

#id5HH-s U.S. disaility studies returned to encounter the slou4hed5o: disaled ody a8ter the !/er8ectile$ ale

ody had een rethou4ht as a #atter o8 e/iste#olo4y as o//osed to iolo4y. e ar4ue that disaility studieshas strate4ically ne4lected the 2uestion o8 the e?/erience o8 disaled e#odi#entin order to disassociate disaility 8ro# its #oorin4 in #edical cultures andinstitutions. lthou4h recently disaility criticis# has een callin4 8or a return to a/heno#enolo4y o8 the disaled ody6 this return has een slo= in co#in4. Like8e#iniAed raced and 2ueered odies the disaled ody eca#e situated inde>nitive contrast to the articulation o8 =hat a#ounted to a he4e#onic aesthetic/re#ised on iolo4y. ithin this cultural elie8 syste# the !nor#al$ ody /rovidedthe aseline 8or deter#inations o8 desiraility and hu#an value. %he section that 8ollo=s

!stractin4 the "ody$ e4ins =ith a discussion o8 the advent o8 the nor#ative ody in #edicine throu4h ananalysis o8 the theories o8 ,ichel oucault and Geor4es Can4uilhe# and the docu#entary >l#s o8 rederickise#an. Leadin4 docu#entarians o8 institutions these three have /roduced =ork critical o8 sterile ideals o8 theody ased on statistical avera4es and on an invest#ent in the dia4nosis o8 iolo4ical di:erences as deviance.

Such criti2ues have /rovided the 8unda#ental /re#ise o8 disaility studies0 the ale ody e#er4es as anarro= #easure 8or the creation o8 discri#inatory hu#an5#ade environ#ents thatelide the e?istence o8 iolo4ical and co4nitive variations. Ne?t in !%he Cultural rena o8

Disaility$ =e e?a#ine the =ays in =hich disaility studies has e?/anded the analysis o8 the/atholo4iAation o8 disaled odies eyond the =alls o8 the #edical institution andinto an en4a4e#ent =ith intrinsically social 2uestions o8 hu#an value andelon4in4. Kne result o8 this e?/ansion has een to direct scholarly attention to the use o8 disaility as a

#eta/hor 8or social conRict in various artistic traditions. In the se4#ent !%heaters o8 Oe/ression$ =e ar4ue that as#edical science strains to rein in the disaled odyTs deviance #ovies unleash ni4ht#arish i#a4es o8 disaility asa threat to social staility. In /osin4 such an o//osition =e analyAe /ortrayals o8 disaility in %od "ro=nin4Ts H6+horror classic reaks and erner BerAo4Ts #is4uided /olitical satire ven D=ar8s Started S#all (H). inally in



%t – Foot CaseAbleism &orms the 6sticatio! &or all oppressio! – racism(

se%ism( a!$ e!"iro!me!tal $estrctio! are i!e"itable abse!t

challe!'es to biolo'ical !ormali*atio!+

@olbri!' G (Gre4or olrin4 assistant /ro8essor De/t o8 Co##unity BealthSciences Pro4ra# in Co##unity Oehailitation and Disaility Studies University o8Cal4ary. !%he Politics o8 leis#.$ Develo/#ent (+--J) 7 +7+*+7J. )

leis# is a set o8 elie8s /rocesses and /ractices that /roduce 5 ased on ailitiesone e?hiits or values 5 a /articular understandin4 o8 onesel8 oneTs ody and oneTsrelationshi/ =ith others o8 hu#anity other s/ecies and the environ#ent andincludes ho= one is 3ud4ed y others (olrin4 +--a+--a c d). leis# reRects thesenti#ent o8 certain social 4rou/s and social structures that value and /ro#otecertain ailities 8or e?a#/le /roductivity and co#/etitiveness over others such ase#/athy co#/assion and kindness. %his /re8erence 8or certain ailities over others leads to a

laellin4 o8 real or /erceived deviations 8ro# or lack o8 essentialT ailities as a di#inished state o8 ein4 leadin4 or

contriutin4 to 3usti8yin4 various other is#s (olrin4 +--a +--a c d). leis# is an u#rella is#8or other is#s such as racis# se?is# casteis# a4eis# s/eciesis# anti5environ#entalis# 4ross do#estic /roduct (GDP)5is# and consu#eris#. Kne can identi8y #any

di:erent 8or#s o8 aleis# such as iolo4ical structure5ased aleis# (") co4nition5ased aleis# (C) socialstructure5ased aleis# (S) and aleis# inherent to a 4iven econo#ic syste# (). "CS could e used as the

aleis# e2uivalent to the N"ICS S% conver4ence (olrin4 +--e). leis# and /re8erence o8certain ailities has een ra#/ant throu4hout history. leis# sha/ed andcontinues to sha/e areas such as hu#an security (olrin4 +--c) social cohesion(olrin4 +--8) social /olicies relationshi/s a#on4 social 4rou/s individuals andcountries hu#ans and non5hu#ans and hu#ans and their environ#ent (olrin4

+--a c). leis# is one o8 the #ost societally entrenched and acce/ted is#s. Bistorically aleis# haseen used y various social 4rou/s to 3usti8y their elevated level o8 ri4hts and statusin relation to other 4rou/s (i.e. =o#en =ere vie=ed as iolo4ically 8ra4ile ande#otional and thus inca/ale o8 earin4 the res/onsiility o8 votin4 o=nin4/ro/erty and retainin4 custody o8 their o=n children (aleis# leadin4 to se?is#F Silvers et

al.HHJFolrin4 +--6). Di:erent 8or#s o8 aleis# leis# a4ainst disaled /eo/le

(olrin4 +--a c) reRects a /re8erence 8or s/eciesty/ical nor#ative ailities leadin4to the discri#ination a4ainst the# as less aleT and1or as i#/airedTdisaled /eo/le(olrin4 +-- +--7). %his ty/e o8 aleis# is su//orted y the #edical de>ciencyi#/air#ent cate4oriAation o8 disaled /eo/le (#edical #odel) (olrin4 +-- +--7). Itre3ects the variation o8 ein4T iodiversity notion and cate4oriAation o8 disaled/eo/le (social #odel). It leads to the 8ocus on >?in4T the /erson or /reventin4 #oreo8 such /eo/le ein4 orn and i4nores the acce/tance and acco##odation o8 such

/eo/le in their variation o8 ein4 (olrin4 +--7). leis# has also lon4 een used to 3usti8y

hierarchies o8 ri4hts and discri#ination et=een other social 4rou/s and to e?clude /eo/le not classi>ed as

disaled /eo/leT. Se?is# is /artly driven y a 8or# o8 aleis# that 8avours certainailities and the laellin4 o8 =o#en as not havin4 those certain necessary ailitiesis used to 3usti8y se?is# and the do#inance o8 #ales over 8e#ales. Si#ilarly racis#and ethnicis# are /artly driven y 8or#s o8 aleis# =hich have t=o co#/onents.Kne 8avours one race or ethnic 4rou/ and discri#inates a4ainst another . %he ook %he

"ell Curve (Berrnstein and ,urray HH) 3ud4ed hu#an ein4s on their co4nitive ailitiesT (their I&). It /ro#oted



racis# y clai#in4 that certain ethnic 4rou/s are less co4nitively ale than others. %healeist 3ud4e#ent related to co4nitive ailities continues 3usti8yin4 racist ar4u#ents .

Casteis# like racis# is ased on the notion that socially de>ned 4rou/s o8 /eo/le have inherent natural 2ualitiesor essences Tthat assi4n the# to social /ositions #ake the# >t 8or s/eci>c duties and occu/ations(K#vedt+--).%he natural inherent 2ualities are ailitiesT that #ake the# >t 8or s/eci>c duties and occu/ations.



AT> 7ocial o$el Hoo$The social mo$el is i!s<cie!t – o"erly abstracte$ &rom

e%perie!ce+

Ter*i (Lorella %erAi School o8 ducational oundations and Policy Studies

Institute o8 ducation University o8 London. Xournal o8 //lied Philoso/hy 'ol. +No. + +--)

,y 2uestionin4 o8 the de>nition o8 i#/air#ent and disaility /rovided y the social #odel certainly does not ai# atsi#/ly reintroducin4 a linear causal link et=een i#/air#ent and disaility and in all cases. I8 =e acce/t thatsociety discri#inates a4ainst i#/aired /eo/le then =e can also understand the clai# o8 the disale#ent structureo8 society. hat I hold ulti#ately is that there certainly is a causal relation et=een o//ression and disaility

=hen society /lays a stron4 role in e?cludin4 and #ar4inaliAin4 i#/aired /eo/le. "ut in #aintainin4 thatdisaility is s2uarely socially caused the social #odel theorists are over5socialisin4their /osition. %heir #odel then as =e have seen needs clari>cations and e?tensions [79.

,ore s/eci>cally the social #odel overlooks the i#/air#ent e:ects in ter#s o8 their restriction

o8 activities or the /ossile inailities to /er8or# di:erent 8unctions. In so doin4 it do=n/lays thei#/ortance o8 the relational nature o8 i#/air#ent disaility and society. ,oreover in

assertin4 the total se/aration et=een i#/air#ent and disaility it o/ens u/ thechance o8 a /roli8erationT o8 ter#s other than disailities to denote inaility orein4 unale to do thin4s =hich i8 /olitically correct a//ears less 3usti>ed theoretically. Kne e?a#/le to

illustrate this /osition is related to so#e 8or#s o8 con4enital lindness =hich 8or instance /revent /eo/le 8ro#/er8or#in4 certain actions such as drivin4 a car. %his 8or# o8 i#/air#ent =hich can e considered a clear inailityand a disaility i8 re8erred to drivin4 (at /resent society is structured to have si4hted drivers only) is certainly not acause o8 inaility or disaility in #any other /ossile activities like en3oyin4 #usic or cookin4 or actin4 as a state

#inister. It is no= clearer there8ore =hy so#e disaled scholars have voiced the need toreconsider i#/air#ent and =hy #edical sociolo4ists have /ointed to the relational as/ect o8 so#e

i#/air#ent =ith illness and disaility. %hese considerations hi4hli4ht the need 8or a di:erent8ra#e=ork /rovidin4 a #ore coherent asis 8or the under5 standin4 o8 i#/air#entdisaility society and their reci/rocal i#/lications. I su44est that a /hiloso/hical /ers/ective

ased on #artya SenTs ca/aility a//roach could take these issues in 8ruit8ul directions. %he discussion o8 thelatter ho=ever is =ell eyond the ai# o8 this article. >nal critical /oint on the relation et=een i#/air#ent

disaility and society concerns #oral and social res/onsiility. In #aintainin4 that disaility issocially caused the social #odel o8 disaility attriutes the res/onsiility o8disale#ent co#/letely to society. In his develo/#ent o8 a social understandin4 o8 i#/air#ent

erley ar4ues that i#/air#ent is socially causedF there8ore assertin4 that society is res/onsile also 8or thei#/air#ent it /roduces. Bo=ever in li4ht o8 the /revious critical /oints and althou4h the issue o8 res/onsiility isvery co#/le? a 8e= considerations e#er4e. irst i8 society causes discri#ination either /olitically or econo#icallyand there8ore restriction o8 activity or /artici/ation then society is res/onsile 8or the disale#ent in anunacce/tale =ay. %he sa#e a//lies =hen society causes i#/air#ent as a con5 se2uence o8 =ar 8or instance. "ut

there are circu#stances =hen i#/air#ent and its e:ects do not ste# 8ro# socialcauses and #any o8 the e?a#/les aove have illustrated this clai#. %here are conse2uently di:erent

considerations related to res/onsiility =ith res/ect to i#/air#ent. Bo= could a con4enital i#/air#ent

unrelated to any ende#ic condition e considered societyTs res/onsiility\ ,oreovereven i8 one 8ully endorsed the social #odel /osition it =ould e 2uite /role#aticalho= society could e held res/onsile in the case o8 disale#ent connected to theactivity o8 drivin4 y a /erson visually i#/aired o=in4 to con4enital lindness. inally

there are i#/air#ents that are a conse2uence o8 a /ersonTs a4ency in other =ords o8 her /articular actions oractivities so#e o8 =hich can =ell e hi4hly risky activities voluntarily undertaken. hen i#/air#ent arises 8ro# ahan454lidin4 accident to #ention an e?tre#e case considerations o8 societyTs res/onsiility are diEcult to sustain.In that case in 8act =hen the s/ort has een voluntarily chosen =ith 8ull a=areness o8 its /otential risks =hen allthat could have een done to /revent the accident has een done and =hen rescue has een /rovided =here



should societyTs res/onsiility e /laced\ Bere a4ain the social #odel o8 disaility sho=s theele#ent o8 over5socialisation and i#/ro/er 4eneralisation seen in the causal linkestalished et=een society and disaility thus recon>r#in4 the internal li#itationshi4hli4hted so 8ar.

Their i!stittio!al cha!'e ar'me!ts are #ro!' – the social

mo$el $oes!:t create le'al re&orm+

7amaha [da# ,. Sa#aha attended Barvard La= School has tau4ht atChica4o University o8 La= and has a " in Bistory and Govern#ent !B% GKKDIS %B SKCIL ,KDL K DIS"ILI%V$ Xuly +--htt/011/a/ers.ssrn.co#1sol61/a/ers.c8#\astractWid]HJ6JJ9

Des/ite the a//arent connection bet#ee! the social mo$el a!$ social cha!'e(

there 6st is !o !ecessary relatio!ship there . %hat is the central clai# o8 this rticle.

lthou4h the social #odel is one =ay to de>ne disaility and a >eld o8 in2uiry( it is

!ot a $isability policy. Decidin4 ho# to respo!$ to .$isability i! la# a!$cltre $epe!$s o! a !ormati"e &rame#or, that ca!!ot be spplie$ by the

mo$el+ This &rame#or, mi'ht be libertaria!( tilitaria!( e'alitaria!( some

combi!atio! thereo&( or somethi!' else+ The social mo$el itsel&( ho#e"er(

has esse!tially !othi!' to say abot #hich &rame#or, to se+ Kne can acce/t the

#odelTs insi4ht re4ardin4 causes o8 disadvanta4e =ithout co##ittin4 to a /articular res/onse even i8 one elievesthat disaility is si#/ly or i#/ortantly the result o8 /eo/leTs attitudes.H hile le4al scholars #ay concede that the

social #odel does not account 8or all disadvanta4e associated =ith i#/air#ents none see# to

ackno=led4e the lo'ical $ista!ce bet#ee! the mo$el:s casatio!

$escriptio! a!$ pblic policy .- %he i#/lications are several. irst disaility la=

scholars shol$ stop mo"i!' so )ic,ly &rom assertio!s abot social

co!strctio! to ar'me!ts &or social reco!strctio!. ven i8 their co#/arative

advanta4e in scholarshi/ does not include #oral theory( their a!alytical s,ills o&te! become

!hi!'e$ #ithot a $e&e!sible !ormati"e 'oal+ %here is no =ay to set /riorities #ake

unavoidale tradeo:s or con8ront cost issues =ithout a nor#ative orientationF even le4al 8or#alists #ust ad#it

this. Second ecause o8 the 4a/ et=een causation and /olicy the stakes are lo=er 8orreco4niAin4 social 8orces in hu#an disadvanta4e. cce/tin4 a de4ree o8 social construction is not

the end o8 a /olicy discussion and so it should e neither shockin4 nor 8ri4htenin4. It #i4ht e intellectually

lieratin4. %hird the ar4u#ent a//lies to all social construction oservations includin4those related to 4ender race se?ual orientation class deviance and la= itsel8. orall o8 the# causation is se/arale 8ro# /olicy /rescri/tion. In 8act the ar4u#enta//lies to all causation oservations. None deter#ine 3ust outco#es. %his is not to

dis#iss e:orts to untan4le causal 8orces in hu#an a:airs. %he social #odel o8 disaility 8or its /art has een asource o8 revelation and ins/iration 8or action. It can dis/el uncritical assu#/tions that disadvanta4e is natural and

necessary =hich is no s#all 8eat. "ut =e ou4ht to kno= /recisely =hat the #odel can andcannot acco#/lish. %hen #ore can e done. e #i4ht achieve a so/histicated /icture o8 the#odelTs interaction =ith 4eneral nor#ative 8ra#e=orks =ithout relyin4 on#e#ershi/ in the disaility ri4hts #ove#ent to do the =ork o8 ar4u#ent. %here is another oversi4ht

in the scholarshi/ ut this =eakness underesti#ates the social #odelTs i#/lications. hen the

#odel is doin4 =ork =ithin a nor#ative 8ra#e=ork its insi4ht can su44est a class o8 decision #akers di:erent 8ro#the class other /ers/ectives su44est. %his insi4ht #i4ht re2uire e?/ertise in addition to or other than #edicalkno=led4e. In a =ay disaility ri4hts advocates =ho constructed the social #odel =ere /ointin4 to=ard this



conclusion all alon4. Vet the co!!ectio! bet#ee! the mo$el a!$ i!stittio!al

$esi'!( ho#e"er me$iate$( has !ot bee! reco'!i*e$ i! the la# literatre+



2AC rame#or,



Fesol"e$Fesol"e$ mea!s to a!aly*e i! part+

erriam-@ebster No Date [htt/011===.#erria#5=ester.co#1dictionary1resolved9

re^solved re^solv^in4 ull De>nition o8 OSKL' transitive ver osolete 0 dissolve #elt + a 0 reak u/se/arate _the /ris# resolved the li4ht into a /lay o8 color`F also 0 to chan4e y disinte4ration 0 to reducey analysis _resolve the /role# into si#/le ele#ents` c 0 to distin4uish et=eenor #ake inde/endently visile ad3acent /arts o8 d 0 to se/arate (a race#ic co#/ound or

#i?ture) into the t=o co#/onents



Af Jrere)isiteJolitical e!'a'eme!t be&ore the a<rmati"e:s cltral shi&t is

impossible – are!as o& po#er a!$ $emocratic $ebate are set p

to e%cl$e $isability – e%te!$i!' the limits o& .acceptable

$ebate is ,ey+Berbe 8 (,ichael !CitiAenshi/ and Disaility0 Disaility is a #atter o8 civil ri4htseven i8 the Su/re#e Court doesnt see# to a4ree.$htt/011===.alternet.or41story17J-H1citiAenshi/WandWdisaility)

Ima'i!e a bil$i!' i! #hich political philosophers are $ebati!' in the =ake

o8 the attacks o8 Se/te#er +-- the value and the /ur/ose o8 /artici/atory /arity

over a4ainst 8or#s o8 authoritarianis# or theocracy. No= i#a4ine that this uildin4 has !o

access ramps !o Braille or lar'e-pri!t pblicatio!s !o A#erican 7 i4n ?an4ua4e

i!terpreters no elevators no s/ecial5needs /ara/ro8essionals no in5class aides.

Contradictory as such a state o8 a:airs #ay sound its a reaso!ably accrate pictre o&

#hat co!temporary $ebate o"er the mea!i!' o& $emocracy actally loo,s

li,e . 3o# ca! #e reme$y thisK Knly =hen =e have 8ostered e2ual /artici/ation

in deates over the ends and #eans o8 de#ocracy can =e have a truly /artici/atorydeate over =hat /artici/atory /arity itsel8 #eans . %hat deate =ill e inter#inale in

/rinci/le since our understandin4s o8 de#ocracy and /arity are in>nitely revisale ut lest =e think o8delierative de#ocracy as a 8orensic society dedicated to e#/yreal reaches o8

astraction #e shol$ remember that $ebates o"er the mea!i!' o&

participatory parity set the terms &or more specic $ebates abot the

"arieties o& hma! embo$ime!t . %hese include deates aout /renatal

screenin4 4enetic discri#ination ste#5cell research euthanasia and =ith re4ard

to /hysical access ra#/s cur cuts kneelin4 uses and uildin4s e#/loyin4 =hatis no= kno=n as universal desi4n. Le8tists and lierals /articularly those associated =ith university

hu#anities de/art#ents are co##only char4ed =ith ein4 #oral relativists unale or un=illin4 to say (even a8ter

Se/te#er ) =hy one society #i4ht e etter than another. So let #e e es/ecially clear on this

>nal /oint. I thi!, theres a "ery 'oo$ reaso! to e%te!$ the &ra!chise( to

#i$e! the co!"ersatio!( to $emocrati*e or $ebates( a!$ to ma,e

$isability ce!tral to or theories o& e'alitaria! social 6stice



7tate ocs Ba$Ce!teri!' or politics aro!$ the state cases a placebo efect

o& real cha!'e a!$ pre"e!ts efecti"e resista!ce – re&se the

top-$o#! illsory 'i&t o& pro'ressi"e e'alitaria! politics i!

&a"or o& or plralist tho'ht+Arri'o 4 @illiams 2000 ["ruce and Christo/her Cali8ornia School o8Pro8essional Psycholo4y Xournal o8 Conte#/orary Cri#inal Xustice u4ust +---9

%he i#/edi#ents to estalishin4 de#ocratic 3ustice in conte#/orary #ericansociety have caused a national /aralysisF one that has recklessly s/a=ned ana/oretic e?istence 8or #inorities. + %he entrenched ideolo4ical co#/le?itiesabictin4 under5 and nonre/resented 4rou/s (e.4. /overty une#/loy#ent illiteracy cri#e) atthe hands o8 /olitical le4al cultural and econo#ic /o=er elites have /roducedcounter8eit /erha/s even 8raudulent e:orts at re8or#0 Discri#ination andine2uality in o//ortunity /revail (e.4. Lynch Patterson HH). %he #is4uided and 8utile

initiatives o8 the state in /ursuit o8 transcendin4 this /ulic a:airs crisis have8ostered a rei>cation that is a rein8orce#ent o8 divisiveness. %his ti#e ho=ever

#inority 4rou/s co#/ete =ith one another 8or reco4nition aEr#ation and identityin the national collective /syche (Oosen8eld HH6). hat ensues y =ay o8 state e:ort thou4h is a conte#/oraneous sense o8 e2uality 8or all and a near i#/erce/tileendorse#ent o8 ine2ualityF a silent conviction that the #a3ority 6 still retains /o=er .

%he !4i8t$ o8 e2uality /rocured throu4h state le4islative enact#ents as an e#le# o8 de#ocratic 3ustice e#odies true (le4iti#ated) /o=er that re#ains nervouslysecure in the hands o8 the #a3ority. 7 %he ostensile e#/o=er#ent o8 #inority4rou/s is a 8acadeF it is the ruse o8 the #a3ority 4i8t. hat e?ists in 8act is asi#ulacru# ("audrillard HJ HJ6) o8 e2uality (and y e?tension de#ocratic 3ustice)0 a /seudo5si4n i#a4e (a hy/erte?t or si#ulation) o8 real socio/olitical /ro4ress. or the 8uturerelationshi/ et=een e2uality and the social to #ore 8ully e#race #inoritysensiilities calculated le4al re8or# e:orts in the na#e o8 e2uality #ust edis/laced and the rule and authority o8 the status 2uo #ust e decentered. I#a4inale

calculale e2uality is sel85li#itin4 and sel85re8erential. Ulti#ately it is al=ays (at least) one ste/re#oved 8ro# true e2uality and there8ore true 3ustice. %he ruse o8 the #a3ority4i8t currently o/erates under the assu#/tion o8 a /resu#ed e#/o=er#ent =hich itcon8ers on #inority /o/ulations. Vet the /resented /o=er is itsel8 circu#scried y the stiRin4 horiAons

o8 #a3ority rule =ith their e:ects. %hus the 4i8t can only e construed as 8alsely eude#onic0n avaricious althou4h insatiale /ursuit o8 narcissistic le4iti#acy su//ortin4#a3ority directives. %he co##ission (esto=al) o8 /o=er to #inority 4rou/s or citiAens throu4h /revailin4

state re8or#atory e:orts underscores a /ole#ic =ith i#/lications 8or /ulic a:airs and civic li8e. e contend

that the avenir (i.e. the !to co#e$) o8 e2uality as an (in)calculale (un)reco4niAaledestination in search o8 de#ocratic 3ustice is needed. Bo=ever =e ar4ue that this dis/lace#ent

o8 e2uality is unattainale i8 /revailin4 3uridico5ethico5/olitical conditions (and societal consciousness /ertainin4 to

the#) re#ain >?ed sta4nant and i##utale. In this article =e =ill de#onstrate ho= the 4i8t o8 the#a3ority is /role#atic /roducin4 as it #ust a narcissistic he4e#ony that is asustained e#/o=erin4 o8 the /rivile4ed a constant rele4iti#ation o8 the /o=er8ul.

Oelyin4 on DerridaTs /ost#odern criti2ue o8 urocentric lo4ic and thou4ht =e =ill sho= ho= co#/licated and8ra4#ented the 2uestion o8 estalishin4 de#ocratic 3ustice is in estern cultures es/ecially in #erican society.

e =ill ar4ue that =hat is needed is a relocation o8 the deate aout 3ustice and



di:erence 8ro# the circu#scried oundaries o8 le4al redistriutive discourse one2uality to the #ore enco#/assin4 conte?t o8 alterity undecidaility cultural/lurality and aEr#ative /ost#odern thou4ht. J



iat Ba$iat is a terrible mo$el &or political e$catio! – &ocsi!' o! the

li"e$ e%perie!ces o& i!$i"i$als is ,ey to efecti"e

policyma,i!' a!$ preser"e le'itimate alter!ati"es+

Cla$e GG [Inis Claude (Pro8essor o8 Govern#ent and orei4n :airs @ Universityo8 'ir4inia) !States and the Gloal Syste#$ HJJ /4s. J5+-9

%his vie= o8 the state as an institutional #onolith is 8ostered y the notion o8 soverei4nty =hich calls u/ the i#a4e

o8 the #onarch /residin4 over his kin4do#. 7o"erei'!ty emphasi*es the si!'larity o&

the state its #ono/oly o8 authority its unity o8 co##and and its ca/acity to s/eak =ith

one voice. %hus rance =ills Iran de#ands China intends Ne= Zealand /ro#ises and the SovietUnion insists. Kne all too easily con3ures u/ the /icture o8 a sin4le5#inded and/ur/ose8ul state that decides e?actly =hat it =ants to achieve ado/ts coherent/olicies intelli4ently ada/ted to its o3ectives kno=s =hat it is doin4 does =hat it intends and al=ays hasits act to4ether. %his vie= o8 the state is rein8orced y /olitical scientistsT e#/hasisu/on the conce/t o8 /olicy and u/on the thesis that 4overn#ents derive /olicy 8ro#calculations o8 national interest. e thus take it 8or 4ranted that states actinternationally in accordance =ith rationally conceived and consciously

constructed sche#es o8 action and #e implicitly re&se to co!si$er the

possibility that alter!ati"es to policy 5directed ehaviour #ay have i#/ortance*

alternatives such as rando# reactive instinctual haitual and con8or#ist ehaviour. Kur rationalisticassu#/tion that states do =hat they have /lanned to do tends to inhiit the discovery thatstates so#eti#es do =hat they 8eel co#/elled to do or =hat they have theo//ortunity to do or =hat they have usually done or =hat other states are doin4or =hatever the line o8 least resistance =ould see# to su44est. cade#ic/reoccu/ation =ith the #akin4 o8 /olicy is acco#/anied y acade#ic ne4lect o8 the

e?ecution o8 /olicy. e see# to assu#e that once the state has calculated its interest and contriveda /olicy to 8urther that interest the carryin4 out o8 /olicy is the virtually auto#atic result o8 theroutine 8unctionin4 o8 the ureaucratic #echanis# o8 the state. I a# inclined to callthis the Genesis theory o8 /ulic ad#inistration takin4 as #y te?t the /assa4e0 nd God

said Let there e li4ht0 and there =as li4htT . I sus/ect that in the real# o8 4overn#ent policy

e%ectio! rarely &ollo#s so promptly a!$ i!e%orably &rom policy

stateme!t+ lternatively one #ay du it the Pooh5"ah1Mo5Mo theory honourin4 those deniAens o8 illia# S.

GilertTs Xa/an =ho took the /osition that =hen the ,ikado ordered that so#ethin4 e done it =as as 4ood as done

and #i4ht as =ell e declared to have een done. I! the real #orl$ that =hich a state decides

to do is not as 4ood as doneF it #ay in 8act never e done. nd =hat states dothey #ay never have decided to do. Govern#ents are not auto#atic #achines 4rindin4 out decisions

and convertin4 decisions into actions. %hey are a44lo#erations o8 hma! bei!'s like therest o8 us inclined to e 8allile laAy 8or4et8ul indecisive resistant to disci/line and authority and

likely to 8ail to 4et the =ord or to heed it. s in other lar4e or4aniAations le8t and ri4ht 4overn#ental

hands are 8re2uently i4norant o8 each otherTs activities oEcial s/okes#en contradict each other #inistries =ork atcross /ur/oses and the creakin4 #achinery o8 4overn#ent o8ten 4ives the i#/ression that no one is really inchar4e. I ho/e that no one =ill attriute #y 3aundiced vie= o8 4overn#ent #erely to the 8act that I a# an#erican*one that is =hose /ersonal e?/erience is li#ited to a 4overn#ental syste# that is notoriously co#/le?dis3ointed erratic cu#erso#e and un/redictale. %he United States does not I sus/ect have the least e:ective

4overn#ent or the #ost u#lin4 and inco#/etent ureaucracy in all the =orld. Bere and there no= and



then 4overn#ents do o8 course /er8or# /rodi4ious 8eats o8 or4aniAation and ad#inistration0

an e?traordinary =ar e:ort a Ri4ht to the #oon a success8ul hosta4e5rescue o/eration. ,ore o8ten stateshave to #ake do =ith 4overn#ents that are not notaly clear aout their /ur/osesor coordinated and disci/lined in their o/erations. %his #eans that in international relations

states are so#eti#es less dan4erous and so#eti#es less reliale than one #i4ht think. Neither their threats nor

their /ro#ises are to e taken =ith asolute seriousness. ove all it #eans that =e st$e!ts o&

i!ter!atio!al politics mst be catios i! attribti!' prpose&l!ess a!$

respo!sibility to 'o"er!me!ts+ %o say that the United States =as in8or#ed

aout an event is not to estalish that the /resident acted in the li4ht o8 thatkno=led4eF he #ay never have heard aout it. %o say that a Soviet /ilot shot do=n an airliner is

not to /rove that the Mre#lin has ado/ted the /olicy o8 destroyin4 all intruders into Soviet airs/aceF one =ants tokno= ho= and y =ho# the decision to >re =as #ade. %o oserve that the re/resentative o8 Zi#a=e voted in8avour o8 a /articular resolution in the United Nations General sse#ly is not necessarily to discover the nature o8Zi#a=eTs /olicy on the a:ected #atterF Zi#a=e #ay have no /olicy on that #atter and it #ay e that no onein the national ca/ital has ever heard o8 the issue. e can hardly dis/ense =ith the convenient notion that Pakistanclai#s Cua /ro#ises and Italy insists and =e cannot =ell aandon the 8or#al /osition that 4overn#ents s/eak

8or and act on ehal8 o8 their states ut it is essential that =e ear constantly in #ind thereality that 4overn#ents are never 8ully in char4e and never achieve the unity

/ur/ose8ulness and disci/line that theory attriutes to the#*and that theyso#eti#es clai#.



Fehabilitatio! DArame#or, is a "iole!t rehabilitati"e attempt to bri!' the

$isable$ bo$y bac, #ithi! !ormati"e sta!$ar$s o& ci"ility –

re6ect their me$ical patholo'i*i!' o& the a<rmati"e+

3'hes 12 ("ill Bu4hes Pro8essor o8 Sociolo4y and the Dean o8 the School o8La= and Social Sciences at Glas4o= Caledonian University Scotland. !Civilisin4,odernity and the Kntolo4ical Invalidation o8 Disaled Peo/le$ in Disaility andSocial %heory Ne= Develo/#ents and Directions)

%here is another =ay to deal =ith disaility a technical (usually) #edical solution desi4ned to assua4e the e?cess o8 cor/oreality the sur/lus o8 li8eT (Molnai +--) that u/sets the civilisedT oserver. %his is the anthro/o/ha4ic

strate4y the /ossiility o8 rescuin4 disaility 8ro# the ayss o8 unacce/taledi:erence throu4h correction rehailitation throu4h >ndin4 =ays to conceal or heal theontolo4ical de>citT (Bu4hes +--). %he 2uest to correct the disaled ody is aout#akin4 disaility and non5disaility identical aout trans8or#in4 the /atholo4ical intothe nor#al. In aleist culture the odily 8or#s o8 disaled /eo/le are #arked not 3ust y constitutional

/atholo4y ut also y aesthetic unruliness. Disaility re/resents de>cit in co#/etence and eauty. u4enicsT 8ore?a#/le /ro#ised to #ake hu#anity not 3ust stron4 and s#art ut eauti8ul as =ellT (Pernick HH0 H). %heontolo4ical dis/ara4e#ent o8 disaility in the #odern /eriod is a doule5ed4ed s=ord. It thrusts and slashes in the

2uotidian s/aces o8 the civilisin4 =orld. ,edical and aesthetic /re3udice =ork in co#ination to/roduce the vie= that disaled /eo/leTs inailitiesT and de>cienciesT are /roductso8 the natural distriution o8 co#/etence and eauty rather than the socialor4anisation o8 o//ortunity. Inso8ar as one cannot e?chan4e =hat one has not 4ot or(easily) trans8or# a de>cit into a credit the disaled ody is locked in its/ossiilities to ac2uire cultural econo#ic or sy#olic ca/ital (see "lack#ore and Bod4kins

in this volu#e). Correction1rehailitation involves the atte#/ted erasure o8 de>cits o8crediility that are si#ultaneously #echanical and undesirale. %o e =hat not toeT is to e a stakeholder at the #ar4ins o8 the hu#an co##unity =ith 8e=

o//ortunities to esca/e #isreco4nition and e?ile. CorrectionT o:ers a tan4ile/ro#ise o8 rede#/tion throu4h * to steal a /hrase 8ro# "ourdieu (HJ0 +7) * ontolo4ical/ro#otionT. ,akin4 ale (rehailitation) o:ers an alternative to lon45ter# or /er#anent incarceration in 2uasi5

#edical institutions. Benri5Xac2ues Stiker (+---0 +J) ar4ues that rehailitation #arks thea//earance o8 a culture that atte#/ts to co#/lete the act o8 identi>cation o8#akin4 identicalT and that this act =ill cause the disaled to disa//ear and =iththe# all that is lackin4 in order to dro=n the# dissolve the# in the 4reater andsin4le social =holeT. %he dyna#ic o8 the dis4ust res/onse * do=n to the re#oval o8 the

aversive o3ect * is in a concrete =ay re/roduced in the /ractice o8 rehailitation.

,odern /ro8essional thera/eutic /ractice is desi4ned to nor#alise in the na#e o8 sa#eness. side 8ro# the /ositive

value that it can and does have 8or #any it re/resents an assault on odily di:erence and

e#odies an assu#/tion that the nor# (o8 =holeness) is rede#/tive . inance (+--0+) notes that in rance 8ro# the H7-s on=ards the ter# handica/T relates to diver4ence 8ro# a nor# o8social /er8or#anceT and re8ers to a disaled /erson =ho throu4h #edical #eans is to e re5ada/tedT.

Oehailitation also si4ni>es etter#ent indicatin4 a #oral ele#ent to correction. Fehabilitatio! is a!

ofer o& o!tolo'ical promotio!( a! i!"itatio! to 6oi! the comm!ity o&

ci"ilise$ perso!s+ ssu#/tions aout civilised odily /er8or#ances are clearly evident in the >eld o8

thera/y and rehailitation. ides that 8acilitate the u/5ri4htT stance and co#/ort#ent o8 /eo/le =ith #oilityi#/air#ents are re4arded as tools 8or enhancin4 /hysical ca/ital. %he di:erence et=een ho#o erectus and hisTslouched /ri#ate /redecessors #i4ht have a 2uite a lot to do =ith our disdain 8or those =ho do not =alk tallT as=ell as =ith the /ervasive (nondisaled) vie= that a =heelchair is a /lace o8 con>ne#ent rather than a vehicle o8



lieration. %he #edical ter# /rosthesis is derived 8ro# the Greek =ord #eanin4 additionT su44estin4 nature in

de>cit. In a literal senseT note ,itchell and Snyder (+---0 ) a /rosthesis seeks to acco#/lish anillusionT /erha/s a deceit. It covers5u/. It atte#/ts to re/resent =hat an individualis * at the level o8 iolo4y and ontolo4y * so that she can e e#raced y aco##unity that =ill not tolerate her as she is. %hera/ies i#/rove and correct so#e cure. %he 4oal

o8 s/eech and lan4ua4e thera/y 8or e?a#/le is to trans8or# de>cit co##unicatorsT y /rovidin4 the# =ith the

tools to develo/ civilisedT s/eech /atterns. Oeci/ients o8 the thera/y are tau4ht * like the heroine o8 Geor4e"ernard Sha=Ts Py4#alion *to e#ody the /rotocols o8 co#/etent co##unicationT and e ale there8ore to

/artici/ate e:ectively in civil social encounters. %he /erson =ith the s/eech i#/air#ent is/resented as a /ortent o8 social #ess. %o o:end a4ainst /rotocol attracts aversion. Vet these /rotocols are the#selves carnally in8or#ed and arise 8ro# the =ays in=hich non5disaled odies leave their i#/rint * the i#/rint o8 nor#alcy * on the8or#s o8 co##unication that co#e to e de>ned as acce/tale. I#/air#ent inthese nor#alised social s/aces is al=ays an ontolo4ical lack. Oehailitation * 8ro# the

Latin hailitareT to #ake aleT * is a correcti"e( a pe$a'o'ical soltio! to or

a"ersio! &or the $isrptio! case$ by a! o!tolo'ical spli!ter i! the

other#ise per&ect eshy &abric o& a slic, social e!co!ter . S/eech i#/air#ent is

treated as a cree/in4 unruliness that threatens civility. ro# a non5disaledT /ers/ective the corru/tin4 /resence

o8 ontolo4ical de>cit is a source o8 #oral a//rehension. Disaled /eo/le can atte#/t to erase theirdi:erence y /assin4 as nor#alT (Go:#an HH) * a 8or# o8 ontolo4ical lu: that is/ro8oundly /recarious. In e2uatin4 social co#/etence =ith the conceal#ent o8cor/oreal di:erence disaled /eo/le trade /ride in =ho they are 8or the re=ards o8assi#ilation. lias understands this all too =ell. Passin4 8ro# his /ers/ective can e e?/lained y 8ear o8

de4radation and is under/inned y the ali4n#ent o8 oneTs su/er5e4o =ithT the social de#ands 8or sel85constraintT(lias +---0 ). Given the /ervasiveness o8 aleis# and the tyranny o8 nor#alcyT one can understand =hy this

can e re4arded as an attractive ar4ain. %he ri4ht sideT o8 civility is an attractive /lace to e.Kne o8 the =ays to sustain crediility as a disaled /erson see#s to e yconvincin4 others that one is not =hat one is. Vet the cost o8 this civilisin4 ontolo4ical strate4y can

e hi4h. Its attraction hin4es on the e?tent to =hich its /rota4onist internalises * as

sha#e * the dis4ust res/onse that she assu#es she =ill invoke i8 her i#/air#ent isnot correctedT y conceal#ent. Bo=ever i8 the concealed i#/air#ent is e?/osed and the /rotective

#antle o8 /assin4T colla/ses the individual is cau4ht in a deceit that #ay have /ro8oundly ne4ative conse2uences8or her social relationshi/s.



Normali*atio! DANormali*i!' the a<rmati"e:s resista!t politics i! a! attempt to

create a! ima'i!e$ per&ect $ebate comm!ity o!ly reslts i!

the mai!te!a!ce o& ableism – &orce$ !orm emlatio! shol$ be

re6ecte$ a!$ replace$ #ith or i!"ersio! o& politics as sal+Campbell G iona Mu#ari Ca#/ell researcher in /hiloso/hy sociolo4y 3uris/rudence and theolo4y and De/uty head o8 school at Gri:on La= School!Oe8usin4 le(ness)0 Preli#inary Conversation aout leis#$ ,1C Xournal-1+--J htt/0113ournal.#edia5culture.or4.au1inde?./h/1#c3ournal1article1vie=rticle1

%y/ically literatre #ithi! $isability and cultural studies has co!ce!trate d o! the

/ractices and /roduction o8 disalis# s/eci>cally y e?a#inin4 those attit$es

a!$ barriers that co!tribte to the sbor$i!atio! o& people #ith

$isabilities i! liberal society. Disablism is a set o8 assu#/tions (conscious or

unconscious) and /ractices that promote the $ifere!tial or !e)al treatme!t o& people becase o& actal or presme$ $isabilities . Kn this asis the strate'ic

positio!s a$opte$ to &acilitate ema!cipatory social cha!'e #hilst $i"erseessentially relate to re8or#in4 those ne4ative attitudes assimilati!' people #ith

$isabilities i!to !ormati"e ci"il society a!$ pro"i$i!' compe!satory

i!itiati"es a!$ sa&ety !ets i! cases o& e!$ri!' "l!erability. In other =ords thesite o& re&ormatio! has een at the i!terme$iate le"el o8 8unction structureand institution in civil society and shi8tin4 values in the cultural arena. Such an e#/hasis

pro$ces scholarship that co!tai!s serios $istortio!s 4a/s and omissio!s

re'ar$i!' the pro$ctio! o& $isability a!$ re-i!scribes a! able-bo$ie$

"oice/le!s to#ar$s $isability. Disaility o8ten 2uite unconsciously continues to e e?a#ined and

tau4ht 8ro# the /ers/ective o8 the Kther (,arksF Solis). The challe!'e the! is to re"erse( toinvert this traditional a//roach to shi8t our 4aAe and concentrate on #hat the

st$y o& $isability tells s abot the pro$ctio!( operatio! a!$

mai!te!a!ce o& ableism. %he earlier =ork o8 %o# Shakes/eare concludes ! /erha/s the #aintenance

o8 a non5disaled identity is a more se&l problem #ith #hich to be co!cer!e$= rather tha!

i!terro'ati!' the other( let s $e-co!strct the !ormality-#hich-is-to-be-assme$$ (+J). Bu4hes ca/tures

this /ro3ect 8orce8ully y callin4 8or a study o8 the !/atholo4ies o8 non5disale#ent$ (J6). n ledi#a4inary relies u/on the e?istence o8 an hitherto unackno=led4ed i#a4inedshared co##unity o8 ale5odied1#inded /eo/le (c.8. "utler Parr) held to4ether y aco##on aleist ho#osocial =orld vie= that asserts the /re8eraility and

co#/ulsoriness o8 the nor#s o8 aleis#. Kveroe and Ca#/ell /oint to the co#/ulsion to

emlate the !orm thro'h the i!ter!alisatio! o& ableism . leistnor#ativity results

in co#/ulsive /assin4 =herein there is a 8ailure to ask aout di:erence to i#a4ine hu#an e5in4ness di:erently.Co#/ulsory aleness and its conviction to and seduction o8 sa#eness as the asis to e2uality clai#s results in aresistance to consider ontolo4ically /eri/heral lives as distinct =ays o8 ein4 hu#an least they /roduce ahei4htened devaluation. Kntolo4ical re8ra#in4 /oses di:erent /reoccu/ations0 =hat does the study o8 the /olitics o8 dea8nessT tell us aout =hat it #eans to e hearin4T\ Indeed ho= is the very conce/tualisation o8 hearin4T 8ra#ed

in the li4ht o8 discourses o8 dea8nessT\ By $ece!tri!' Able$!ess( it is possible to .to

loo, at the #orl$ &rom the i!si$e ot )$ (Linton 6) and unveil the non5disaled1aleistT stance.

In a di:erent conte?t Bara=ay (7+) e?clai#s ! [this9 cannot e said 2uite out loud or it loses its crucial /ositionas a /re5condition o8 vision and eco#es the o3ect o8 scrutiny$. So =hat is #eant y the conce/t o8 aleis#T\ survey o8 the literature su44ests that the ter# is o8ten re8erred to in a Reetin4 =ay =ith li#ited de>nitional or

http://journal.media-culture.org.au/index.php/mcjournal/article/viewArticle/46






conce/tual s/eci>city (ClearF I=asaki ,actavish0 atts revelles). hen there is co##entaryaleis# is descried as denotin4 an attitude that devalues or di:erentiatesdisaility throu4h the valuation o8 ale5odiedness e2uated to nor#alcy. or so#ethe ter# aleis# is used interchan4ealy =ith the ter# disalis#. I ar4ue ho=ever that

these t=o =ords render 2uite radically di:erent understandin4s o8 the status o8 disaility to the nor#. urther#oreas a conce/tual tool aleis# transcends the /rocedures structures 8or 4overnin4 civil society and locates itsel8

clearly in the arena o8 4enealo4ies o8 kno=led4e. %here is little consensus as to =hat /ractices and ehavioursconstitute aleis#. @e ca! !e"ertheless say that a chie& &eatre o& a! ableist

"ie#poi!t is a belie& that impairme!t or $isability (irres/ective o8 ty/eT) is

i!here!tly !e'ati"e a!$ shol$ the opport!ity prese!t itsel&( be

ameliorate$( cre$ or i!$ee$ elimi!ate$+ leis# re8ers to In a si#ilar vein 'eronica

Chouinard de>nes aleis# as !ideas /ractices institutions and social relations that /resu#e aleodiedness andy so doin4 construct /ersons =ith disailities as #ar4inalised and lar4ely invisile othersT$ (6J-). In contrast#undson %aira attriute a doctrinal /osture to aleis# in their su44estion that !leis# is a doctrine that 8alselytreats i#/air#ents as inherently and naturally horrile and la#es the i#/air#ents the#selves 8or the /role#se?/erienced y the /eo/le =ho have the#$ (7). hilst there is little ar4u#ent =ith this /resu//osition =hat isasent 8ro# the de>nition is any #ention o8 aleis#Ts 8unction in inau4uratin4 the nor#. Ca#/ell and ChouinardTsa//roach is less aout the coherency and intentionalities o8 aleis#F rather their e#/hasis is on a conce/tion o8aleis# as a hu net=ork 8unctionin4 around shi8tin4 interest conver4ences. Linton de>nes aleis# as !includ[in49

the idea that a /ersonTs ailities or characteristics are deter#ined y disaility or that /eo/le =ith disailities as a4rou/ are in8erior to non5disaled /eo/le$ (H). %here are /role#s =ith si#/ly endorsin4 a sche#a that /osits a/articular =orldvie= that either 8avours or dis8avours dis1ale5odied /eo/le as i8 each cate4ory is discrete sel85evident and >?ed. s I =ill ar4ue later leis# sets u/ a inary dyna#ic =hich is not si#/ly co#/arative ut ratherco5relationally constitutive. Ca#/ellTs 8or#ulation o8 aleis# not only /role#atises the si4ni>er disaility ut/oints to the 8act that the essential core o8 aleis# is the 8or#ation o8 a naturalised understandin4 o8 ein4 8ullyhu#an and this as Chouinard notes is articulated on a asis o8 an en8orced /resu#/tion that erases di:erence.



Ne'ati"e



No 7ol"e!cyI!terro'ati!' $isability as a social co!strctio! $oes !othi!' –

!o broa$ social cha!'e+

Do!o'he 8 (Christo/her ordha# University Challen4in4 the authority o8 the

#edical de>nition o8 disaility0 an analysis o8 the resistance to the socialconstructionist /aradi4# Disaility Society J.+)

In an e:ort to deunk the entrenched authority o8 the #edical #odel a socialconstructionist /aradi4# has een ado/ted y #any disaility theorists and activists. %hey have

su44ested that society nor#ally creates a ne4ative social identity 8or /eo/le =ith disailities (Ger4en HJ7F ine

sch HJJF Scotch HJJF "rAuAy HH). %hrou4h the construction o8 this identity =hich isty/ically characterised y deviant or anor#al ehaviour the non5disaled #a3orityis 4ranted a le4iti#ate #eans to e?clude and isolate /eo/le =ith disailities . s

re#oved #e#ers o8 society their contriutions are o8ten discredited and their successes are treated asaerrations. Like=ise the e?/ectations o8 /eo/le =ith disailities are chronically lo= and there is an ever5/resentsu44estion that their lives are not necessarily =orth livin4. %his identity has een ar4ued to derive 8ro# the #edical#odel =hich de>nes a disaility as a de>ciency that restricts oneTs aility to /er8or# nor#al li8e activities. "y

ado/tin4 the social constructionist vie=/oint theorists and activists have contended that society has createddisaility y choosin4 not to re#ove structural constraints that =ould enale #ore /eo/le to /artici/ate and 4ain

access to social resources. %he social constructionist a//roach =as an e:ective ideolo4icalre3oinder to the estalished #edical #odel. Vet the 2uestion o8 ho= to convince thenon5disaled #a3ority that society has disaled certain individuals has not eenade2uately resolved. %he activists atte#/ted to ado/t the social constructionist theory as a asis 8or a

#inority 4rou/ #odel o8 disaility. %hey =ould use this #odel to su//ort a /lea 8or action to/eo/le =ith disailities as a #echanis# to overco#e the o//ression ein4 inRictedu/on the# y the non5disaled #a3ority. hile it is clear that such a trans8or#ation o8 the de>nition

o8 disaility a#on4 acade#ics and disaility activists has clearly taken hold the disaility #ove#enta//ears to have achieved only li#ited success in chan4in4 the vie=s o8 the non5disaled #a3ority. "y acce/tin4 the re=ard o8 civil ri4hts /rotection =ithout insistin4 that the #edical #odel

e /ulicly dis#antled the ho/es o8 the disaility activists to chan4e the vie=s o8 the roader /ulic #ay haveeen sacri>ced. %he =illin4ness to #ake this concession #ay have ste##ed 8ro# the elie8 a#on4 socialconstructionist theorists that society =ill chan4e its /erce/tion o8 disaility i8 it is#erely de#onstrated that the /rior notion has een #ade un3ustly. ro# astructural /oint o8 vie= it =ould see# to take #uch #ore to convince a do#inant4rou/ in society that it needs to redistriute /o=er and access to its treasuredresources. %he #ore desirale arran4e#ent to the non5disaled #a3ority is one that#aintains the su/eriority o8 /eo/le =ith nor#alT ailities. s a result the disaledare ty/ically descried as dys8unctional and are o8ten /erceived to e inca/ale o8understandin4 the =orld in the sa#e =ay that nor#alT /eo/le do. lthou4h socialconstructionists ar4ue that such 3ud4e#ents re4ardin4 ho= /eo/le should e ale to think or act are

su3ective notions that ste# 8ro# do#inant social ideolo4ies they #ay e said to underesti#ate thee?tent to =hich those ideolo4ies are created and le4iti#ated y the non5disaled#a3ority ecause they est serve their interests.



Case



7ocial o$el Hoo$7ocial mo$el o& $isability is 'oo$ – ,ey to pro'ressi"e

i!stittio!al cha!'e+

orris 2000 [Xenny ,orris !Oeclai#in4 the Social ,odel o8 Disaility$ Greater

London ction on Disaility eruary +--- htt/011disaility5studies.leeds.ac.uk1>les1lirary1GLD5Social5,odel5o85Disaility5Con8erence5Oe/ort./d89

%he social #odel o8 disaility 4ives us the =ords to descrie our e?/eriences o8ine2uality. It se/arates our disaility (disalin4 arriers) 8ro# i#/air#ent (not ein4 ale to

=alk or see or hear or havin4 diEculty learnin4). %here are t=o #ain ty/es o8 disalin4 arriers. ttitudes(/re3udice) and une2ual access * the =ay in =hich society denies us access to the thin4s =e need to have a 4ood2uality li8e and to do the thin4s that non5disaled /eo/le take 8or 4ranted. So #y i#/air#ent is the 8act that I canTt=alkF disaility is the 8act that architects think that ste/s are a =onder8ul desi4n 8eature. Not ein4 ale to see is an

i#/air#entF disaility is the 8ailure to /rovide /rinted #aterial on audio ta/e in raille etc. e use the =orddisaility to #ean o//ression to #ean disalin4 arriers. %he social #odel doesnTt deny thei#/ortance o8 i#/air#ent. It actually enales us to 8ocus on our needs relatin4 to

i#/air#ent ecause it #eans =e can se/arate these out 8ro# the disalin4arriers =e e?/erience. %he social #odel also doesnTt deny our di:erence. e are

di:erent 8ro# non5disaled /eo/le 8or t=o reasons0 =e have needs arisin4 8ro# our i#/air#ents and =ee?/erience disalin4 arriers o8 /re3udice and une2ual access. %his is =hy the 4overn#entTs recent advertisin4

ca#/ai4n (!See the Person$) is so dan4erous. e are asked to elieve that it is /ro4ressive 8ornon5disaled /eo/le to say to us I donTt see =hat #akes your ody or #inddi:erent 8ro# #e I 3ust see you as a /ersonT. %his is not only an atte#/t to deny the 8eelin4s that

/eo/le have aout di:erence it is also to deny that =e are di:erent * they deny the /re3udice =e e?/erience and

deny the thin4s =e need to ha//en in order that =e can have our hu#an and civil ri4hts. %he social #odelhel/s us to understand =hat needs to ha//en in order that =e can access ourhu#an and civil ri4hts. "ut to have our hu#an and civil ri4hts =e also need entitle#ents tothe additional thin4s =e re2uire to have e2ual access0 =e need entitle#ents to

/hysical access to co##unication assistance to /ersonal assistance to accessilein8or#ationF =e need le4islation to /rotect us 8ro# /re3udice. e need hu#anri4hts civil ri4hts and entitle#ents. %hese three state#ents illustrate the di:erences et=een these

and the relationshi/ et=een the#0 Disaled /eo/le have the ri4ht to e /arentsT a hu#an ri4ht Disaled /arentshave the ri4ht to sit =ith their children in the cine#aT a civil ri4ht Disaled /arents have the ri4ht to assistance

=ith lookin4 a8ter their children in their o=n ho#es i8 they need itT an entitle#ent "ecause the social#odel se/arates out disalin4 arriers and i#/air#ents it enales us to 8ocus one?actly =hat it is =hich denies us our hu#an and civil ri4hts and =hat action needsto e taken in order to 4et us these ri4hts. So#eti#es the action is aout re#ovin4 disalin4

arriers ut so#eti#es itTs aout /rovidin4 the hel/ =e need ecause o8 our i#/air#ent. So#eti#es itTs aoutein4 treated the sa#e as everyone else so#eti#es itTs aout ein4 treated di:erently so that =e can thenachieve the sa#e thin4s as everyone else. In the /ast our di:erence has only een reco4nised in a ne4ative =ay

=hich has resulted in disaled /eo/le ein4 se4re4ated and e?cluded 8ro# society. %he social #odel hel/sour di:erence to e ackno=led4ed in a /ositive or neutral =ay and #akes it #orelikely that =e =ill 4et our hu#an and civil ri4hts.



Jolitical Actio! Hoo$;rie!ti!' aro!$ co!crete political actio! is ,ey to acti"ate the

pote!tial o& embo$ie$ politics a!$ $irectly challe!'e

oppressio! – the af:s i$e!tity-base$ resista!ce tra$es of+

;J 1 (Krchestrated Pulse #a4aAine 61 !,y Skin8olk inTt ll Min8olk0 %he Le8tTsProle# =ith Identity Politics$ htt/011===.orchestrated/ulse.co#1+-1-61/role#5identity5/olitics1)

I#/erial #erica #urderous #erica the #erica that aused and roed countries like "olivia <that #erica=as #e. I too =as a settlerF #y "lack 8eet =ere stained red =ith lood as I stood on stolen indi4enous land. I tooene>tted 8ro# colonialis# ca/italis# and the other 8acets o8 hite su/re#acy. I could no lon4er si#/ly /oint the

>n4er at hite /eo/le. ,y #ar4inaliAed identity didnTt asolve #e. I e4an to think syste#ically. I

had to actually develo/ a #ultidi#ensional =orldvie= and ta,e political sta!ces

that $re# o ! more tha! my li"e$ e%perie!ces. hen I returned to the United States and

eca#e involved in le8tist /olitics I soon realiAed that the /olitical scene =as un8ortunately still stuck on /ersonal

identity. B% IS IDN%I%V PKLI%ICS\ In this a4e o8 (#isinter/reted) intersectionality our

/olitics tend to rely o! the bo$y . hen =e deal =ith race hite /eo/le e#ody hite su/re#acy and /rivile4e =hile non5hites are the cor/oral #ani8estation o8resistance. e osess over hite /rivile4e and ho= =e can 4et #ore /eo/le o8 color

involved in our s/aces and /ro3ects ut does hite su/re#acy really disa//ear =henthere are no hite /eo/le in the roo#\ So#e /eo/le look at these Ra=s and call 8or an end to

!identity /olitics$ ut I think thatTs a #istake. t its #ost asic level identity /olitics #erely #eans /olitical activity

that caters to the interests o8 a /articular social 4rou/. In a certain sense all /olitics are identity/olitics. Bo=ever itTs one thin4 to intentionally 8or# a 4rou/ around articulatedinterestsF itTs another #atter entirely =hen 4rou/ #e#ershi/ is socially i#/osed. Personal

identities are socially de>ned throu4h a co#ination o8 syste#ic re=ards1#ar4inaliAation /lus actual and1or

/otential violence. e canTt uild /olitics 8ro# that 8oundation ecause these sociallyi#/osed identities donTt necessarily tell us anythin4 aout so#eoneTs /olitical interests.

Success8ul i$e!tity politics re)ires share$ i!terests( !ot share$ perso!ali$e!tities. IT# not here to tell you that /ersonal identity doesnTt #atterF =e ri4ht8ully /oint out that syste#ic

/o=er sha/es /eo/leTs lives. Si#/ly /ut #y #essa4e is that /ersonal identity is not the only

thin4 that #atters. @e spe!$ so mch e!er'y labeli!' peopleE

pri"ile'e$/mar'i!ali*e$( oppressor/oppresse$Ethat #e o&te! !e'lect to

bil$ spaces that a!ta'o!i*e the systems that case or collecti"e

trama+ ll Vou "lacks ant ll the Sa#e %hin4s e assu#e that i8 a /erson is syste#ically #ar4inaliAed then

they #ust have a vested interest in dis#antlin4 that syste#. Vet thatTs not al=ays the case. %ake Krville LloydDou4las =ho last su##er =rote an article in the Guardian in =hich he ad#itted that he hates ein4 "lack. I canhonestly say I hate ein4 a lack #ale I 3ust donTt >t into a neat cate4ory o8 the stereoty/ical vie=s /eo/le haveo8 lack #en. I hate ra/ #usic I hate #ost s/orts and I like listenin4 to rock #usic I have nothin4 in co##on=ith the archety/es aout the lack #ale I resent ein4 co#/ared to youn4 lack #ales (or youn4 /eo/le o8 any

race) =ho are laAy not disci/lined or delin2uent. Krville Lloyd Dou4las hy I Bate "ein4 a "lack ,an s =e cansee 8ro# Dou4lasT cry 8or hel/ #e#ershi/ in a #ar4inaliAed 4rou/ is no 4uarantee that a

/erson can understand and efecti"ely combat syste#ic o//ression. Vet =e see#

to treat all #ar4inaliAed voices as e2ual as i8 they are all insi4ht8ul as i8 there is no diversity o8

thou4ht as i8<in the case o8 race* !ll you "lacks =ant all the sa#e thin4s$. Shared identity does note2ual shared interests. Xohn Oidley the Kscar5=innin4 screen/lay =riter o8 + Vears a Slave is a 4ood

e?a#/le. BeTs =ritten screen/lays ased on Xi#i Bendri? the L.. riots and other /oi4nant #o#ents and icons=ithin "lack history. Be =ants to see #ore "lack /eo/le in Bolly=ood and he has a lon4 history o8 success8ullyincor/oratin4 "lack and "ro=n characters into co#ic ook stories and 8ranchises. Bo=ever in +-- Oidley #ade



=aves =ith an essay in =hich he casti4ated "lack /eo/le =ho did not live u/ to his standardsF sayin4 !ItTs ti#e 8orascended lacks to =ish ni44ers 4ood luck.$ So I say this0 ItTs ti#e 8or ascended lacks to =ish ni44ers 4ood luck. Xust as =hites #ay e concerned =ith the 4ood o8 all citiAens ut donTt travel their days =orryin4 s/eci>cally aoutthe =ell5ein4 o8 hillillies 8ro# //alachia =e need to send ni44ers on their =ay. e need to start e?tollin4 the#ost virtuous o8 ourselves. It is ti#e to celerate the Ne= "lack #ericans<those =ho have sealed the Deal =hoarenTt eholden to lieral indul4ence any #ore than they are to the disdain o8 the hard Oi4ht. It is ti#e to /raiselacks =ho are #erely undeniale in their individuality and e?e#/lary in their levels o8 achieve#ent. %he ,ani8estoo8 scendancy 8or the ,odern #erican Ni44er hile Oidley and I share cultural aEnity and =e oth =ant to see"lack /eo/le doin4 =ell shared cultural aEnity and co##on identity are not enou4h* =hich recent history #akesaundantly clear. "arack Ka#a continues to de/ort record nu#ers o8 "ro=n i##i4rants here at ho#e =hile#ercilessly o#in4 "ro=n 8olks aroad. Don Le#on s/eakin4 in su//ort o8 "ill KTOeilly said that racis# =ould elessened i8 "lack /eo/le /ulled u/ their /ants and sto//ed litterin4. Last 8all -Q o8 "lack U.S. #ericanssu//orted airstrikes a4ainst Syria. ,y skin8olk ainTt all kin8olk and the Le8t needs to catch u/. NK ,KO LLIS XohnOidley "arack Ka#a #ysel8 and Don Le#on are all "lack #ales. e also have conRictin4 /olitical /ositions and

interests ut ho= can =e decide =hich /aths are valid i8 =e only /ay attention to /ersonal identity\ Instead o8learnin4 to reco4niAe ho= the overarchin4 syste#s #aintain their /o=er and thenattackin4 those tools =e s/end our ener4y !$i!' a! .other to embo$y the

systemic mar'i!ali*atio! a!$ le'itimi*e or spaces a!$ i$eals. In so#e interracial

s/aces I 8eel like nothin4 #ore than an interchan4eale token =hose only /ur/ose is to le4iti#iAe the /olitics o8 #y

hite /eers. I8 not #e then so#e other "lack /erson =ould >ll the slot. e use these !others$ asauthorities on various issues and =e use conce/ts like !/rivile4e$ to ensure that/eo/le stay in their lanes. Peo/le o8 color are the authorities on race =hile LG"%&/eo/le are the authorities on 4ender and se?uality and so 8orth and so on. Let(

e%perie!ce is !ot the same as e%pertise( a!$ pri"ile'e $oes!:t

atomatically ma,e yo cleless. s ITve discussed these 4rou/s are not oriented around a

sin4ular set o8 /olitical ideals and /ractices. urther#ore as =e see in ndrea S#ithTs =ork there are o8tenco#/etin4 interests =ithin these 4rou/s. e #istake essentialis# 8orintersectionality as =e look 8or the ideal su3ects to e#ody the various 8or#s o8o//ressionF true intersectionality is a descri/tion o8 syste#ic /o=er not a call 8or diversity. I8 =e donTtdevelo/ any sbsta!ti"e a!alysis o& systemic po#er then itTs i#/ossile tokno= =hat our interests are and ali4nin4 =ith one another accordin4 to sharedinterests is out o8 the 2uestion. In this cli#ate all that re#ains is the ally =hich re2uires no real

kno=led4e or /olitical e:ort only the =illin4ness to a//ear su//ortive o8 an !other$. e canTt uild /o=er that =ay.8ter havin4 4athered to o//ose or4aniAed hite su/re#acy at the University o8 North Carolina a 4rou/ o8

or4aniAers in Durha# North Carolina 8ound that the ?e&t:s emphasis o! perso!al

i$e!tity a!$ allyship #as a ma6or reaso! #hy their eforts collapse$+ %hey

/ro/osed that =e ado/t the /ractice o8 &ormi!' allia!ces rather tha!

i$e!ti&yi!' allies. (h1t Nin3a"ikeSlut) ,uch o8 the discourse around ein4 an ally see#s to /resu#e a

relationshi/ o8 one5sided su//ort =ith one /erson or 4rou/ 8ollo=in4 anotherTs leadershi/. hile there are certainly

ti#es =here this #akes sense it is #isleadin4 to use the ter# ally to descrie this relationshi/. In an alliancethe t=o /arties su//ort each other =hile #aintainin4 their o=n sel85deter#ination and autono#y and

are ound to4ether not y the relationshi/ o8 leader and 8ollo=er ut y a shared 4oal.

In other =ords one cannot actually e the ally o8 a 4rou/ or individual =ith =ho# one has no /olitical aEnity * and

this #eans that one cannot e an ally to an entire de#o4ra/hic 4rou/ like /eo/le o8 color

=ho do not share a sin4ular cohesive /olitical or /ersonal desire. %he Divorce o8 %hou4ht ro#

Deed hile itTs vital 8or #e to learn the /olitics and history o8 #ar4inaliAed e?/eriences that di:er 8ro# #y o=nlisten to their voices and res/ect their s/aces and contriutions < itTs also i#/ortant 8or #e to understand the

=ays in =hich these sa#e syste#s have sha/ed #y o=n identity1history as =ell. Since =e kno= that

o//ression is syste#ic and #ultidi#ensional then I:m 'oi!' to ha"e to step

otsi$e o& perso!al e%perie!ce a!$ be'i! to $e"elop political i$eals a!$

practices that actally a!ta'o!i*e those systems+ I have to !$ersta!$ a!$

articlate my i!terests =hich =ill allo= #e to o/erate 8ro# a /osition o8 stren4th



and &orm political allia!ces that advance those interests* interests =hich s/eak

to issues eyond 3ust #y o=n i##ediate e?/erience . Ulti#ately I =ant to attack/o=er not /eo/le. In order to 4et there the Le8t needs #ore identity /olitics not less.

disability biometrics aff - cndi 2015-4

Documents