From this week’s readings I can already tell that my views about who society pegs as “disabled” are changing. It’s obvious that there are inequalities in society, there always have been and sadly I think there always will be. But reading Baynton made me realize that difference is a disability in the eyes of society: “…not only has it been considered justifiable to treat disabled people unequally, but the concept of disability has been used to justify discrimination against other groups by attributing disability to them,”(33). I never considered myself disabled by being a woman, but the more I think about it, struggles of inequality for women have always been based on difference, just like struggles based on race or physical disability. However I find it heartening that those that are different can find commonality in their differences, and this sense of unity has led to areas of reform and progress.
I find it shocking that in the past few centuries, the basis for being normal or not disabled has been “the male norm,”(33). Although the obvious differences between males and females are physical, those in power have pulled the wool over the public’s eyes by attributing constructed differences as disabilities. The same process was repeated to invoke racial inequality and immigration restrictions as well.
My question is: Why does being “normal” lead to thoughts of progress? Why couldn’t people in the past view a future of progress based on the unique perspectives and talents of different groups of people? I guess that human nature is partly to blame, that gaining power at all costs is more important than including everyone in the grand scheme of things. I have never knowingly experienced discrimination based on being a woman, but if and when I do I don’t know how I’ll feel. I’ll probably remember this article and be proud of my “disabilities” because I’ll understand that “disabled” in a certain individual’s eyes can simply mean that I am threatening their innate sense of domination.
Interesting post. I like how you adapted this reading to describe yourself and how it affected you rather than giving a generic response by simply summarizing the text. It is also nice to see someone interpret the issues discussed in this reading constructively. Instead of viewing what Baynton covers as insulting, you found it empowering to think that someone classifying you as "disabled" actually meant that they were intimidated by how you could potentially threaten their sense of dominance. Your sense of confidence is refreshing, though I would take caution. Few people, primarily males, will share your beliefs and may actually take offense to them. When it comes to dominance, the only thing more threatening to a man than a woman is an educated woman. That being said, your words are encouraging, even to the opposite sex, and you should continue to express your ideas freely. Excellent post.
ReplyDeleteI actually read your post right after I'd written mine and I was so jealous of the way you'd interpreted the reading. I agree with Ryan that you should be commended for applying this idea of gender disability to your life. However, I disagree with him slightly (maybe because I am a girl) and I think you shouldn't have to take caution in sharing your confidence. If men don't agree with you, that's totally fine - it's your opinion and they don't need to respond to it if it bothers them. That's just my opinion, though! Anyway, your questions are also really thoughtful and I would be curious to see how someone with a better background of this subject would respond to them. All in all, a thoughtful post!
ReplyDeleteI apologize for being late to the party. Though I think this may have been a good thing because the exchange by Ryan and Mary is thought provoking (thanks for commenting both of you!). I think in the post, and the comments, the question of who gets to label whom and how one is to respond to the label is the central issue. In some respect, Ryan's caution is well-intentioned, and commendable, because it acknowledges the burden of resistance--which battles are worth fighting. And at the same time, Mary H'.s point is also well-taken, those who experience marginalization may not always have the luxury of picking their battles. And then, at the end of the day, as Mary B. points out, the problem is not our differences but our inability to recognize that our differences are all that we have in common--and thus, the sign of our humanity. Again, thanks for initiating this wonderful dialogue.
ReplyDelete