The emergence of an us and them discourse in disability theory

Journal of deaf studies and deaf education, 2008

This article draws on some of the existing literature on the politics of identity and representation as related to minority group formation. It applies this to constructions of Deaf 2 identity from a cultural and linguistic perspective and contrasts this with dominant constructions of Deaf people as disabled. It highlights a number of ways in which Deaf identity differs from disabled identity, demonstrating that the cultural and linguistic construction of Deaf people is a more useful tool for analysis. It raises questions aimed to examine the discourse on deafness and seeks further debate on how best the discourse can be progressed. The article raises issues related to the use of terminology and labeling in the field of deafness. It contends that the continued use of the word deafness is unworkable and should be more widely recognized as a social construct, which has current usage beyond the paradigm in which it was originally intended. The article concludes by recognizing the importance of diversity in identity formation, while simultaneously calling for an appreciation of the need to incorporate this diversity within wider theorizing, focused on commonality and cohesion in identity as a source of collective expression and political mobilization.

Australian Social Policy Conference …, 2003

The social model and social perspectives of disability are gaining increasing momentum within Australia. This identification of people as disabled by their environments rather than their impairment results in part in the identification of disabled people as a group marginalised and disenfranchised by the exclusions of societies and communities. Propelled by the social model, the disability movement has as one

Développement humain, handicap et changement social, 2022

Tous droits réservés © Réseau International sur le Processus de Production du Handicap, 2009 Ce document est protégé par la loi sur le droit d'auteur. L'utilisation des services d'Érudit (y compris la reproduction) est assujettie à sa politique d'utilisation que vous pouvez consulter en ligne. https://apropos.erudit.org/fr/usagers/politique-dutilisation/ Cet article est diffusé et préservé par Érudit. Érudit est un consortium interuniversitaire sans but lucratif composé de l'

Human Organization, 2015

In our research with d/Deaf people in five families in the North and South Islands of New Zealand, we found that some of the challenges that we as researchers faced in our encounters with participants and within our mixed hearing and d/Deaf research group paralleled broader issues for this community. We use the details of our field research processes to explore the conundrum of d/Deafness, which may or may not be a disability and use this exploration to reflect on approaches to d/Deafness as revealed in our research findings. We argue that d/Deafness creates a predicament, but not only for the d/Deaf. We propose that practical solutions to this predicament may be thought of as services that enable citizenship, participation, communication, and care, rather than disability services, and this rethinking would ease the cognitive and cultural dissonance experienced by perfectly able d/Deaf people who have to access disability services in their everyday life.

How do social preconceptions develop, particularly when they are concerned with ‘disability?’ Democratic, industrial societies that most often embody tenets of Western capitalism play a dominant role in shaping global ideologies; consequently, the ways in which these societies construct meaning about ‘disability’ communities directly inform broader international opinions. The research presented in this thesis explores the culturally constructed stigma ascribed to the concept of intellectual ‘disability,’ considering in particular how an imbalance between power and knowledge can sway social relationships. Ultimately, those who hold power in the social world have far more resources that can be employed to control the dissemination of knowledge, which can obscure the perception of ‘disability’ as an identity category. This thesis asks: Why has stigma towards ‘disability’ communities emerged in dominant social and political thought, and how are these preconceptions reproduced? This question is answered in three stages: firstly, through a sociohistorical investigation of how cognitive deviations from the established norm have been managed by societies in the past; secondly, through a theoretical exploration of the systems of organization aggravating social inequalities; and lastly, through the evaluation of a sociolinguistic framework that both overtly and covertly reproduces an assumption of absolute difference between ability and disability. Ultimately, the research will demonstrate how social, cultural, and political barriers are far more disabling to individuals with intellectual exceptions than their biological realities.

Disability & Society, 2014

Disclosure a Journal of Social Theory, 1997

The Year's Work in Critical and Cultural Theory, 2015

In this article, I review seven books published in disability studies in 2013 and 2014. Two of the books deal exclusively with the North American context. The remaining five books focus primarily on areas outside North America, including Europe, Asia and Latin America. Two of the books are edited anthologies of new and original work. Four books are single-authored monographs and one book is co-authored. A search of new work published in 2013 and 2014 revealed more than twenty books. As a way of narrowing the focus and organizing the essay, I begin with a critique of key issues raised in Lennard J. Davis’ The End of Normal: Identity in a Biocultural Era (UMichiganP [2013]) and go on to show how authors living and/or working in other parts of the world are engaging with, building on and diverging from what could be called a white, Western global North disability studies. In the end, I argue that decentring North American and UK disability studies reveals significant field-changing insights that will no doubt have profound and lasting effects on the study of disability and disabled people in the humanities and social sciences.