Feminist Disability: Theory and ...Practice?

INTRODUCTION

The truth is- people with disabilities especially women with disabilities are more vulnerable to being victims of inequality and injustice. They are seen as "not normal" and hence these negative outcomes of their disability led activists to fight for the rights of the differently abled. The feminist took into consideration the disability of them and hence called it the 'Feminist Disability Movement' which gave rise to the formulation of the theory and the hope that it would be practiced in real life. What is the theory about? What is disability? What is the ability and the disability system? What are the aspects of disability? What are the major domains of Feminist Disability Theory? All questions stand answered theoretically in the Feminist Disability Theory and the following is the explanation of the same.

It addresses broad feminist concerns as the unity of the category woman, the status of the lived body, the politics of appearance, the medicalization of the body, the privilege of normalcy, multiculturalism, sexuality, the social construction of identity and the commitment to integration.

The system of disability/ ability produces subjects by differentiating and marking bodies, making the comparison ideological rather than biological. It nevertheless penetrates into the formation of culture, making it legitimate to have an unequal distribution of resources, status and power within a biased social and biological environment.

The disability system excludes the kinds of bodily forms, functions, impairments, changes, or ambiguities that call into question our cultural fantasy of the body as a neutral, compliant instrument of some transcendent will. Moreover, disability is a broad term within which cluster ideological categories as varied as sick, deformed, crazy, ugly, old, maimed, afflicted, mad, abnormal, or debilitated-all of which disadvantage people by devaluing bodies that do not conform to cultural standards.

A feminist disability theory denaturalizes disability by unseating the dominant assumption that disability is something that is wrong with someone. It mobilizes feminism's highly developed and complex critique of gender, class, race, ethnicity, and sexuality as exclusionary and oppressive systems rather than as the natural and appropriate order of things. To do this, feminist disability theory engages several of the fundamental premises of critical theory: 1) that representation structures reality, 2) that the margins define the center, 3) that gender (or disability) is a way of signifying relationships of power, 4) that human identity is multiple and unstable, 5) that all analysis and evaluation have political implications. In order to elaborate on these premises,

A recent study on stereotyping showed that housewives, disabled people, blind people, so-called retarded people, and the elderly were all judged as being similarly incompetent. Recognizing how the concept of disability has been used to cast the form and functioning of female bodies as non-normative can extend feminist critiques. The gender, race, and ability systems intertwine further in representing conquered people as being pure body, unredeemed by mind or spirit. This sense of embodiment is conceived of as either a lack or an excess. Women, for example, are considered castrated, or to use Marge Piercy's wonderful term, "penis-poor". They are thought to be hysterical or have overactive hormones. People with disabilities are described as having aplasia, meaning absence or failure of formation, or hypoplasia, meaning underdevelopment. (Spelman)All these terms police variation and reference a hidden norm from which the bodies of people with disabilities and women are imagined to depart.

The third domain of feminist theory that a disability analysis complicates is identity. Feminist theory has productively and rigorously critiqued the identity category of woman. Feminism increasingly recognizes that no woman is ever only a woman, that she occupies multiple subject positions and is claimed by several cultural identity categories. This complication of woman compelled feminist theory to turn from an exclusively male/female focus to look more fully at the exclusionary, essentialist, oppressive, and binary aspects of the category woman itself.

Cultural stereotypes imagine disabled women as asexual, unfit to reproduce, overly dependent, unattractive-as generally removed from the sphere of true womanhood and feminine beauty. Women with disabilities often must struggle to have their sexuality and rights to bear children recognized. Aging is a form of disablement that disqualifies older women from the limited power allotted females who are young and meet the criteria for attracting men. Depression, anorexia, and agoraphobia are female-dominant, psychophysical disabilities that exaggerate normative gender roles.

The final domain of feminist theory that a disability analysis expands is activism. There are many arenas of what can be seen as feminist disability activism: marches; protests, etc. Ther are also two unlikely, even quirky, cultural practices that function in activist ways but are seldom considered as potentially transformative. One practice is disabled fashion modeling, and the other is academic tolerance. Both are different genres of activism. Both are less theatrical, but perhaps fresher and more interestingly controversial ways to change the social landscape and to promote equality, which is the goal of activism.

Images of disabled fashion models in the media can shake up established categories and expectations. Because commercial visual media are the most widespread and commanding sources of images in modern, image-saturated culture, they have great potential for shaping public consciousness-as feminist cultural critics are well aware. A study conducted in the US demonstrated culturally appropriate form independent group living to have a beneficial impact on the women's levels of sociability and their confidence to venture out in public or to social functions (Heis). Living among other women with disabilities and in a non-judgmental environment helped in raising self-esteem and in developing social skills. All of the women who resided in the group house felt accepted, sociable, and confident to venture. Together, confidence in their abilities was strengthened and they could carry out their business with mutual support. Thus, independent group living helps in Social Development (Increased sociability, public confidence and ability to support) and Personal Development (improved self-image, independence and professional motivation).

Despite the most optimistic outlook for change in employment opportunities for women with disabilities, the present reality is that the best hope public representations of disability have traditionally been contained within the conventions of sentimental charity images, unique freak show portraits, medical illustrations, or sensational and forbidden pictures. Indeed, people with disabilities have been excluded most fully from the dominant, public world of the marketplace.

The second group provided images of children using braces or wheelchairs to elicit pity and donations. These advertisements contributed to public fear of disabled bodies. Images that depicted people with disabilities as deserving of pity created a stigmatizing system that is only now being questioned and replaced.

The presence of disabilities in advertisements has been met with varying degrees of acceptance. For example, because women are often depicted as sexual objects and people with disabilities are traditionally understood to be asexual, viewers expectations are violated when women with disfigurements or disabilities are sexualized in the media.

Disability, like gender and race, is everywhere, once we know how to look for it. Integrating disability analyses into the work and education setting is a start to redefine the meaning of normalcy. Moreover, such critical intellectual work facilitates a fuller integration of the sociopolitical world-for the benefit of everyone. As with gender, race, sexuality, and class: to understand how disability operates is to understand what it is to be fully human. Realizing the need to promote the full participation of the disabled in the social life and development of their societies, on 16 December 1976, the General Assembly declared the year 1981 International Year of Disabled Persons (IYDP), stipulating that it be devoted to integrating disabled persons fully into society. Disability is not a curse or a disadvantage, it is a different type of personal ability and women have th eight to flaunt it without facing injustice and inequality.

WORKS CITED

Blood, S. K. Body work: The social construction of women's bodies. New York: Routledge. Accessed 2 July 2022.

Bordo, S. Unbearable weight: Feminism, western culture, and the body. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Accessed 2 July 2022.

“Gender and disability: a matter of dignity.” Gender Justice, 6 May 2019, https://www.justgender.org/gender-and-disability-a-matter-of-dignity/. Accessed 2 July 2022.

Heiss, Sarah N. “Locating the Bodies of Women and Disability in Definitions of Beauty: An Analysis of Dove's Campaign for Real Beauty.” Disability Studies Quarterly, https://dsq-sds.org/article/view/1367/1497. Accessed 2 July 2022.

Herndl, Diane Price, and Marie Huet. “Women and Disability: Feminist Disability Studies - The Center on Human Policy – Syracuse University.” The Center on Human Policy, https://thechp.syr.edu/women-and-disability-feminist-disability-studies/. Accessed 2 July 2022.

“Home Feminist Disability Studies.” Indiana University Press, https://iupress.org/9780253223401/feminist-disability-studies/. Accessed 2 July 2022.

YouTube, https://botswanajournal.com/lifestyle/representation-of-youth-women-and-people-with-disabilities-is-poor-in-govt-report/. Accessed 2 July 2022.