"Dehumanization, which marks not only those whose humanity has been stolen, but also (though in a different way) those who have stolen it, is a distortion of the vocation of becoming more fully human"
-Freire (PO ch. 1, par. 3)
In the process of reinforcing dominant stereotypes and stigmas about people with disabilities, the culminating attitudinal barriers become mechanisms of dehumanization. The oppressors, whether bureaucracies like universities, political figures or parties, capitalist institutions, the individual ableist or the collective discriminatory group, perpetuate false ontological notions such as these:
They're being paid less because they are less productive workers.
People with intellectual or developmental disabilities cannot live in a community and belong in institutions.
They live a life of sorrow and disappointment because of their disability.
People with disabilities cannot lead a productive and a fulfilling life.
People with disabilities are of less value to society because they are less physically and/or mentally capable.
These notions of inferiority and dissatisfaction are sometimes plainly spoken to the oppressed and they are sometimes ideas which underpin the prescribed behavior of the oppressor in more subtle expression. In order to better understand the invisible forces of dehumanization, let's begin with critically examining Freire's concept of "false generosity" or "false charity":
The oppressors, who oppress, exploit, and rape by virtue of their power, cannot find in this power the strength to liberate either the oppressed or themselves. Only power that springs from the weakness of the oppressed will be sufficiently strong to free both. Any attempt to “soften” the power of the oppressor in deference to the weakness of the oppressed almost always manifests itself in the form of false generosity; indeed, the attempt never goes beyond this. (Freire PO ch. 1, par. 5)
False generosity may be understood as acts committed or sentiments expressed by the oppressor which attempt only to temporarily alleviate situations, conditions, or feelings symptomatic of oppression. Freire also suggests that false generosity might expose a dimension of guilt felt by the oppressor. But, no matter the size of the donation to the non-profit organization or the words of superficial support spoken by figures of power or celebrity on social media in times of crisis or tragedy, they have no transforming effect on society without what Freire calls "true generosity."
Take the last notion, for example, that People with disabilities are brave and inspirational. Upon first examining it, it is harmless, if not even a positive affirmation toward those with disabilities. It does not feel like a problematic stigma or attitudinal barrier. Let's include some observations from Stella Young, an activist and journalist, who will supplement our understanding of "false generosity" in her discussion of the term "inspiration porn."
In essence, inspiration porn is defined as the representation or portrayal of people with disabilities, often performing ordinary or day-to-day tasks, as inspirational. However, through a Freirean framework, we may understand manifestations of inspiration porn as the reifying of the deficit model as a structure of oppression: because we view people with disabilities as broken or faulty, it suddenly appears amazing that they complete "able-bodied" tasks or accomplishments designated as inferior or less credible because they are disabled.
Just as much as blatantly believing and perpetuating the stigma that people with disabilities are of less value than non-disabled people, the consumption and production of inspiration porn about people with disabilities is an act of dehumanization precisely because it objectifies and alienates us. We are, as previously described in the ontological binary between "able-bodied" and disabled, made to be the Other in this myth of exceptionality. Whether you are non-disabled finding a person with a disability inspirational or a person with a disability finding another person with a disability inspirational, this false generosity, with conscious intent or not, is merely functioning to maintain structures of oppression. Find some examples of inspiration porn to the left.
There is a difference between being falsely inspired by people with disabilities and actually learning from them in a dialogic interplay of critical consciousness, which takes us to the next step in our revolutionary praxis.
To read more about how inspiration porn works in the last two news stories, see disability activist Sarah Levin's article, "Inspiration Porn: Once You See It, You Can't Unsee It." She says, "Inspiration porn isn’t about the disabled people in the stories. It’s about:
How wonderful the football player is for asking the poor disabled girl to prom
How gracious it was for the basketball team to make a disabled boy’s dream come true by letting him take a shot at the basketball game
How inspirational it is that a woman in a wheelchair manages to get herself up, dressed, and on the train each morning to go to a job (even though she’s only doing what millions of people do every day). After all, she could just be sitting at home watching television all day like most disabled people do because they’re, well, disabled. And if she can get up each morning and get on with things, shouldn’t you be able to face the challenges in front of you with grace? At least you don’t have a disability, you quitter! Remember, the only disability in life is a bad attitude! (There are about 4 inspiration porn tropes in this paragraph.)"
See Jay Timothy Dolmage's "INTERCHAPTER: An Archive and Anatomy of Disability Myths" for further exploration of myths beyond inspiration porn.