chapter 9

chapter 9 - .. , . . . . . 12 UEt’ElKEUUH 12:l:11...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–11. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 2
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 4
Background image of page 5

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 6
Background image of page 7

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 8
Background image of page 9

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 10
Background image of page 11
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: .. , . . . . . 12 UEt’ElKEUUH 12:l:11 Hdb4btlicl4z.’ HLIMtl'tN til-.H'U'ileb l-‘ti'tlnl: U2? 3;; 9 Whose body? With Paula Greenwell ‘ Theorizing the body Since the early 19805, issues to do with the body and appearance haveif; increasingly been addressed by social scientists and we have moved into an} era which ‘can be characterised by its unique obsession with the visual displayl'y of identity’ (Frost 2001: 37), A journey through any shopping centre will pro» , vide ample evidence of at least the economic importance of the body (com-g! modification). — clothes to hang on it, jewellery, body piercers and tatooists to“? adorn it, soap and scent to perfume it, barbers to style it, beauticians to beau- If tify it and make-up to paint it. It is evident too in the growth of keep-fit clubs "H and the number of joggers on our streets. The first section explores the wide; ; diverse and controversial topic for this chapter, ‘the body‘, The Second section examines the significance of these issues in relation to disabled bodies, loolt- " ing in particular at socially created impairment, sexual relations and medical 1 technology and interirention. Finally Paula Greenwell has provided a case study as a wheelchair user with multiple sclerosis (MS), ‘ As Hancock ct a1. (2000: 1) state, “By the close of the twentieth century the body had become a key site of political. social, cultural and economic inter- vention in relation, for example, to medicine, disability, work, consumption, old age and ethics" We look first at some key ideas that have emerged from contemporary debates about the body, concentrating particularly on theoreti‘ cal perspectives. There are generally recognized to be two polarizedperspec- tives on the body in the social sciences, though there are different positions within each. These are the naturalistic (including the biological and sociobio- logical) and the social (including the social constmctioni-st) (Netdeton 1995). The contrast of the perspectives provides a basis for pin-pointing contem- porary issues relating to the body. The starting point for the naturalistic perspective addresses the body as a biological entity, irrespective of social and historical context, that UEe’ElHEUUH 12: till Ellib4btlllj42 HLIMtfltN til-.H'v'llilz‘j I-‘fltlsil: Eli-’12 Whose body? 99 lfiéteymines what we are as individuals and our behaviour as social beings. 2A person's genetic makeup, hormonal activity and whole physical being dart-be drawn on in explaining desires and actions as a man or a woman, .wimm social psychology two types of explanations can be recognized. ‘(jausal explanations involve understanding the immediate predecessors of behaviours, thoughts or feelings. For instance, research suggests that the Experience of emotion is determined by the interrelation of physiological factorsilsuch as the release of hormones and heart rate). the socialcontext and a person’s understanding of the context (Toates 1996). Functional, or .rociobiologicai, explanations start‘from the idea that our bodies are products of evolution. Natural selection is-- thought to favour those processes or mechanisms that best enhance the chances of the organism surviving to reproduce and passing on its genes. Human behaviour is seen as the culmi- nation of a long evolutionary history. LeVay (1993) provides a succinct sum- mary. of naturalistic perspectives: People will ask of some trait w homosexuality, for example — "Is it psycho- logical or is it biological?’ By that they generally mean ‘15 it some nebu- lous state of mind resulting from upbringing and social interactions, or is it a matter of genes and brain chemistry?’ But this is‘a false distinction. since even the most nebulous and socially determined states of mind are a matter of genes and brain chemistry too. (Levay 1993: xii) Critiques of naturalistic perspectives can focus on What is sometimes called essentialjsm_ Essentialism is any way of thinking about human beings and social issues. which suggests that behaviour can be attributed to ’essences’lor fixed qualities. It. can be argued that essentialist discountes legitimize inequal- ity (Thompson 1998). Differences between people are seen as natural and therefore grounds for inequality. Supposedly natural sexual difference (the division into ‘male’ and ’female') is used to explain social differenCes. inequal- ities between men and women are justified on the basis that 'men are Stronger and more logical’, ‘women are better at caring’ and so on. Saraga {1998) 'argnes that essentialism implies both the permanence of a condition or identity and the homogeneity of people defined by this characteristic. She analyses a number of examples including sexual preference. ethnic minorititts and disability. of the last of these she writes. ‘Disability is commonly seen as an essential, and hence permanent, characteristic of people, derived from physicallbiologicalipsychological{cognitive traits” (Saraga 1993: 196),. There is now a growing body of literature that presents an alternative, social perspective. Though there are a number of different positions within this perspective, the central notion is that t'hebody is socially constructed or ere-7 ated and how we think about our bodies depends on the social, cultural and historical context. Hancock et a1. (2000) argue that the assumption that biol- ogy provides the dominant understanding of the body has collapsed and the meaning of the body has become a significant focus for linguistic, cultural and. social analysis, Two important theoretical developments are the notions of UEi’ElHEUUH 12:l:11 Ellib4btlllj42 HLIMi'fliN til-.H'Itl'llilz‘j I-‘fltlal: mile 100 Values and ideologies 'body projects’ and the “somatic society’. Shilling (1993) sees the body as1 project. He argues that the body might best be conceptualized as an unfi ished biological and social phenomenon, which is transformed, within lim ‘ as a result of its participation in society. Styles of walking, talking and gestc are perpetually in a state of ‘unfinished business'. Furthermore, people try- alter or improve their appearance, size and shape in line with their particifl‘ desires. Body projects are, however, social at the same time as they arepe‘ sonal. Our perceptions and interpretations of the body are mediated throu- language and surrounding culture. Shilling (1993i-argues that we live ever-changing world, ever more rapidly changing. Identity can no longertyé' derived from our traditional place within society. from class, family. gen er“? or locality. The body, then, offers a site for personal control in a seemingly certain social context. He writes: ‘ Investing in the body provides people with a means of self expression an a way of potentially feeling good and increasing the control they have over their bodies. If one feels unable to exert control over the increasingly 2. complex society. at least one can have some effect on the size, shape and ‘ appearance of one's body. (Shilling. 1993: 7i From this perspective the body is not simply a personal projECt. In his often quoted and influential books. Turner {1996: 1) has proposed the notion of ‘somatic society’ to denote a society within which 'major political and per sonal problems are both problematized in the body and expressed through it He has explored the social tasks in relation to the ‘governance of the body .' reproduction, restraint, regulation and representation. In terms of reproduc tion, for instance, every society has to reproduce its members and develop ments in technology, such as in vitro fertilization and “the pill”, have a considerably increased the control over reproduction (see Chapter 4). it He argues, then, that bodies are controlled, particularly by the institution of law. religion and medicine. Turner builds on the concept of surveillance : which has been significant within the literature. Foucault is particularly con-y: cerned with power relations and the body, and how control is maintained. though inducing people to watch over their own behaviour. He says, “Just ,a j gaze. An inspecting gaze, a gaze which each individual under its weight will- end by interiorizing to the point that he [tie] is his own overseer, each indi: vidual thus exercising this surveillance over, and against, himself” (Foucault g 1980: 155). ' -- i: Why has the body become such a significant subject for theory and analy sis in the social sciences? There are a number of possible reasons. First, there .- has been a politicization of the body. An example of this isthc way in which L: women have attempted to reclaim control over their own bodies from a male- . dominated medical profession (Jacobus et al. 1990). Second, there are dcmo‘r 41}; graphic factors. The proportion of old people in the population is increasing and the procesSEs associated with ageing now form a substantial field of study. 2:, ; UEr’Elr’ElfilfiH 12:l:11 Ellib4hhlllj42 HLIMtfltN til-.H'u'lile‘j Whose body? 101 In has been estimated that in Europe 70 per cent of disabled people are now Over 60 years old. Third, there are many examples of deliberate cultural shaping of the human body in different societies and historical eras, such as the foot binding of women in traditional Chinese society, the cradle boards used to shape infants' heads among Kwakiutl Indians and the stays and meets worn by nineteenth-century middle-class European and American women (Freund and McGuire 1995). More recently, however, the develop— ment of new technologies has opened up new possibilities for not only con- trol of but also the shaping of the body. Shilling (1993) has pointed out that the more WC know about our bodies and the more we are ablelto control, intervene and alter them. then the more uncertain we become as to what the body actually is. Turner (2001) writes: ' The transformation of medical technology has made possible the con- struction of the human body as a personal project through cosmetic surgery, organ transplants, and transsexual surgery. In addition, there is a whole panoply of dieting regimes, health farms, sports science, and nutritional science that are formed on, the development of the aesthetic, thin body. {Turner 2001: 259) Finally, there has been. the rise of the consumer culture (Peatherstone 1991}. Identity has become a commodity, With the physical body providing the locus for consumption. You can buy the look, or purchase the lifestyle, though looks and lifestyles are, of course, not equally available to all. A consumer cult ‘ ture is essentially unequal. Images in advertising and the media sell ’the body’. Cultural representations of the body oiier ‘normative criteria' against which bodies are judged day-today. What is an attracrive or even desirable body? We are all bombarded with almost unattainable media images of physical ‘perfection’, such as James Bond{s) and Bond’s women. Gillespie (1998) associates this ideal of “beauty' with the globalization of western media images: ’Mirror, mirror on the Wall, who’s the fairest of them all?" America's mirror screams back Elondie, Rapunzel, Cinderella, Marilyn Monroe, Christie Brinkley. Dianne Sawyer, Michelle Pfeiffer. Oh, yes, sometimes the look changes and those who are style arbiters decree ernfittes, exotics or ethnics the latest ‘in’ look. .(Gillespie'1998: 185) It is in this social context that young women may be said to suffer from alien- ation from their bodies and experience self-hatred, which can become mani- fest in self-harm and eating disorders (Frost 2001). Kaw (1998: 168), in her study of Asian women undergoing cosmetic surgery. states that, 'Racial minorities may internalise a body image produced by the dominant culture's racial ideology and, because oi it, begin to loathe, muulate and revise parts of their body.’ I - I-‘tfltisil: kill-’12 UEr’ElHElfilfiH 12:l:11 Ellib4luhllld42 HLIMtfltN HtHVlUt‘d l-‘fltisil: UbrrlE 102 Values and ideologies Questions for discussion 1 What aspects of your lifestyle and identity as either a man or woman, jij would you explain in terms of the biology of your body? ‘ r 2 Thinking of your own physical appearance, were (are) you ever embarrassed about your body? It so, in what context and why? What. 37 '1: would you change about your physical appearance and why? CL”; 3 Describe the physical characteristics of a *good looking’ man or I a woman in present-daywestern society. Describe a different set of -"‘u physical characteristics of a ’good looking” man or woman either i;- from a different historical period or from a different culture. How 211‘: would youexplaln the differences between the two sets of character- istics? Disabled body projects To address issues generated by the question fwnose body?’ immediately engages in controversy in the field of disability studies. This is essentially because questions about the body raise issues of impairment and can give credence to the medical model and notions of deficit and abnormality. Yet notions of “body project“ and ‘body politics' are seen by some as challenging disability theory. There have been calls for the examination of impairment, lilre disability, as socially created and constructed and the possibilities are being sought for a social model of impairment (Paterson and Hughes 2000). Most impairments are socially created and incidence is strongly related to demographic factors and structural inequalities. As French (1997) points out-,. in affluent countries, diseases now in evidence are chronic and associated with old age. These include heart disease, diabetes, respiratory disease, cancer; .stroke, circulatory diseases. neurological diseases and arthritis. Visual and hearing impairments are also more common in old age. Furthermore, health and the incidence of impairment are unevenly spread across different sectors of society. Malnutrition, poverty and disease are very closely related. Impair- ments are also created by sooial phenomena such as war, traffic accidents, accidents at work and in the home, pollution and medical interventions. Meekosha (1998: 179) adds the effects of bodily interventions and conditions that particularly affect women: “Early and unnecessary hysterectomies, the effects of drugs more readily administered to women the connections between socially induced illnesses such as anorexia and later disabilities, and the disabling effects of cosmetic or medical interventions.” The notion of the disabled body as a project has a long history, with the eugenics movement providing the philosophy and supposed ‘scientific' justification for extreme measures of “governance of the body', as illustrated by the following quotation: ‘ ldEi’ElrrEldldH 12:l:11 Ellib4btllld42 HLIMr'fltN til-.H'U'lUlz‘d l-‘tfltisil: UNVlE Whose body? 103 The sociological conclusion is: Prevent the feeble-minded, drunkards, paupers. sexhoffenders, and criminallstic from marrying their like or cousins or any person belonging to a neuropathfc strain. Practically it might be well to segregate such persons during the reproductive period of one generation. Then the crop of defectives will be reduced to practi- cally nothing. I ' (Castle et al. 1912: 286—7) gugenic practices involve measures to Prevent the procreation of “degener- may, including segregation and sterilization, and the termination of the lives of ’degenerates’, including euthanasia. As Wolbrtng (2001) points out, today the main target for eugenic practices is the disabled body. The ideas of the eugenics movement persist today, for instance, in‘the perceived undesirabil- ity nr inappropriateness of disabled people expressing themselves sexually. The disabled body is the site of oppression, abuse and prejudice. Sexuality is socially conferred and constructed rather than biologically defined and dis- ablcd people face soCial, political and economic barriers in their functioning and identity as sexual beings (Shakespeare et al. 1996; Lawrence and Swain , 1997). Research conducted by Gillespie-Sells et a1. (1998) suggested that most disabled Women aspired to the establishment of sexual relationships, getting married and having children. They cOnclude: However, the study also showed that disabled women’s opportunities to fulfil these aspirations are often not the same as those of their non- disabled contemporaries. Being continually regulated to lesser services, education, jobs and social opportunities all make it extremely difficult for them to develop and explore social contacts and relationships. ‘ ‘ (Gillespie-Sells et al.. 1993: 119) Disabled women are more likely than non-disabled women to be the victims of all forms of violence, especially sexual assault. There is a Wide range of possible explanations. Dependence on care—givers, for instance, can render disabled women susceptible to abuse. unassertive in resistance and fearful of losing assistance (Cassidy et al. 1995}. In the research by Gillespie-Sells et al. (1995), 29.28 per cent of the respondents said they had experiencad sexual abuse by a member of their family, a further 24.3 1 per cent said they were vie. tims of sexual abuse by someone other than a family member, and 43 per eent said they had suffered other forms of abuse. One Asian young person, inter- viewed by Middleton (1999: 10), responded to bullying in her own coni- rnunity by self-mutilation. She said, ’I did Stupid things, like i rubbed my face with floor cleaner to malre myself whiter. I cut my hair, I cut chunks off the front. There was one time I Was so' unhappy I got a knife and Icut myself.’ Another major set of issues concernsthe subjugation of the disabled body to ’correctivc’ medical intervention, including cosmetic surgery, particularly - associated with professional intervention to ‘normalize’ the disabled body. For many disabled people such interventions can be, at best, irrelevant and at worst abusive and dehumanizing. Nasa Begum (1994b), a Black disabled UEi’Eli’EUUH 12:l:11 Ellib4btlllj42 HLIMtfltN HtHVlUt‘d I-‘fltlsil: UHIIE up :4. .‘t 104 Values and ideologies activist, for instance, writes of her experiences of regular sessions of physio)!“ therapy during childhood. She said, ‘I couldn’t see the point of all these; agonising exercises. I was never very good at accepting the fact'that thingy-E I didn't like could be “good for me" and the physiotherapist managed to a really good job of making me a conscientious objector for the rest 0f liie' (Begum 1994b: as). y . - Four disabled people, interviewed by Johnson (1993), who had receive physiotherapy had similar experiences to those of Begum and largely dig missed physiotherapy as having no importance in their lives. Alsn like Begum. a young person interviewed by Middleton {1999) rebelled: i hated physiotherapy, moving limbs about. I couldn’t see an end to it. was put in splints to straighten my legs, lihe callipers. I stood up all day it was like a table on my back. I had to eat my dinner like that . . . I had no choice whatsoever. I was stood up all day from the age of ten to ‘ eleven. It was painful and demoralislng, and when I was twelve I rebelled ft- and refused to have the callipers on. {quoted in Middleton 1999: 13) 1; Meeltosha (1998) writes of disabled women’s experiences of cochlea? implants, lengthening limbs, straightening body parts and facial surgery (for. example on people with Down‘s syndrome). She states: ‘These processes may! be performed under the guise of indispensable medical treatment, but are in fact often designed to normalise the less than perfect body —to make it more- attractive and pleasing. to fit dominant conceptions of attractiveness and desirability” (Meehosha 1993: 177). Some ye»qu people Middleton (1999) interViewed had experienced ’corl—f rective' surgery that was sometimes seen as a waste of time and sometimes conducted when the young people had other concerns and priorities. One" stated: 'The arm was better when it was done but as time’s gone on it’s just gone back to how it was, because of the tissues there . . . Looking back ii i" knew then what I know now I would not have had the operation done. It' messed up so many things at the time’ {quoted in Middleton 1999: 21). Questions for discussion 1 The statisties consistently suggest that disabled people are more likely to experience sexual abuse than non-disabled people. What explanations would you offer for the sexual abuse of disabled people? ‘ . ' ‘ 2 List examples of positive images of disabled bodies in the media. What are the lrey characteristics of these positive images. and how do they differ from positive images of non-disabled people? ‘ 3 In what ways might experiences of medical intervention, particularly in childhood, effect disabled people’s body-image? UEKEIKEUUH 12:Ul Hdb4hflld42 HUMQN HhHUiUhH Whose body? 105 was it fuck the MS’ ' question ‘Whose Body?’ For me there are so many aspects in this because when I was a young womanr I've always been veryr sociable but a bit of a loner. When I went through the usual puberty bit I emerged a swan from a duckling. I really got sick of men trying to chase me and women being jeaIOus of me. The container 1 inhabited was a siren to the opposite sex, and I was saying I’m friendlyr I’m warm and I'm funny and can we have a bit of that before sex please? Women didn't like me. because I was competition, and I didn’t want any of that. I got sick of the fact that it was all or nothing. I felt at sea. When I was 22 I got M5 and people said poor Paula she so loves to dance and I’m thinking well yes sure but there are lots of people that are perfectly fit and they’ve still got left feet. Been there. done that, got the tee-shire I’d done it. At the ripe old age of 48 I'd look a bit funny Spiri- ning on 4-inch heels. I felt sort of that I was inhabiting a body that didn’t represent who I was. When I got MS obviously I was traumatised. My immediate Instinct Was oh no Jacqueline Du Pre and I can’t even play the cello. For me MS simply meant increasing disability until death. So I thought, ’nice future’. A few years before I got MS people would say you should be a model and I was thinking what a fucking boring thing to do. For me that’s what life is about, it’s about new experiences. My body? Think about something more serious than that. The roost important thing for me was discovery. creativity, learning new thingsr going to new places . . . for me it was ‘see who I am' and that doesn’t make any difference from a. gorgeous teenager to a disabled_ middle-aged woman. It doesn’t make any difference; I am who I am. And I will not be diminished because I should have been a beautiful but airv . head person when I was a young woman. And now I am a disabled womanpeople think I have lost everything . . . and I have experienced so many things — sure it is a bugger being in pain, but it is part of who I am — I accept it. I am not angry about it. I have to get people to understand where I am coming from. Climbing stairsis not a challenge, changing the world is a challenge. People say ‘oh you're a wheelchainuser this must mean you can’t have sex’, and I say ‘why?’ and they say 'you can’t walk' and I say ’oh you walk while you are having sex?’ I’ve got this wonderful irony which is a blessing. I don’t understand why people accept status me case study for this chapter takes the forth of the story of one disabled Wywpman. Paula 1s a diSabled activist who is well known for her work with dis- able-d people's organirations, particularly as chairperson of Disability Action “North East (DANE). She agreed to be interviewed by John Swain. who is also a member of DANE. Paula had editorial control over the whole chapter. Her I‘ story is prerented here in her own words, without analysis or interpretation, except through editing to the required word length. It is a story told in 1 response to the topic for this Chapter and. in general terms. addresses the Ffifih lfi‘jflz‘ UEHEIHEUUH 12:Ul Hflh4h31342 HUMflN HhHUthH 10¢ Values and ideologies I quo. People say to me wooldn’t you want to be normal and I say 1.2;? wouldn’t want to lower my standards. who wants to be normal! Youfi‘l want to be Iilre clones or something. Ijust had to do it a different way. It; is part of who I am. I know people with chronic illness they go to the gym three times a]:- week. That would bore me shitless. The muscle in my head is'the one [if like to use. I got MS when I was 22. I was living with a guy at the time. I '5 left him and I went abroad. Completely alone. I thought I had better cram; this part of my life. I wouldn’t swap my life for anybody’s, not at all, My L; sex life improved when I said I was a disabled person. I came out as a dis . abled person. The biggest thing was coming off all the drugs. Coming offjg; I all the drugs I was multi-orgasmic whereas I had been struggling for-"j years. I was thinking it must be the MS. Was it fuck the MS. It was the 3, ' drugs. The anti-spasmodic drugs that I took. limo of the best lowers I had were wheelchair-users. They were more. :. imaginative. They were more sensitive and they were not performing. ‘5 for me it is a very odd thing. I've been engaged six times. I've put up have said to me. ‘you need me”, and the answer is, ’I need you like I need ‘ bonus to be married in two countries. I lovesex but I don’t need it. I think that is personal to me. People think that I am desperate. It really pisses me off. I think it’s something people make too much fuss about. I am a communicator. first and foremost. A teacher, a lecturer, an actress, ' a writer. I am a communicator and that’s what I need — and sex as well. I was sexually harassed rather than abused by my father. There are men that a hole in the head“. This is the impression that they have of me as a disabled woman, that I need someone to support me physically and emotionally. What I want in a relationship is mutual respect and a lot of laughs. The problem I havc with doctors is that I upset them because it is the lack of need. I’ve seen a neurologist twice in two years and each time I’ve gone to him and I’ve said. ’anything new?” He gets really piSSEd off. I show him all the natural healthcare I take because I haven’t taken drugs since 1986. that’s why I’m in so much debt. What happened'was when I got MS, you go to the doctor and you get a drug which deals with the symptom. I was taking these handfuls of drugs. A clinical ecologist said that people with MS are being slowly poisoned. I came off all the drugs and I felt tons better and I found that symptoms I had put down to M5 were actually sideueffects of the drugs I was taking. and I’ve been seeing natural health practitioners since 193:5. It costs me a lot of money but at least I am coherent. This consultant I upset him because I take away his power and he doesn't like it. My own dector he believes in natural health care so he is with me. When I was taking-the drugs I molt them out of desperation with no discernible difference. They didn’t help. So I have sorted all of it out. Years ago I used to lie awake all night with spasm, and cannabis stops that. Welive in a world of superficiality, or comparison and we don’t ‘ think beyond solids. We are so easily satisfied as a race. ‘ I think that in some ways I have been out of communication with my Pflfih lUHlE UEa’Ela’L’lfilfiH 12: Ell Hdb4btilti42 HLIMtl'uN til-.H'U'iiilzti Hills“: 11.512 Whose body? 107 .‘ body for some time, because it won’t do as I fueltihg say, that’s why. I f think that the life that I have had has been extremely interesting. I am i; . glad for who I am, and somebody else’s body, it wouldn’t be me. When I first got MS. people used to say to me. ‘i don’t consider you to If he a disabled person’, and neither did I,- and this goes to show what 3%; society knows of disabled people. They are largely ignorant. For me s ‘ '3 learning about the social mode] put everything in place. mats only bricks y and mortar you can change that. So meeting other disabled people meant that I could use my voice to help the struggle. When people are demean~ mg to me or other disabled people personally most of the time-I feel the}r a are inadequate. I’m not. . 1;; Questions for discussion . . i; I How do Paula's experiences other body differ from, and how are they i- similar to. your own? ‘ ‘ ' 2 Why do you think Faula has such a strong belief in alternative or I complementary medicine? $ 3 In what Ways might Paula have control over her ‘disabled body pm. ject'? In what respects might Paula not have control Over her own i; body, her embodied identity. and her experiences as a physical being? Debate actt'w'ty Debate the proposition; The social model of disability, the disabled people’s movement and disability sLudies have nor considered the “dis- abled body” and have, therefore. not addressed significant experiences of disabled people. The following quotations may provide you with a starting point: This can lead to the kind of absurd claims . . . that the disability movement has ‘written the body out’ . . . of all consideration. Quite how '[he] comes to this conclusion when one of the central planlts of the disability movement since Berkeley 1961 has been indepen- "l dent living is a mystery. Independent living is of course about noth- ing more or leSs than rescuing the body from the hands of medics, 1“ other professionals and welfare administrators. l (Oliver 2001: 153) the Weakness of disability studies' Structuralist account is its failure to interrogate embodiment . . . The social model tells us little about it] the ways in which impairment is produced in the everyday world, , how oppression and discrimination become embodied and become , part of everyday reality. ' ‘ rig (Paterson and Hughes 1999: 608) r i UEa’Elf'AUUH 12: U1 Hdb4btil'd42 HLIMn'l'uN titH'U'iLilz‘d H'i'u'lsil: 12.512 103 Value: and ideologies Further reading Hancuck. E, Hughes, 13., Jagger, E. m, at. (2000) Me Body, Culture and Sadetycfln mm: dum‘cm. Buckingham: Open University Press. ‘ 7 Saraga, E. (ed) (.1998) Embadying the Soda]; Construcrims 0f Dz'fi‘ereme. London: Rout; lcdgc. Shakespearc, T., Giliespie-Sells, K. and Davies, D. (1996) The Sexual Politic: ofmmbz'lz‘fiIE Unmld Desires. London: Cassall. r" Mme-r, 13.5. {1.996) The Body and 5mm; 2nd :cln. Londuu: Sager. ...
View Full Document

Page1 / 11

chapter 9 - .. , . . . . . 12 UEt’ElKEUUH 12:l:11...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 11. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online