I chose to define this keyword because it resonates with me as a nurse. The narrative of healing and curing is deeply ingrained in medical practice, so it’s easy for me to understand the rationale behind viewing disability as something to be “cured.” Something I’ve studied is how people define health, and if health is seen as the absence of illness or disability, then disability naturally becomes framed as something abnormal. The medical model reinforces this by locating the “problem” in the person rather than questioning how societal structures may exclude or disadvantage them. As a healthcare provider, it challenges me to reflect more critically on my own assumptions and consider how I can support more inclusive, approaches that recognize the lived experiences of people with disabilities.

Answering this question is intriguing to me as non-integrated sports exist at almost every level. Sports, particularly competitive sports have been non-integrated based on skill level, experience, age, gender, and qualifications for as long as organized sports have been around. To go deeper, I don’t think this should change, the beauty of sport is that in most cases, the game is meant to have an even playing field, professionals against professionals, amateurs against amateurs, beginners against beginners, in ways that makes the competition fun and equal. I don’t believe fully integrating sports specifically with able-bodied and people with disabilities would benefit either party. I do believe however, there can be ways where integration can be acceptable and encouraged, for example, if an amputee with running blade prostetics can run at the pace similar to able bodied people, and competes at that level qualifying as everyone else, why shouldn’t they be able to race in the same events? The answer to this question becomes more grey as skill levels progress. In all honesty, this question is so difficult to answer because non-integrated sports have always been the normal, Fully integrating sports even at the recreational level would involve systemic changes and breaking of barriers that have been put in place, and involve fully reforming the sport and leisure system we know today.

The film highlights the real mental struggle many of them face when coming to terms with their disability. Some of the men mentioned that they thought they would “get better” after their injuries, but eventually, they embraced their new lifestyles as simply their “new normal.” By the end of the movie, my takeaway wasn’t about how these men are amazing athletes or inspirations because they “overcame” their disabilities; it was more about how they’re just like any other athletes, pushing themselves to be the best they can in their sport. I kept thinking about a quote early in the film, where one of the characters says that when he goes out to a club, people tell him, “I’m so glad to see you out,” as if just leaving the house is some sort of grand achievement. His response, “Where else would I be?” perfectly sums up the film’s approach. It challenges the idea that simply living your life or doing everyday things should be framed as “extraordinary” for people with disabilities. I found it refreshing because the film avoids the supercrip narrative and just shows these men as relatable athletes who happen to have disabilities but want the same thing any athlete does… success in their sport.

When it comes to gender and the supercrip narrative, the intersection is pretty significant. For men with disabilities, there’s often pressure to showcase an exaggerated form of masculinity to prove they’ve “overcome” their disability. The focus is often on strength, toughness, and sometimes even violence, traits that align with stereotypical masculine norms. In the case of the wheelchair rugby players in Murderball, their athleticism is often tied to their display of traditional masculine traits like aggression and dominance, both on the court and off. The implication is that disabled men who fit these norms are more worthy of celebration than those who don’t conform to these ideals. For women, the supercrip narrative plays out a bit differently. While their athleticism is highlighted at times, there’s also an emphasis on their sexuality and how “feminine” they can appear, even with a disability. This focus on their appearance often reduces them to objects of desire or admiration for their beauty rather than simply celebrating their athletic achievements.