5
Section one: The fundamentals
A)
Exercise 1: Notebook Prompt
Many of you are likely familiar with the concept of “ability inequity,” which the authors of this article define as “an unjust or unfair (a) ‘distribution of access to and protection from abilities generated through human interventions’ or (b) ‘judgment of abilities intrinsic to biological structures such as the human body’.”
However, they go on to identify the following “ability concepts” that are less familiar:
1) ability security (one is able to live a decent life with whatever set of abilities one has)
2) ability identity security (to be able to be at ease with ones abilities)
How prevalent are these forms of security among disabled people you know? Or, if you identify as a disabled person, would you say your social surroundings and community foster and support these kinds of security? Furthermore, while the focus of the article is on Kinesiology programs, it is also important to reflect on how academia in general accommodates for disability. If you feel comfortable answering this question, what has been your experience of postsecondary education to date?
-OR-
The authors also observe that “Ableism not only intersects with other forms of oppression, such as racism, sexism, ageism, and classism, but abilities are often used to justify such negative ‘isms’.”
What do you think this means? Provide an example.
| Question: The authors also observe that “Ableism not only intersects with other forms of oppression, such as racism, sexism, ageism, and classism, but abilities are often used to justify such negative ‘isms’.” What do you think this means? Provide an example.
When I think about this statement, it really speaks to how society often uses people’s abilities or perceived lack of them as a way to excuse other forms of discrimination. Ableism does not just stand alone; it overlaps with racism, sexism, ageism, and classism, creating extra layers of oppression. This is exemplified in sports and physical education, as there’s this assumption that male athletes are inherently stronger or more capable than female athletes. This combination of ableism and sexism shows up in how women’s sports frequently get less media coverage and lower pay, justified by the claim that women are not as “fast” or “exciting” to watch. This is not just sexist; it is rooted in ableist ideas about what athletic “ability” should look like. An example of this intersection can be seen with ageism and ableism, which often intertwine. Older adults are sometimes left out of physical activity opportunities as people assume they cannot keep up or should not push themselves. This is frustrating as these assumptions frequently ignore individual abilities and can discourage older people from staying active. Classism connects with this, too, as people from lower-income backgrounds may not have access to proper training, nutrition, or healthcare, but society sometimes blames them personally for not being as “fit” or “healthy”, ignoring the systemic barriers they face. Thus, realizing how these “isms” overlap makes me think differently about fairness and inclusion, especially in fields such as kinesiology. If we want truly inclusive environments, we need to challenge these assumptions and make sure we’re not solely judging people based on narrow ideas of ability. |
Exercise 2: Implicit Bias Test
Did anything surprise you about the results of the test? Please share if you’re comfortable OR comment on the usefulness of these kinds of tests more generally.
| Taking the Harvard Implicit Association Test on disability bias was a surprisingly eye-opening experience for me. I’ve always considered myself someone who treats everyone equally, regardless of their abilities, so I went into the test feeling confident that my results would reflect that. But when the results showed that I have a slight automatic preference for people without disabilities, I was honestly shocked and a bit uncomfortable. I found myself thinking, how could that be? I’ve volunteered with disability advocacy groups, have friends with disabilities, and genuinely believe in equality. However, the test made me realize that unconscious biases can exist even when our conscious beliefs are inclusive. After reflecting, I remembered situations where I may have unintentionally acted on these biases, such as assuming someone needed help without asking first or feeling awkward in conversations when I was unsure what to say. These memories made the test results hit even harder as they showed me that good intentions are not always enough. What surprised me most was not just the result, but how defensive I felt initially. It was a reminder that acknowledging bias does not make you a bad person; it makes you aware and gives you the chance to improve. Overall, I found the test really useful, not as a judgment of who I am but as a mirror showing how society’s subtle messages have seeped into my thinking. It’s uncomfortable but necessary. This experience has motivated me to be more mindful and proactive in unlearning these ingrained attitudes. |
B) Keywords
Exercise 3:
Add the keyword you contributed to padlet and briefly (50 words max) explain its importance to you.
| I contributed the keyword “Healthism” as it underscores how society often judges individuals based on their health status, framing wellness as a personal responsibility rather than acknowledging systemic barriers. This resonates with me as it connects to my passion for law, particularly in advocating for fair healthcare policies and protecting individuals from health-based discrimination. |
B) On Disability
Exercise 4: Complete the Activities
Exercise 5: Notebook Prompt
What do Fitzgerald and Long identify as barriers to inclusion and how might these apply to sport in particular?
Fitzgerald and Long (2017) emphasize several barriers that prevent true inclusion in sports, especially for disabled individuals. These challenges fall into three main categories: logistical, physical, and psychological. Logistical barriers include things such as sports facilities being too far away, expensive, or difficult to get to. Physical barriers show up when venues lack accessible equipment or properly trained staff. On the other hand, psychological barriers are often the hardest to overcome. Many disabled people worry about standing out, being judged, or not being able to keep up with non-disabled participants, which can lead to feelings of embarrassment or low confidence. A major issue is how society views disability. The medical model focuses on what a person cannot do, seeing disability as something that needs fixing. In contrast, the social model shifts the blame from the individual to society, emphasizing how inaccessible environments and negative attitudes create obstacles. Sports, which frequently celebrate physical ability, can make these issues even more apparent. There’s a lot of debate about whether it’s better to have separate sports programs for disabled people or to integrate everyone together. Separate programs can provide comfort and support but risk creating segregation. Integration sounds ideal, but if not done thoughtfully, it can make disabled participants feel excluded or accentuate differences rather than similarities. The authors suggest that there is not a one-size-fits-all solution (Fitzgerald et al., 2017). Thus, a mix of approaches, such as integrating where possible while offering separate options, gives people choices. The goal is simple: let everyone enjoy sports on their own terms, without barriers or judgments.
References
Fitzgerald, H., & Long, J. (2017). Integration or special provision? Sport, Leisure and Social Justice, 126–138. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315660356-10
C) Inclusion, Integration, Separation
Exercise 6: Complete the Activities
Exercise 7: Notebook Prompt
Choose ONE of the three questions Fitzgerald and Long argue disability sport needs to address and record your thoughts in your Notebook.
- Should sport be grouped by ability or disability?
- Is sport for participation or competition?
- Should sport competitions be integrated?
| Question: Should sport competitions be integrated?
The idea of integrating sport competitions, where disabled and non-disabled athletes compete together, is a topic that sparks a lot of debate. On the surface, it seems like a no-brainer, why shouldn’t everyone have the chance to play on the same field? Integration can break down stereotypes and show that athletes, regardless of disability, are competitors first and foremost. Take John, for example; he’s a visually impaired athlete who trains and competes with non-disabled athletes. For him, being part of a mainstream athletics club is not solely about competing; it is about belonging and being treated like any other athlete. However, integration is not always straightforward, as not all athletes feel comfortable competing in integrated settings. There’s a real fear of standing out for the wrong reasons or not being able to keep up. No one wants to feel like they’re just there for show or to tick a diversity box. This is why separate competitions, such as the Paralympics, are important, as they create a level playing field where disabled athletes can shine in their own right. Yet, keeping things separate can unintentionally reinforce the idea that disabled athletes are “different” or less capable. So, what is the solution? Honestly, it’s about choice and flexibility. Some athletes thrive in integrated environments, while others prefer separate competitions, and that’s okay. There’s no one-size-fits-all answer; what matters is making sure everyone feels respected and has the opportunity to compete at their best. After all, sport should be about passion, perseverance, and celebrating what people can do, not what sets them apart. |
Part Two: Making Connections
A) Gender, Sport and Disability
Exercise 8: Complete the Activity
The paradox that sportswomen habitually face (as the authors observe, this isn’t confined to disabled sportswomen) involves the expectation they will be successful in a ‘masculine’ environment while complying with femininity norms in order to be recognized as a woman.
True or false?
Take a moment to reflect on this paradox below (optional).
| Sportswomen indeed face the paradox of being expected to excel in a “masculine” environment while conforming to femininity norms to be recognized as women. This contradiction is deeply embedded in the sports culture and broader society, where female athletes are celebrated for their strength and competitiveness yet scrutinized for how they present themselves off the field. As someone passionate about justice and equity, I find this dual expectation deeply problematic. While male athletes are primarily evaluated based on their performance, female athletes often face questions about their appearance, fashion choices, and personal lives, overshadowing their sporting achievements. I’ve personally noticed this when watching interviews or reading articles where a sportswoman’s looks are discussed more than her skills or dedication. This double standard becomes even more pronounced for disabled sportswomen, who face both gendered expectations and stereotypes surrounding disability. Their accomplishments are frequently overlooked, with attention instead directed toward their disability narratives rather than their athletic prowess. This not only marginalizes them further but also undermines their identity as athletes. In my view, athletic achievements should be celebrated regardless of gender or appearance. Female athletes should not be forced to navigate this paradox just to receive the recognition they deserve. Thus, breaking free from these stereotypes requires society to shift its focus toward skill, dedication, and hard work, qualities that define all great athletes. |
B) Masculinity, Disability, and Murderball
Exercise 9: Notebook/Padlet Prompt
Watch the film, Murderball and respond to the question in the padlet below (you will have an opportunity to return to the film at the end of this module).
The authors of “Cripping Sport and Physical Activity: An Intersectional Approach to Gender and Disability” observe that the “gendered performance of the wheelchair rugby players can…be interpreted as a form of resistance to marginalized masculinity” (332) but also point out that it may reinforce “ableist norms of masculinity.” After viewing the film, which argument do you agree with?
a) Murderball celebrates a kind of resistance to marginalized masculinity
| After watching Murderball (2005), I believe the film both resists marginalized masculinity and reinforces ableist norms of masculinity. What struck me most was how the players refused to be seen as anything less than strong and capable. Watching them crash into each other at full speed and throw themselves into the game was inspiring. It challenges the stereotype that people with disabilities are fragile or dependent. These men are intense, competitive, and driven, which reclaims their masculinity in a society that often overlooks them. At the same time, though, I noticed how much of their masculinity was tied to traditional ideas of being tough, aggressive, and emotionally guarded, traits often celebrated in sports but not always healthy. The constant trash talk, focus on physical dominance, and need to “prove” themselves felt like they were trying to fit into a mold that says men must be strong to be valued. It made me wonder: why does proving masculinity have to come through violence or physical prowess? Can’t vulnerability and self-acceptance also be masculine? I appreciated how the film showed different sides of the players, their frustrations, fears, and hopes, especially when they talked about relationships and personal struggles. It was a reminder that masculinity is not solely about toughness but also about honesty and connection. Thus, Murderball (2005) was powerful as it celebrated these athletes while also making me think critically about the pressure men, disabled or not, face to meet certain standards of masculinity.
References Shapiro, D. A., & Rubin, H. A. (Directors). (2005, July 8). Murderball. |
Section Three: Taking a Shot
A) Resistance
B) Calling out Supercrip
Exercise 10: Mini Assignment (worth 5% in addition to the module grade)
1) Do you agree with the critique of the “supercrip” narrative in this video? Why or why not? Find an example of the “supercrip” Paralympian in the 2024 Paris Paralympics or Special Olympics coverage and explain how it works.
| The “supercrip” narrative, a term used to describe portrayals of disabled individuals as inspirational solely for “overcoming” their disability, while meant to empower, often reinforces ableist stereotypes by portraying disability as something to be conquered rather than a lived experience. As underscored in the video, the “Yes I Can” message and the notion that Paralympians are equal to able-bodied athletes, even calling themselves “superhumans”, is inspiring. I agree to an extent; Paralympians push human potential and deserve recognition for their skill and dedication. However, this narrative can also reinforce ableist assumptions and marginalize those who do not fit into this exceptional category. The “supercrip” narrative suggests disabled athletes succeed through sheer willpower, implying disability is something to overcome rather than a valid identity. This creates unrealistic expectations that all disabled individuals must achieve Paralympic success to be valued. As John Loeppky’s (2021) critique in “Grappling with Ableism in the Para-Sport Movement” emphasizes, para-sport operates within a privileged sphere, benefiting only a select few while ignoring structural barriers that prevent many disabled people from accessing sports or even basic accessibility needs. This narrative is exemplified in the 2024 Paris Paralympics portrayal of Italian wheelchair fencer Beatrice Vio. Vio, a multiple gold medalist, is frequently depicted as a symbol of resilience rather than being recognized primarily for her elite athletic ability. Media coverage frequently emphasizes her journey of overcoming severe illness and amputation instead of focusing on her fencing techniques, training regimen, or tactical skills. Headlines celebrate her as someone who has “defied the odds”, reinforcing the idea that disabled athletes are remarkable only as they have “overcome” disability rather than as they have mastered their sport. This framing sidelines the reality that Paralympians, such as all elite athletes, succeed through years of discipline and training, not simply through perseverance against disability. Some argue the “supercrip” narrative is necessary for media visibility and public interest in Paralympic sports. However, as Loeppky (2021) and other para-athletes point out, this framing deepens the divide between disabled and able-bodied athletes. It perpetuates stereotypes that equate disability with weakness and suggests disabled people must achieve extraordinary success to be valued, ignoring those who lead meaningful lives outside elite sports. A more equitable approach would recognize Paralympians as athletes first without framing their success as a battle against disability. Therefore, true progress lies in acknowledging para-sport’s inaccessibility to many and advocating for authentic representations of disabled athletes. Thus, by moving beyond the “supercrip” narrative, we can foster a more just portrayal of disability in sports, one that respects both achievement and the diverse realities of disabled lives.
References Cascini, P. (n.d.). The incredible story of Bebe Vio: The girl with no arms and legs who rose to sports stardom. Www.segmento.com.au. https://www.segmento.com.au/post/the-incredible-story-of-bebe-vio-the-girl-with-no-arms-and-legs-who-rose-to-sports-stardom Loeppky, J. (2021, August 4). Grappling with Ableism in the Para-Sport Movement. Rooted in Rights. https://rootedinrights.org/grappling-with-ableism-in-the-para-sport-movement/ |
2) Does the film Murderball play into the supercrip narrative in your opinion? How does gender inform supercrip (read this blog for some ideas)?
(300 words for each response)
| Murderball (2005) compellingly portrays mobility-impaired athletes pushing competitive limits, yet beneath its dynamic storytelling; it upholds the problematic “supercrip” stereotype. As discussed by Ben Mattlin (2022) in “I AM NOT YOUR SUPERCRIP”, this narrative presents disabled individuals as inspirational primarily when they achieve extraordinary success or achieve nondisabled norms. This reinforces the idea that disabled people must be exceptional to be valued rather than accepted for who they are. The athletes in Murderball (2005) are depicted as hyper-masculine and fiercely competitive, fitting the supercrip mold by demonstrating strength and perseverance in ways that align with able-bodied ideals of success. The film emphasizes their achievements while underscoring their toughness, aggression, and independence, qualities aligned with traditional masculinity. These men are not portrayed as weak but as warriors in battle-ready wheelchairs. While this challenges stereotypes of disabled people as dependent, it upholds the notion that worthiness is tied to physical capability and dominance. However, Murderball (2005) somewhat complicates the supercrip narrative as it explores the athletes’ struggles, including vulnerability and their emotional toll. These moments challenge the simplistic idea that disability is solely something to be “overcome”. However, as the film accentuates athletic ability and competition, it reinforces the notion that only those who achieve greatness are worthy of admiration. Additionally, gender plays a crucial role in shaping the supercrip archetype. The film’s focus on mobility-impaired male athletes, who exhibit traditionally masculine traits such as competitiveness and strength, reinforces a gendered lens through which disability is perceived. The supercrip is often framed as a heroic figure overcoming adversity, a narrative more readily applied to men than women. The absence of female athletes highlights how the supercrip trope is tied to masculinity. Male disabled athletes are celebrated for toughness, while disabled women are less frequently positioned as supercrips. Ultimately, while Murderball (2005) challenges perceptions of disabled people as passive, it reinforces the alternative stereotype of the supercrip. Thus, by privileging stories of extraordinary athleticism, the film risks sidelining disabled individuals who do not fit this mold, perpetuating the idea that only those who “overcome” disability in culturally approved ways deserve admiration. In order to foster more inclusive disability representation, narratives must move beyond victimhood or extraordinary achievement to acknowledge the full spectrum of disabled experiences.
References Mattlin, B. (2022, September 1). I AM NOT YOUR SUPERCRIP. Facing Disability. https://facingdisability.com/blog/i-am-not-your-supercrip Shapiro, D. A., & Rubin, H. A. (Directors). (2005, July 8). Murderball. |
