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.
| I would love to be telling the truth when I say that my social surroundings and community foster and support these kinds of security but I would in fact be lying if I made this statement. From my experience with ADHD and from what I have learned from my peers with various disabilities, both ability security and ability identity security are most definitely not fully supported in the university setting. While I do want to acknowledge that some accommodations exist, I find that they are very rarely actually presented in an accessible manner. Since ADHD is often a very misunderstood disability because it is not a visible disability I find that a lot of people just want me to “do better” or “try harder” instead of wanting to help me and provide accommodations for me to succeed. This is why I think there is a serious lack of meaningful support with neither of these securities being readily available.
First off, Ability security, which states that one is able to live a decent life with whatever set of abilities one has, is not supported in academia. Just like the reading mentions there is a lack of knowledge and training surrounding disabilities and mandates associated with them. This can be seen in universities. I find that my professors and TA’s often lack training in how ADHD affects someone’s functioning, time management, and ability to focus. This lack of training means that myself along with several other people are left without accommodations that we need to be successful in certain courses. Although there are some accommodations like extended time on tests, extensions, and note-taking services through things like SAS these accommodations aren’t always available to everyone and are extremely hard to receive. I personally have been trying to get SAS accommodations for 2 years and have yet to be successful. I noticed how the article highlighted how faculty awareness of disability mandates is limited and this is so beyond true. I have noticed that some professors are flexible and willing to accommodate whilst others are strict and don’t understand that ADHD is a disability in need of accommodations. Myself as well as some of my peers with ADHD have been told numerous times that ADHD is not a real disability and this is honestly dehumanizing and shows the lack of knowledge that professors have on these types of security. The second security called ability identity security is when people feel at ease with one’s abilities. This means people are comfortable with whatever ability they have. This type of security can also be super challenging because there is often stigma surrounding disabilities like ADHD and many others. Due to this stigma people like myself struggle to disclose their disability fearing negative reactions from peers and professors. The article’s point about negative reactions to disability disclosure is especially relevant because I think that many students I know including myself have had to “prove” their struggles over and over, which can be exhausting and discouraging and this is definitely not a feeling of ease with our ability. It is important to acknowledge that universities like Trent are however improving their accessibility and inclusion services but there is still a lot to be done. At both the community and academic level there needs to be more education on disabilities so that people can feel secure. There also needs to be an increase in accommodations that support all different kinds of disabilities, especially neurodiversity. The Forms of security discussed in the reading really need to be felt by the disabled community therefore, a lot of work needs to be done so we can achieve this.
|
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.
| If I’m honest, the result of my Harvard Implicit Bias Test on Ableism did not really surprise me. The results I got did however, leave me thinking about how social bias influences my everyday decisions. I found that my unconscious mind automatically gravitates toward able-bodied people, which I understand is a result of growing up in an environment and community where ableist norms are extremely prevalent. Even though I was somewhat expecting the results I received, I was surprised that my scores weren’t slightly more neutral since I myself have a disability and have many friends with various disabilities as well. I am somewhat disappointed with my results because I have taken disability studies courses, personally navigate life with ADHD, and I also work with children with physical and intellectual disabilities therefore I thought my mind would be adopting a more inclusive approach to disability but I guess I was wrong. I think that this shows how strong societal norms and ideas are to break free from. Overall, I think that taking this test has most definitely made me understand how deeply ingrained ableism is in our society. I think that the results I got highlight the need for continued education, self-reflection, and change that are all highlighted in the reading by Khushi Arora and Gregor Wolbring. Before taking this test I had never heard of it before, but I think it is a useful tool to discover hidden biases and recognize the need for inclusive change.
|
B) Keywords
Exercise 3:
Add the keyword you contributed to padlet and briefly (50 words max) explain its importance to you.
| Medical Model of Disability
I chose to define the medical model of disability because it is something that stood out to me a lot. The medical model of disability is when disability is viewed through a medical lens making disability a medical condition or impairment that is an individual issue. The medical model sees disability as a problem in need of a “fix” or “cure” through medical intervention or treatment. This idea often leads to the marginalization and oppression of disabled populations because it focuses on disabled individuals being a problem and not society around them. This idea focuses on disabled people’s limitations rather than their abilities and makes people believe there is something wrong with them. It is important to note that the medical model can contribute to exclusion, as it reinforces the idea that disabled individuals are “broken” . it is clear that the medical model is a very flawed concept
|
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 identified several barriers to inclusion in this reading but they grouped them together into three groups, those being logistical, physical, and psychological. Each of these groups impact inclusion in the sporting world.
First, off logistical barriers are mentioned. These barriers include geographical inaccessibility, expensiveness of sports, and transportation difficulties. In the sports realm these barriers may mean that accessible sporting facilities are too far away for people to access, too expensive for lower-income individuals, or they do not provide accessible transportation. All of these barriers mean that disabled individuals are not able to fairly participate in sports.
Next, physical and structural barriers are also mentioned. These barriers involve a lack of accommodations for disabled individuals such as trained staff, specialized equipment, and accessible facilities like ramps into buildings or lifts into pools or other things. These physical barriers make inclusion almost impossible for disabled populations to participate in sport and leisure which is unfair.
Some more barriers mentioned are psychological or attitudinal barriers. These barriers stem from negative societal perceptions on disability which leads disabled people to internalize these negative attitudes discouraging them from participating in sports. To add to this it is important to mention that some individuals with disabilities may not identify as disabled or fall between traditional categories of disabled or able-bodied. For example deaf athletes often do not fall under either of these categories making it hard for them to find a truly inclusive space to practice sports and leisure in.
All of these barriers mentioned create immense inequality for disabled individuals, almost making them seem invisible in the sporting world. Even when disabled folk are acknowledged their participation is often hindered leaving them feel like they are less important than able-bodied people which is a huge societal issue. Although a lot of progress has been made in this realm Fitzgeralnd and Long underscore that these changes remain biased in many ways which highlights the need for improved systems to create actual inequality in the sporting realm for disabled individuals.
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?
| I chose to answer the question should sport be grouped by ability or disability. I find all of these questions very complicated to answer because there are many complexities when considering equality for all people in these situations. Fitzgeralnd and Long (2017) argue that these ideas exist on a continuum which means that both approaches have both advantages and disadvantages to them. This complexity makes it difficult to understand what way of grouping provides the most equality in general for all athletes involved.
I find this question particularly interesting because it plays a key role in shaping inclusivity rules in sports. First off, Grouping athletes by disability may help foster a sense of community among disabled individuals. This is important because they may feel more welcome in an environment where others understand their experiences. This may make them feel better than competing with people who may not fully grasp the challenges they face in sports. Fitzgerald and Long (2017) also note that the Paralympics once included a section for athletes with learning disabilities, but it was often difficult to determine eligibility, which led to exclusion. Similarly, they mention that many deaf athletes do not always want to participate in disability-specific sports, leaving them in a middle ground where they feel excluded from both categories. These statements underscore the challenges faced when sport is grouped based on disability. This idea seems like a good idea but I think it creates a lot more exclusion than it is intended to. On the other hand, grouping by ability can provide a more competitive balance, ensuring that athletes compete against others with similar skill levels rather than being classified solely by their diagnosis or type of disability. I do also think that this grouping comes with its challenges as well. It may separate athletes with similar disabilities into different categories which limits their opportunities for participation. It also could diminish the sense of community athletes may receive from participating with other disabled athletes alike. In all, I think that both approaches hold their fair share of pros and cons but I think grouping by ability may be a little easier and more inclusive for all. By doing this society can limit the amount of exclusion disabled individuals face in the sporting world.
|
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).
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 the fascinating film titled Murderball I agree that it can be interpreted as a form of resistance as well as one that reinforces ableist norms. Although initially I expected the film to be fully about resistance, after critically analyzing it and taking a more sociological approach I came to understand that the film actually displays resistance and ableism. First off, I think that this film can be interpreted as a form of resistance to marginalized masculinity because it challenges the stereotype that disabled men are not “real” men because they cannot embody significant masculine traits. This film does a good job at pushing back against weak or incapable stereotypes usually used to describe disabled men. I think that people like Mark Zupan who is the main character in this film shows how he can still embody masculine traits such as strength, toughness, resilience, and leadership even though he is a wheelchair user/disabled. This example of Zupan was an individual example but the teams portrayed in the movie as a whole also resist traditional stereotypes. I think that the sport of wheelchair rugby/Murderball itself is simply resistance. Showing that disabled people can play an adapted version of an able-bodied sport shows that they can still be athletic and capable. Team USA and team Canada both present immense skill, physical ability, and passion throughout the film which I think resists norms and helps prove that disabled athletes can compete at a competitive level just like able-bodied men. The men’s dedication to hard work challenges the long-standing stereotype that disabled individuals cannot excel in sports. Not only did these men prove this wrong but they excelled at an international level which breaks down any stigmas about disabled people.It is also important to mention that the film resists marginalized masculinity in ways that are not associated with sports. The film also resits the stereotype that disabled men are asexual and cannot participate in sexual activities. In one scene, the athletes openly discuss their relationships and sex lives and directly mention how society sees physically disabled men as incapable of intimacy. This scene is super powerful because it helps them reclaim their masculinity by reassuring viewers that they can in fact participate in sexual activity in the same manner as able-bodied men. Throughout the film these types of relationships are mentioned and by the end it is clear that many of the players have found successful long-term relationships without any issue at all. This proves that disability does not hinder a man’s ability to participate in things such as intimacy that determine his manhood.
In contrast however, I do feel that the film also reinforces ableist norms of masculinity. There is a lot of aggression, drinking, and toughness and these are all signs of hypermasculinity which is an unfortunate societal creation that men feel they need to follow to feel like they are “real men”. This creates the impression that disabled men must have these traits in order to be respected as men when in reality a more inclusive view of masculinity should be portrayed showing that men don’t need to abide by traditional masculine traits. It is important to mention that Joe Soares portrays a lot of masculine traits. For example his coaching style consisting of frequent aggression and yelling towards his team reflect traditional masculinity. This is where a man needs to assert power and dominance to be seen as manly. He also downplays his heart attack in the film and treats it as something minor rather than a serious health issue. I think this reinforces the idea that all men need to come across as tough and not vulnerable or emotional. Similar to Joe Mark Zupan embraces a hyper masculine view of strength. Early in the film, he participates in verbal conflicts with team Canada and expresses his willingness to physically fight anyone who puts him down. Zupan also speaks about fighting in general and views it as a way to assert his power and toughness. I feel this reflects the transitional belief that masculinity is proven through violence such as fighting. Overall, I think that Murderball presents a complex portrayal of masculinity. On one hand, it successfully resists marginalized masculinity by showing that disabled men are strong, competitive, and fully capable of leading fulfilling lives. On the other hand, it upholds ableist norms by suggesting that to be considered “real men,” they must conform to hypermasculine ideals such as dominance, aggression, and emotional suppression.The way the players speak about disability throughout the film suggests that they feel pressure to prove their manhood in ways that align with ableist and traditional masculine expectations. Because of this, I believe that Murderball both challenges and reinforces traditional masculinity, making it a complex film.
|
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.
| I undoubtedly agree with the critique of the “supercrip” narrative. The “supercrip” narrative portrays disabled individuals as inspirational simply for performing everyday activities. This reinforces the idea that disability is something to “overcome.” “Supercrip” reminds me of another concept I’ve heard before, that being “inspiration porn”. This is where disability is often portrayed as a trait that is both valued and rejected by society, and this is where a person must overcome and conquer their impairment through physical strength (Grue, 2016). I think the “supercrip” narrative comes across as positive at first glance, but it instead highlights differences in a way that can be harmful to the disabled population. It suggests that success is amazing only because of disability, reinforcing stereotypes that disabled individuals are defined by their physical/mental impairments. For example, Paralympic athletes often struggle with how they are portrayed in the media. Athlete Kelsey LeFevour points out in the critique that many disabled athletes would rather be recognized for their training and skill rather than their disability (Lefevour in Loeppky, 2021). Words from my former soccer coach Matt Brown, a Paralympic soccer player add to this. He told me that people admire him for “overcoming” cerebral palsy but did not appreciate him for his athletic talent. This is why I feel that the “supercrip” narrative can be critiqued in so many ways.
I think that Hunter Woodhall’s portrayal in the 2024 Paris Paralympics exemplifies the “supercrip” narrative. I have watched Hunter on tik-tok for a long time and while he was competing and after he won gold in the 400m, the news, media, and online discussion began to focus more on his status as a double amputee “overcoming” adversity rather than focusing on his athletic skill. Instead of mentioning Woodhall’s strength, determination, dedication, and skill, the media framed his success as “superhuman” just for simply achieving something an able-bodied person could do, which in this case was running. I feel that this reinforces the flawed “supercrip” narrative because it reduced him to a disability that he had to overcome instead of recognizing him for his sheer talent. References Grue, J. (2016). The problem with inspiration porn: a tentative definition and a provisional critique. Disability & Society, 31(6), 838–849. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2016.1205473 Loeppky, J. (2023). 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)
| The film Murderball does play into the supercrip narrative in subtle ways. Although this film does a much better job than many at framing disabled individuals as more human than disabled it still presents the supercrip narrative by focusing on “overcoming” disability by framing everyday activities like playing rugby, and having a sex life as exceptional things. This reinforces the idea that disabled people are amazing when they achieve things able-bodied people can do. The next thing I noticed was how the film underscores certain players’ life journeys through their injuries. For example, Mark Zupan’s story on how he became a quadriplegic was shared. The film began by explaining his initial struggles with being disabled and then it led to Zupan “overcoming” his disability and learning to play wheelchair rugby. Similarly Keith, another man, faces initial struggles after his injury but later “overcomes” this disability and strives to participate in wheelchair rugby as well. I think that because the film focuses on these athletes as heroes overcoming their disabilities the film definitely reinforces the idea that people with disabilities are amazing and heroes if they do things able-bodied people can do too. It is also important to note that there were interviews with family members that further reinforce the supercrip narrative. The family members express amazement at the athletes ability to play, which implies that to be worthy they have to “overcome” a disability. Even though it is great that they are proud of their family or friends for playing a sport, this plays into the supercrip narrative because they see the disabled person as an “inspiration” just because they are doing something that able-bodied people can do.
Finally, gender does inform the supercrip narrative in a plethora of ways especially in this film. The men/athletes in this film are framed as heroes because they must not only “overcome their disability but also the stereotypes and stigmas that disabled men are not masculine enough. I think this reinforced the supercrip narrative even more because it underscores the men’s ability to have sexual intercourse, fight, and be aggressive which are all traits that are traditionally associated with masculinity. The film is built in a way that makes these people seem incredible for participating in these activities which follows a parallel line with the supercrip narrative. In all gender definitely informs supercrip because exemplifying masculine status whilst disabled is made to be something that is inspirational which is unfortunate.
|
Feedback/Errata