A Taste of Disability History: When Oppressors Use Disability to Legitimize Their Actions

Here in the United States, school curriculum is greatly lacking in the area of disability history; however, the term disability, terms that can be used interchangeably with disability, or terms that fall under the category of disability, are not completely scarce from History text books. Ironically, when these terms appear, they are not describing events that have happened to the disabled population as a whole, what it was like to have a disability in past eras, what policies greatly impacted the lives of people with disabilities, nor how these past events have and continue to effect those with disabilities today. Maybe the disabled will surface when talking about the veterans that returned home from the First and Second World Wars, but nothing in detail beyond that. Maybe students are informed that FDR -- the 32nd President of the United States -- used a wheelchair due to contracting polio, but not about the stigma that surrounded him and others at that time, nor his pride that kept the world from knowing the extent of his disability. Instead, these terms appear when studying the history of other people groups.

Historically, people mistreated blacks, immigrants, and women through identifying skin color or gender as a disability. Slavery was rationalized by portraying blacks as inferior due to their lesser mental capability and by the belief that blacks were at a higher risk of becoming disabled if they were set free. People were also afraid of those who were unknown, thus they were considered to be defective and termed disabled; this rationalization was used to keep undesired immigrants out of the country. The United States used the stigma of disability to rationalize their behavior. Men were also successful in arguing against women’s suffrage by threatening the acquisition of a disability upon any woman stepping outside the set gender roles established by society; women, afraid of being labelled disabled, assimilated into this role imposed upon them. Women were also determined to be feeble minded and frail in relativity to men, which can be translated into women being disabled simply due to their gender. The oppressors used the negative stigma of people with disabilities with the intention of controlling those they considered to be lesser than themselves.

Today, society does not outwardly express that people of color and women are disabled due to their skin color or gender, but the historical residue still, subtly but surely, continues to resonate in the mindsets of society that both people of color and women are inferior. However, there is a deeper issue; if an oppressor can use disability to legitimize their actions, then people who have a disability are automatically inferior no matter the color of their skin or their gender.  

In the recent decades, the increased advocation for the acceptance and equality of all people has brought about awareness to the subtleties of racism and sexism that still exist in our culture today. However, ablism -- which constitutes any form of discrimination against a person with a disability and stems from a long line of generations hiding and exterminating the disabled -- is generally shoved under the rug and ignored. Leaving ableism out of discussions about discrimination does not allow for a solution to this underlying problem; oppressing and discriminating the disabled has become second-nature to society through the false understanding that disabled people are inherently unable to contribute to society, therefore, are a burden and a liability, and ultimately inferior. This negative stigma placed on people with disabilities creates the tendency to not award people with disabilities the same rights as able-bodied people forcing the disabled to have to fight for their dignity and respect. It has become so deeply ingrained in the back of people’s minds that people with disabilities are not able to contribute to society as a normal person. The rights of people with disabilities are often seen as privileges rather than just human rights; this dehumanizes people with disabilities. If someone is treated of lesser value, they inevitably begin to psychologically internalize these lies and draw the conclusion that they are inadequate. If people with disabilities believe the disabled community to be inadequate, it will continue to be easy for stereotypes to be placed on the disabled community, and for disability to be used as a justification for racism and sexism.

Even though people have used disability as a justification for the discrimination of minorities, historians have failed to see disability as something to be explored and have ignored its cultural construct; they instead consider disability a tragedy. This fallacy needs to be exposed; the topic of disability can no longer be a taboo so that people understand that disability is not bad. Disability history needs to be taught and the stigma of disability needs to be erased in order for people with disabilities to be treated as people. Until disability is no longer a legitimate reasoning behind treating those of a supposed lesser race or gender as inferior, racism and sexism will continue to exist; racism and sexism will not cease until ablism is eliminated first. 

One Step Forward, Two Steps Back: The Irony of Eliminating Ablism

This past week I was perusing my papers from my studies as an undergrad at Western Washington University. There is one paper that I particularly liked. I wrote this paper for an American Studies course that mainly focused on race and gender in the United States, but greatly lacked in the area of disability studies (in the hundred or so articles that we read, there were only three that touched on disability in the US). I took the opportunity to write a paper on disability in the United States, and would like to share it with you. So here it is.

One Step Forward, Two Steps Back: The Irony of Eliminating Ablism

Since the dawn of the United States, people with disabilities have been discriminated against in a wide range of forms as it has simply been a justified social concept. This discrimination, termed ableism, has impacted people with disabilities; ableism is to favor people who are able-bodied and in turn be prejudice against persons with disabilities. This prejudice has been seen in many different forms and can only start to be removed through eliminating ignorance of disability history and discrimination that continues today as we can examine the past to evaluate the present and in turn, create a better future with regard to accessibility of public places and education, transportation, housing and social treatment.

Disability is a universal condition in that anyone at any time could acquire a disability of any varying degree; in fact, as the majority of people age, they most assuredly could become a member of the disability community (Davis, 502). This label applies a stigma to the disabled person as disability is viewed as “merely as personal tragedy ... rather than as a cultural construct to be questioned and explored...” (Baynton, 101). This tragedy allowed for the hiding away of disabled people in order for the world to not be burdened by them. Today, people with disabilities have escaped attics and basements in which they had been hidden due to embarrassment, but they still remain invisible through the identity society has placed upon them (Davis, 500). Historically, society had created a “normality” being one that symbolizes the perfect, moral, good-looking person; the disabled were not viewed as normal but rather as an object of pity or as a villain (Davis, 510). People have been discriminated against as it has been a justified social concept as people with disabilities are considered insignificant (Baynton, 100).

This discrimination comes in the form of unintentionally and unconsciously (Livingston, 186) unaccessible physical barriers that appear in architectural designs; these architectural barriers are considered compliant with the American with Disabilities Act (ADA). This has to do with the fact that the ADA allows for accommodations to only be made if they are considered “reasonable” and without any undue hardship on the party fulfilling the accommodation (Livingston, 186). “Reasonable” and undue hardship are relative terms; what is reasonable to an able-bodied person is probably not going to comply with what is reasonable for a person with a disability, and in terms of claiming to not have to follow the necessary accessibility terms as it would be an undue hardship in turn create a hardship for persons with disabilities. Another reason is that “[t]he ADA requires all government programs, not all government buildings, to be accessible (Livingston, 186). When buildings are not accessible, people with disabilities become discouraged as the responsibility of fighting for accessibility falls on their shoulders as government programs do not automatically provide accommodations to persons with disabilities.

Another example of barriers in public spaces is the lack of access that students with disabilities have in the educational system. Even though the Education for all Handicapped Children Act passed in 1975 mandating public schools to allow access to an education for children with disabilities, in 1995, the majority of public schools still were not physically accessible to students with disabilities (Longmore, Location 353, Kindle Edition). The inaccessibility of schools is counterproductive when it come to mandating that public schools accommodate students with disabilities as even if schools are willing to follow the law, they cannot do so if a student cannot physically enter or travel throughout the building. This leads to forcing students to go to a different school. It also causes students who are capable of being in a mainstream classroom to be placed in special education when it is the only accessible option. This is due to the fact that architectural barriers only have to be removed if their removal is "readily achievable" and without "undue financial and administrative burden" (Livingston, 186).   If universal design was to be utilized, barriers would be removed from the disabled person’s path, thus allowing them to live a more independent life and not leave them to depend on “...the mercy of others” (Livingston, 184). 

Another place that universal design should come into play is the transportation system as when it comes to using public transportation such as riding busses, planes and trains, people with disabilities are discriminated against. Many Americans with disabilities rely on public transportation in order to get around; they may not be able to drive themselves due to physical impairments or the lack of a handicapped accessible vehicle. Even though public transportation is a large part of many disabled people’s lives, people with disabilities often find that their mobility rights are denied; this can be seen in the denial to the access to a bus either by the choice of a driver or the lack of a working lift. People with disabilities have the option of utilizing paratransit over the city bus; however, many disability advocates argue that the paratransit system is “separate but not equal” (Longmore, Location 297, Kindle Edition) as it is time consuming and inconvenient. Before even gaining access to a paratransit bus, a disabled person must apply. If they are accepted, they must make an appointment twenty-four hours to even two weeks in advance to receive a ride and they must be ready to be picked up any time up to two hours before their chosen arrival time. The paratransit will guarantee that the rider will get to their destination on time. However, this is a different story for returning home; the paratransit will get the rider back home at paratransit’s convenience. 

The bus system is not the only transportation system that is lacking with respect to equality. “The ADA overlooks airline travel altogether, and the Air Carrier Access Act of 1986, the federal law that supposedly ensures disabled Americans' right to fly commercial airlines, in fact contains no guarantee of equal access” (Longmore, Locations 307-308, Kindle Edition). This same law does not even require terminals to be retrofitted for access until they are being updated (Longmore, Locations 310, Kindle Edition). Though bus systems and airlines are frustrating, subways are the worst offenders of accessibility simply because they were not built to be handicap accessible and the fact that it would be very difficult to make it accessible due to it being expensive to retrofit. 

In New York City (NYC), the subway system has 28 key stations out of 594 total stations which meet the legal access requirements of handicap accessibility; however, NYC claims that they have 104 key stations that meet these requirements (Longmore, 290). NYC has deemed their key stations as the most necessary stations to be handicap accessible; however, deeming only one-sixth of the stations as key stations is demeaning to a person with a disability as this action implies that a person with a disability does not intend on utilizing the remaining five-sixths stations and if one was to take into consideration that only 28 stations are completely handicap accessible, this means that 1/24 of the stations in NYC are actually usable to all people with disabilities. This does not even come close to “separate but equal” but is flat out unequal.

Another inequality for people with disabilities that greatly impacts their economic status is the inability to purchase or rent an accessible home. However, skyrocketing home prices and ridiculously high rent are not the sole barriers in finding a living place of choice for people with disabilities rather the barriers result from the lack of physical accessibility. Only a small percentage of houses and apartments in the US are readily adaptable or even accessible for people with disabilities (Longmore, Location 337, Kindle Edition). And while the Fair Housing Amendment Act of 1988 mandates owners allow alterations to be made by disabled tenants, these alterations place a burden upon the shoulders of the disabled person that would not otherwise be put upon a tenant without a disability. The 1988 act also mandates accessibility in new housing; yet, authorities typically do not follow through in enforcing these provisions (Longmore, Location 341-343, Kindle Edition). On top of having to find an affordable place, a disabled person has to face “[d]iscrimination—by landlords, real estate agents and mortgage lenders” (Turner, Electronic Copy). These barriers block the ability for people with disabilities to acquire a home (Turner, Electronic Copy) and the lack of accessible housing often leads to putting a disabled person in an institution (Longmore, Location 340, Kindle Edition). “People who may be victims of discrimination need to know their rights; landlords and real estate agents need to understand what actions are prohibited; and all of us need to speak out against practices that limit freedom of choice” (Turner, Electronic Copy). Until able-bodied people come to realize that people with disabilities have just as much right to live in an affordable home of choice, the discrimination towards people with disabilities will continue and it will be easier for a person with a disability to lose a portion or all of their independence by having to resort to an institution like a nursing home. 

If people with disabilities are not able to acquire housing which forces them into an institution and if they cannot access the public and are not integrated into society, it is easy for their rights to be stripped and no ally will be able to come along side to help fight for their rights. In Sharon’s Kowalski’s case, she did have an ally, Karen Thompson; however, this ally was only one voice against the world. Kowalski’s father and the institution that he placed Kowalski in did not care for Kowalski as a person but as a patient; Kowalski desired to live in her own home and with her own partner, Thompson. Yet, Kowalski ha[d] lost the right to choose whom she may see, who she may like, and who she may love” (Griscom, Electronic Copy). From the time Kowalski entered the institution to the time that she was freed, her body had significantly deteriorated from the lack of care (Griscom, Electronic Copy) that she would have otherwise received if she was allowed to live with Thompson. “The same system that disabled [Kowalski] by allowing her body to degrade, stamped the stereotype of disability upon her forehead and therefore gained the ability to take away her rights because she was disabled” (Griscom, Electronic Copy).

Ableism is reinforced when public places are inaccessible for people with disabilities, these people become invisible and are not give social rights (Livingston, 184). People with disabilities are often marginalized which leaves them behind. “Disabled people, ... are all to some degree denied their full personhood by the structures of our society” (Griscom, Electronic Copy) whether it is being denied accessibility of public places and education, transportation, housing or social treatment. If people with disabilities are not treated with the same equality every able-bodied person is afforded, then how should they be expected to assimilate into the mainstream culture? People with disabilities will not be able to completely integrate into society until ableism has been eliminated; however, there is an irony to this as ableism will not completely be eradicated until people with disabilities begin to integrate into society.

Work Cited

Douglas C. Baynton, “Disability and the Justification of Inequality in American History,” 

Paula S. Rothenberg, Race, Class and Gender in the United States: An Integrated Study, Ninth Ed., Part 1, Art. 9, (New York: Worth Publishers, 2013), Electronic Copy.

Joan L. Griscom, “The Case of Sharon Kowalski and Karen Thompson: Ableism, Heterosexism 

and Sexism,” Paula S. Rothenberg, Race, Class and Gender in the United States: An Integrated Study, Ninth Ed., Part 6, Art. 25, (New York: Worth Publishers, 2013), Electronic Copy.

Kathy Livingston, “Architecture Disables: Teaching Undergraduates to Perceive Ableism in 

the Built Environment,” Teaching Sociology, Vol. 28, No. 3 (Jul., 2000), 182-191.

Lennard J. Davis, “Crips Strike Back: The Rise of Disability Studies,” American Literary 

History, Vol. 11, No. 3 (Autumn, 1999), 500-512.

Margery Austin Turner and Carla Herbig, “Closing Doors On American’s Housing Choices,” 

Paula S. Rothenberg, Race, Class and Gender in the United States, Ninth Ed., Part 4, 

Art. 14, (New York: Worth Publishers, 2013), Electronic Copy.

Paul K. Longmore, Why I Burned My Book: And Other Essays on Disability, (Philadelphia: 

Temple University Press, ): 2003, Kindle Edition.