#for thesis

crpplpnk:

“Critiques of normalization have a substantial history in the fields of both disability studies and queer studies. Indeed, those critiques generated their own critical terminology in their respective areas of humanities scholarship during the 1990s. In addition to Warner’s coinage of “heteronormativity,” Rosemarie Garland-Thomson deployed the concept of the “normate” in her influential book _Extraordinary_Bodies_ to designate “the social figure through which people can represent themselves as definitive human beings” (1997, 8). Similarly, Lennard Davis’s _Enforcing_Normalcy_ (1995) described the cultural processes that perpetuate exclusionary corporeal norms and ideals. As with Warner’s critique of heteronormativity, the central claim of this area of scholarship is that, beyond examining the bodily conditions or the physical environments that produce disability, disability studies should also examine those less tangible but profoundly distorted social expectations that presume what bodies should look like and be able to do.”

—

“Queer”.Keywords for Disability Studies, by Tim Dean. NYU Press (2015)

Yeah. It’s this kind of reading I’ve been doing, over most of the last decade, that make me Oh-So-Very-Not-Surprised that there’s a countably larger percentage of queer folk in the Disability Community than there is in the population that includes both disabled andnormate people.

And it also makes me frustrated and sad that so few dedicated Queer spaces and Queer events are organized with accessibility in mind.

(viacapricorn-0mnikorn)