Comment Paper- Week 1

Comment Paper #1

Davis, Lennard J. “Constructing Normalcy: The Bell Curve, The Novel, and the Invention of the Disabled Body in the Nineteenth Century.” From The Disability Studies Reader. New York, Routledge, 1997.
Linton, Simi. “Reassigning Meaning”. From Claiming Disability: Knowledge and Identity. New York, New York University Press, 1998.
Zola, Irving. “Disability Statistics, What We Count and What It Tells Us.” Journal of Disability Policy Studies 4.2 (1993): 9-31.

One of the first things to note is the very clear patterns of thought amongst these authors, and these pieces of writing. While each takes their own style of writing and own thoughts on the topic of disability and disability studies, the main focus is consistent: society, as a whole, has been quite judgmental and has succumbed to a labeling theory in reference to those with disabilities. This in turn has created a one-dimensional viewpoint of disability; that is something to be feared, something that should be referred to as a tragedy. This is of course without consideration given to those people who actually are disabled in regards to what words or phrases they would prefer their social subsection to be referred to.
Each piece of writing makes its point well-known, but in my opinion, none as well as that of Linton's “Reassigning Meaning”. Linton writes in favour of those who are perhaps unfamiliar with disability studies, and gives the audience more than ample opportunity to formulate concise opinions and reassess their withstanding knowledge of disability. This of course is important, as it allows people to educate themselves on language that will in turn create less ambiguity and a positive advancement towards a society where disabled people are not left to the wayside. She also touches on the fact that when referring to people with a disability, there is often a need to use language that prevents the speaker from feeling guilt or remorse. Society needs to move away from this comfort zone and instead allow those with a disability to promote the type of language they prefer to use.
Zola's article accompanies Linton's well. Where she has a more qualitative stance, Zola applies a quantitative, statistical approach. Linton's writings on the usage of correct language works well with Zola's article; it is through this unnecessary and sometimes harmful language that we attach labels to people with disabilities, but these labels often skew data and misrepresent people in question. There is too much ambiguity associated with disability to properly lend a definition or categorize it.
Along with this is the notion of labeling. As discussed in the Davis article “Constructing Normalcy”, the idea of being 'normal' is ludicrous. Yet society has placed a high emphasis on normalcy, promoting perfection over any type of deviation from what is considered the norm, and thus creating a perceived need for eugenics. It is time to shed that reliance on perfection and instead focus on the differences that make someone unique and useful in society. There is too much emphasis on science as a means to perfect society. The belief seems to be that with further advances in sciences, there will be less deviation from the norm. In a time where society should be becoming more tolerant, it seems we are instead moving backwards.