The three films each featured individuals who fit Kimberlé Crenshaw’s intersectionality theory (Crenshaw, 1990). Crenshaw defines this theory as both a prism and a metaphor to name and identify various forms of disadvantage and discrimination that become compounded when faced by one individual (NAIS, 2017). Ade Adepite, Christine Sun Kim, and Chay Brown all face compounding issues that affect and limit how they can interact with society. Each film highlights the ways in which society discriminates against or fails to accommodate them.
There were many shared themes across the videos, but what stood out to me was that all films raised the point, sometimes implicitly, that it’s not being disabled that disadvantages them, but the way society excludes people with disabilities. This felt particularly powerful as it was a perspective I had never considered. Previously, I believed that society needed to help disabled people interact with society. However, this needs to be flipped; instead, society needs to work towards redesigning an inclusive environment so every single person is taken into account, not just the majority.
Christine being shut down when trying to take art classes, Ade being targeted in the street either for his race or disability, and Chay’s friend, who is unable to use the toilet while attending an event for other marginalized groups, are all examples of challenges they should never have to face.
What was interesting to me about Kim’s film was that once Kim’s needs were met by relocating from America and becoming an artist, she was then able to freely create art that commented on other areas of injustice in society, such as debt or COVID, as well as art that shed light on what the deaf community faces. To me, that just further shows how necessary it is to create equitable experiences for everyone, not only because it benefits the individual but also society at large.
Another question that stayed with me, raised by Ade, is whether society truly wants equality. Watching the three films and considering reports such as the Initial Report under the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: United Kingdom (United Nations, 2023), which resulted from a 2016 investigation and was made public in April 2024, detailing the injustices the UK government has committed against disabled people through funding cuts and other means, I think the answer to Ade’s question is no. However, if the answer is indeed no, we do not want an equal society, this is difficult to confront as it forces the conversation to change from simply how to make society more equitable and inclusive to addressing why people are resistant to it.
When I think of disability considerations within my own teaching context, it comes down to ensuring that my slides are accessible, checking if someone has disclosed access requirements on forms for one-to-ones and events, and at times running resources and practices past the disability team.
I recognise that the steps I currently take are good practice, but I can do more to ensure that I am regularly upskilling, rethinking, and questioning my approaches. All three videos highlighted the importance of consulting and utilising people with lived experiences of disability, as they are the greatest authority on their needs. I think it would be good for me to work towards this model in the future.
References:
Crenshaw, K. (1990) Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color
NAIS (2017) Kimberlé Crenshaw – On Intersectionality – keynote – WOW 2016. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ViDtnfQ9FHc
United Nations (2023) Initial Report under the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: United Kingdom. Available at: https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/15/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?symbolno=CRPD%2FC%2FGBR%2FFUIR%2F1&Lang=en
5 responses to “Disability Blog”
Jazmin I really like how you raise a important question regarding society’s actions in relation to accessibility. There is definitely a question here to the resistance of accessibility adjustments. Do you think that within institutions such as UAL that cost is the main driving factor? – or do you think it is instead about priorities – or ignorance or something else entirely?
Thanks for your comment Elliott! I honestly think it’s a combination of all three. Not making it a priority sums up much of the reason for the failings. If it were a priority, accessibility requirements could be budgeted and considered at every stage, as highlighted in Chay’s film. Additionally, ignorance could be playing a role, perhaps due to the lack of people with lived experiences at the helm of making these decisions.
Really interesting Jazmin, I wasn’t aware if the investigation into the UK government failures. I believe the reason, that is all too common is that it’s cheaper and easier to ignore the needs of those with disabilities, often choosing to conform to bare minimum legal requirements which are often suboptimal.
The majority who have no impediments can’t relate to the lived experiences of those with needs and fail to see that a well thought out infrastructure oftens benefits everybody not just the few.
Thank you for your comment Campbell! I agree with both your takes, cost being a contributing factor as well as the decision makers failing to see the benefit of accessibility due to a lack of lived experience.
Campbell you make a really great point here – I suppose it just highlights the importance of having a diverse range of people sat at the table when decisions are made at every step.