Disability Normativity and Oppression- Exploring Historical Precedents and Contemporary Challenges

Disability Normativity and Oppression- Exploring Historical Precedents and Contemporary Challenges

The concept of disability and women’s suffrage

During women’s suffrage, opponents of equality used disability to justify discrimination against women. According to them, women have intellectual, physical, and psychological flaws. They claimed that women are physically weak and they are temperamental, making them incapable of equality. The opponents argued that the participation of women in political matters would increase society’s insanity. Edward Clarke argued that overuse of a woman’s brain resulted in weakness and hysteria among women and girls (McGirr, 2018). In 1891 a presenter in New York’s Medical Society stated that inappropriate education made women incapable of motherhood since the women’s reproductive organs were deformed, weakened, and dwarfed (McGirr, 2018). The opponents compared women’s and men’s abilities dismissing the women’s flaws as disabilities. Based on the muscle build-up, men have stronger muscles than women, and women are also more emotional than men. This does, however, not mean that women are weaker since there are duties that men cannot perform, and women perform excellently and vice versa. As such, the opponents used the flaws linked to disability to justify discrimination against women.

The concept of “good” and “right.”

People have different notions about what is right or wrong, depending on the situation. Although personal ethical views depend on different aspects, normative ethics illustrates how the concepts of normal and natural are used to establish what is good and right. Normative ethics includes deontology, teleology, and consequentialism (Gensler, 2017). Deontology describes obligation and, in this case, moral duties. Deontology holds that good and right actions conform to the set duties and rules without considering the consequences (Gensler, 2017). For example, one should not steal.  However, deontology may lead someone to accomplish their moral duties even when the consequences are unpleasant. For example, one may choose to tell the truth, but someone may die as a result. Nonetheless, consequentialist theories argue that a good and right action produces the best consequences. As such, consequentialists may lie to save a life. Teleology focuses on the end goal. In this case, a good and right action focuses on attaining certain moral goals.

References

Gensler, H. J. (2017). Ethics: A contemporary introduction. Routledge.

McGirr, L. (2018). Defectives in the Land: Disability and Immigration in the Age of Eugenics. By Douglas C. Baynton.(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2016). Pp. 192. Cloth, $35.00.“Disability is everywhere in history, once you begin looking for it, but conspicuously absent in the histories we write.” Douglas Baynton’s observation about disability’s simultaneous ubiquity and scarcity in.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

We’ll write everything from scratch

---

Answer any 2 discussion prompts. Each answer should consist of a thoughtful response between 100-150 words.

The concept of disability has often been used to justify discrimination against certain groups by attributing a particular disability to them. Cite one historical example of such.

In what ways have the concepts of natural and normal been used to establish what is “good” and “right”?
Drawing from examples in one or more of the videos, describe how oppression is manifested in terms of ableism; what ways could schools, workplaces, and communities support people with disabilities and their families?