Does the Self-demand Subject Expose that “Disability” is an Identity?
The issue of self-demand amputation does not appear to fit into existing paradigms, consequently listening to the voices in play in this debate, causes us to re-think these paradigms. As a non-disabled person, I was initially sceptical for the reasons outlined above, that there was a coherent identity “disabled”. However, upon reading narratives by disabled activists and theorists I began to change my perception and realise that in fact, the everyday problems that people were describing on gaining a disability, were often not just problems of “impairment”, of unequal access to education or resources, or of overt discrimination, but those of being inducted into a new, unwanted identity. The “weight”, dare I say “materiality”, of this identity is something that Lois Keith vividly illustrates in her narrative “Encounters with Strangers”. This is particularly demonstrated in this narrative because she is describing an experience of transition, from one identity to another: the “normative”
Related Questions
- I want to raise some concerns and suggestions about I-CAN policy and management, but I dont want to expose my identity. What should I do?
- What happens if a lawyer subject to Rule 5.5(f) does not provide the requisite notification and fee?
- Is it possible to customize the format of the subject identity in a SAML assertion?
