Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
R Braidotti (2006)
197Theory, Culture & Society, 23
D. Goodley, K. Runswick-Cole, K. Liddiard (2016)
The DisHuman childDiscourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 37
Rod Michalko (1998)
The mystery of the eye and the shadow of blindness
D. Goodley, R. Lawthom, K. Runswick-Cole (2014)
Dis/ability and austerity: beyond work and slow deathDisability & Society, 29
T. Titchkosky (2011)
The Question of Access: Disability, Space, Meaning
D. Reeve (2012)
Cyborgs, cripples and iCrip:reflections on the contribution of Haraway to disability studies
D. Goodley, R. Lawthom, Katherine Cole (2014)
Posthuman disability studiesSubjectivity, 7
R. Braidotti (2006)
Posthuman, All Too HumanTheory, Culture & Society, 23
S. Wynter (2004)
Unsettling the Coloniality of Being/Power/Truth/Freedom: Towards the Human, After Man, Its Overrepresentation--An ArgumentCR: The New Centennial Review, 3
D. Goodley (2014)
Dis/ability Studies: Theorising disablism and ableism
Jasbir Puar (2009)
Prognosis time: Towards a geopolitics of affect, debility and capacityWomen & Performance: a journal of feminist theory, 19
Rod Michalko (2002)
The Difference That Disability Makes
D. Goodley (2001)
Self Advocacy in the Lives of People with Learning Difficulties: The Politics of Resilience
D. Goodley, K. Runswick-Cole (2016)
Becoming dishuman: thinking about the human through dis/abilityDiscourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 37
D. Haraway (1990)
Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature
[This chapter will draw upon some of my recent work with colleagues in Sheffield and Manchester in Britain (www.dishuman.com) and in response to some inspiring writers and writings. Drawing on research projects and intellectual moments of engagement, the chapter considers the ways in which disability disavows normative constructions of the human. I use the term disavowal in its original psychoanalytic sense of the word: to simultaneously and ambivalently desire and reject something (in this case, the human). I will then clarify and expand upon this disavowal—with explicit reference to the politics of people with intellectual disabilities (Throughout the chapter I will use interchangeably the terms “learning disability” and “intellectual disability” to acknowledge the ways in which their different usage reflects different national contexts. Learning disability is preferred in Britain whereas intellectual disability is used in Australia and the USA)—and make a case for the ways in which the human is (1) a category through which social recognition can be gained and (2) a classification requiring expansion, extension, and disruption. Indeed, an under-girding contention of this chapter is that people with intellectual disabilities are already engaged in what we might term a post-human politics from which all kinds of human can learn. The chapter outlines seven reasons why we should ask what it means to be human. Then we will move to focus on four very human elements—support, frailty, capacity, and desire—and disability’s place in redefining these elements.]
Published: Mar 14, 2020
Keywords: Intellectual disability; Research methodology; Interdisciplinarity; Disablism; Post-human
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.