Ableism refers to the discrimination and prejudice against people with mental, emotional, or physical disabilities.While ‘ability’ refers mostly to a specific set of functional skills, the ableist aspect is rooted in the belief that certain abilities are inherently superior and that individuals with disabilities require ‘fixing’ (Eisenmenger, 2019). Acknowledging the diversity of disabilities is important to avoid oversimplifying the experiences of individuals with disabilities.
Oftentimes, people are defined by their disability and it defines their entire identity. Language plays an important role in this process as it labels the individual which guides the inferences and expectations of others (Bogart & Dunn, 2019). The language used to refer to disability is an ongoing discussion within disability studies and activism. While some advocate for identity-first language (e.g., ‘disabled individuals’) to affirm disability as an integral part of identity, others prefer person-first language (e.g., ‘individuals with disabilities’) to emphasize personhood beyond disability (National Institutes of Health, 2023). By putting the person ahead of the disability, the latter formulation slows the perceiver down a bit, verbally and cognitively, so the disability becomes a secondary concern. This entry uses person-first language to prioritize inclusivity and acknowledge that individuals may experience and define disabilities in diverse ways. The following texts provide examples of oppressive practices rooted in an ableist mindset, such as discrimination and social exclusion.
Framing & Perspectives
Individuals with disabilities are often excluded from the category of ‘normative’ citizens and framed as a vulnerable minority (Campbell, 2013). Society often undermines individuals with disabilities, and creates barriers that can influence various aspects of their quality of life and well-being (Okur, 2021). For example, they may face societal pressures related to body shape, size, and culturally constructed body ideals (Reel & Bucciere, 2020). One study examining ableist experiences of individuals with disabilities revealed common feelings of anger, resentment, and frustration, as well as a collective desire for justice and empathy. Some reported they had experienced internalized ableism (Kattari et al., 2018).
People with disabilities experience different forms of discrimination and microaggressions in everyday life. Some examples of ableism include failing to incorporate accessibility into building design plans or creating inaccessible websites. It can also be seen in everyday interactions, such as asking invasive questions to someone with a disability, talking to them like they are a child, or speaking for them without them explicitly asking you to (Eisenmenger, 2019).
Labeling different types of prejudice can help identify its origin. Manifestations of hostile ableism can include avoidance, shaming language, gestures of disgust, acts of aggression, and even hate crimes. Though scholars offer various explanations for such behaviors, some suggest it stems from the fear of death and the body’s vulnerability to harm and decline, as disability is a possibility for anyone (Nario‐Redmond et al. 2019).
There is also benevolent, or so-called positive, ableism that can manifest as pity, paternalistic protection, or exaggerated praise for everyday activities. This is perceived to stem from low expectations from people with disabilities, leading to amazement and wonder when they accomplish routine tasks such as driving, going to work, getting a college education, becoming romantically involved, etc. Admiring individuals with disabilities for ‘overcoming’ their limitations by completing everyday activities is a pervasive form of ableism (Nario‐Redmond et al., 2019.) Although often well-intended comments or actions that emphasize disability can take a heavy toll on the individual, such acts can reinforce the idea that disability is a deficiency rather than a natural and inevitable aspect of human experience (Eisenmenger, 2019).
A common form is a mixture of hostile and benevolent forms of ableism, known as ambivalent ableism. Ambivalence amplification theory suggests that people hold conflicting beliefs about disability. They are aware that they should show kindness and compassion towards individuals with a disability but simultaneously might feel uncomfortable and anxious around them (Nario‐Redmond et al., 2019.).
The type of prejudice present depends on various individual and situational factors, as well as the disability itself. As with many ‘isms’, the underlying mechanisms of prejudice are complex, and ableism is no exception, especially taking into account how diverse this group is. Campbell (2013) points out that even people with different disabilities might show discriminatory behavior towards people with different disabilities.
Relevance
Interventions can be problematic as they assume that the impairments themselves cause the segregation and exclusion of these individuals from society (Okur, 2021), rather than societal barriers. Ableism is not merely ignorance or negative attitudes towards people with disabilities; it represents a way of thinking about wholeness in a fixed frame of ‘normality’ (Campbell, 2013). Disability research has consistently shown that the concept of ‘disability’ is a social construct that relies on the existence of this clear-cut definition of a normative body. It emphasizes that ability or disability is not necessarily a matter of the capacities and limitations of bodies but more about the societal expectations from a body at a particular place and time (Monceri, 2014). No single individual can eradicate ableism from society. However, understanding that it is present in several forms and its impact on individuals with disabilities and their mental health is a significant step toward fostering more affirming and empowering interactions (Kattari, 2020).
Keywords: Disability Injustice, Accessibility, Social Exclusion, Marginalization, Discrimination
Connected terms: Microaggressions, Neurodiversity, Inspiration Porn, Microinterventions, Body Liberation, Reproductive Rights, Bodily Autonomy, Neurotypical (Neuromajority), Representation
References
Bogart, K. R., & Dunn, D. S. (2019). Ableism special issue introduction. Journal of social issues, 75(3), 650-664.
Campbell, F. K. (2013, June). Ableism: A theory of everything. Keynote for International Conference on’Linking Concepts of Critical Ableism and Racism Studies with Research on Conflicts of Participation’University of Hamburg (Germany).
Eisenmenger, A. (2019). Ableism 101: What it is, what it looks like, and what we can do to fix it. Access Living.
Kattari, S. K., Olzman, M., & Hanna, M. D. (2018). “You look fine!” Ableist experiences by people with invisible disabilities. Affilia, 33(4), 477-492.
Kattari, S. K. (2020). Ableist microaggressions and the mental health of disabled adults. Community Mental Health Journal, 56(6), 1170-1179.
Monceri, F. (2014). The Nature of the ‘Ruling Body’: Embodiment, Ableism and Normalcy. Teoria, 34(1), 183-200.
Nario‐Redmond, M. R., Kemerling, A. A., & Silverman, A. (2019). Hostile, Benevolent, and Ambivalent Ableism: Contemporary Manifestations. Journal of Social Issues. doi:10.1111/josi.12337
National Institutes of Health. (2023, April 12). Writing respectfully: Person-first and identity-first language. https://www.nih.gov/about-nih/what-we-do/science-health-public-trust/perspectives/writing-respectfully-person-first-identity-first-language
Okur, Ö. (2021). How visually impaired people perceive their disability: Loss or lack? An interpretative phenomenological analysis. Reel, J. J., & Bucciere, R. A. (2010). Ableism and Body Image: Conceptualizing How Individuals Are Marginalized. Women in Sport and Physical Activity Journal, 19(1), 91–97. doi:10.1123/wspaj.19.1.91
