Sundaymail EditorDisability Issues
Dr Christine Peta
POLITICS of the body encompasses issues of diversity and oppression such as in persons with disabilities, who are generally treated as objects, whose value can only be measured by the extent to which they can be used by others.
Bodies of persons with disabilities are usually separated from their other attributes such as intelligence, especially in scenarios where the bodies “cease” to be a part of the people, but, instead, become objects.
Bodily appearance is the most common feature that results in social exclusion.
Bodies whose appearances are perceived to be different are usually classified as “abnormal” and often targeted for intense discrimination.
Such bodies are described as being ugly, deformed, fat, weird, ambiguous, disproportionate or marked by scarring or so-called birthmarks.
Some people resort to medical surgery to “normalise” their bodies through, for example, extending the limbs of people of short stature, removing so-called blemishes, augmenting breasts, stapling stomachs and lifting faces.
Although remedial surgery may assist to sustain untenable lives such as in the case of open heart valves, research has indicated that some operations may result in more harm than “normalcy”.
Regardless of whether surgical procedures are done under the banner of reconstruction or cosmetology, such practices represent ferocious attempts to minimise human differences and an intolerance of bodily variations.
In some instances, people create their own oppression through systems of daily behaviours and traditions that are intertwined in complex webs of social relationships, practices and organisations.
The discourse of normality and norms, which is generated by scientific knowledge, results in some people desiring to conform to such norms. As such, by creating disease classifications, medicine has attained the power to define what is “normal” and what is “deviant”.
Medicine, therefore, has the authority to construct yardsticks against which all human beings can be judged.
The practice of normalisation breeds control in all facets of life, thus putting people under pressure to make an effort to conform to such norms.
Consequently, individuals who find themselves falling outside such norms are branded “abnormal”.
Such a mindset is what leads people to seek to safeguard and uphold their own oppression through self-surveillance and self-disciplining to avoid having bodies that may be described as disabled.
Medical techniques form one of the foundations of official processes of disciplining and controlling bodies.
As I stated earlier, persons with disabilities are commonly treated by society as bodies (or collection of body parts), which are valued predominantly for their use or consumption by others.
It is, therefore, not surprising that research has shown that some traditional healers and religious prophets in Zimbabwe prescribe sex with women with disabilities as a cure for HIV/AIDS and a conduit for getting rich.
Bodily differences and restrictions in role effectiveness often frame the central experiences of disability.
For example, some women with disabilities are discriminated against by family members under the fallacious belief that they cannot fulfil traditional gender roles associated with a daughter-in-law such as fetching firewood, cooking on an open fire, taking maize to the grinding mill or fetching water from the well.
In some instances, some non-disabled women perpetuate abuse against women with disabilities.
Research has indicated that it is common for men to compete for women to the extent that such competition may result in violence.
However, from a feminist perspective, women have been criticised for either competing with each other or treating each other with disrespect, in scenarios where some non-disabled women perpetuate abuse against women with disabilities.
Some researchers have argued that such scenarios arise from the fact that from the day they are born, women are often taught to compete with each other to capture the attention of men; thus, ironically giving additional mileage to patriarchy.
The dismal performance of women in respecting one another has been attributed to early competitive training fostered by communities, where women are commodified and are not privileged participants.
Competition among women upholds feminine rivalry for seats in structures of patriarchy, in which women, including those with disabilities, are perpetual subordinates.
Way forward
In order to inform policy and practice, there is need to undertake research on the manner in which the politics of bodily appearance, power and bodily practice intersects with other social life attributes to frame the experiences of persons with disabilities.
In addition, if women are to make significant progress that goes beyond just changing one or two professions, unity between non-disabled women and women with disabilities becomes a non-negotiable value.
Women should not only respect themselves but should also respect other women, including those with disabilities, alongside a spirit of “sisterhood” that seeks to leave no woman behind.
Dr Christine Peta is a disability, policy, international development and research expert. She is also the national director of Disability Affairs in Zimbabwe. Feedback: [email protected]
Online Reporter