Summary

• Objects (1 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
  • Caselist.CitesClass[16]
  • Caselist.CitesClass[17]

Details

Caselist.CitesClass[16]

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-2016-12-17 20:44:01.222
	1	+2016-12-17 20:44:01.0

Caselist.CitesClass[17]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,14 @@
	1	+Representations of “free speech” exclude the cognitively disabled by predicating the concept of freedom and independence on spoken voice. The 1ACs valorization of speech marginalizes those who rely on other forms of communication.
	2	+Ashby 11. Christine. Professor at Syracuse University, Degree in Leadership and Communications. “Whose ‘Voice’ is it Anyway?: Giving Voice Qualitative Research Involving Individuals that Type to Communicate.” Disabilities Study Quarterly. MCM.
	3	+One of the critical questions facing Disability Studies is how to make central the voices of individuals with disabilities in research? In this paper, I interrogate the idea of "voice" in critical, qualitative research and its application to research involving individuals who do not use speech as their primary mode of expression. How do critical, qualitative research and theories of voice position participants whose means of expression challenge traditional notions of normative participation? I first problematize the premise of giving voice generally and then present four key issues, which include a) the question of competence for individuals who do not use speech, b) hearing silence, c) agency and voice, and d) broadening the conceptualization of voice beyond speech. I conclude with implications for qualitative researchers and others interested in facilitating voice for individuals using alternative forms of expression. The celebration and representation of voices, rather, implies endowing speaking subjects with a special significance. Giving voice to subjects includes the representation of individuals and groups who have been muted and marginalized. It implies the expression of their unique experience, usually through the reproduction of personal testimony and narrative. The authors describe celebration of voice as "endowing speaking subjects with a special significance." While the message is clearly about empowerment and representation of marginalized perspectives, this passage also highlights a key challenge. Representation centers on speech. Spoken voice is clearly privileged in American culture. Where, then, does that leave individuals who do not speak or for whom speech is not always reliable? Consider the following example. During an observation in Jacob's eighth grade English class, Jacob was scheduled to present a poster and report on a famous nineteenth invention with his partner Diana. When it was their turn to present to the class, Jacob stood up and walked to the front with Diana. She handed Jacob the paper and he held it out in front of himself. Diana read the paper and turned back and forth between the class and Jacob who was standing to her right. Diana talked about the invention of the bicycle in 1890 and stated that it was important because they did not have bicycles before that. Jacob laughed and clucked quietly. As the presentation continued, there was muttering and snickering from students in the class. Diana read another page about the invention of the washing machine and then they were done. One of the male students in the class sarcastically shouted out, "Good job Jacob." Several other students cheered as Diana and Jacob took their seats. Jacob never spoke or participated in the presentation in any way other than holding the paper on which the material was written. I am sure he participated in the development of the project and the writing of the text, but that was not evident during the oral presentation. With no means of complex expression available to him in class, he was effectively silenced, rendered voiceless and unable to present himself as a thinking, capable member of the class. In an attempt to have Jacob present "without support" he was unable to present at all. His ideas and perspectives were never accessible to his peers. Normative conceptions of performance, participation and independence clearly impact the opportunities provided to individuals with disabilities. Some people with disabilities will always need the support of another person to communicate and make themselves heard. Traditional liberal theory leaves individuals labeled with cognitive disabilities outside the ranks of "citizen" (Erevelles, 2002). This often results from an emphasis on independence and utilitarian principles of liberal theory. In keeping with the idea of a self-sufficient, rational being as the ideal of American individualism, disability studies scholars have recognized that "the autonomous individual is imagined as having inviolate boundaries that enable unfettered self-determination, creating a myth of wholeness" (Thomson, 1996, p. 32). In western culture, independence is prized over interdependence and social good comes from "one's individual utility, intrinsic ability and personal performance with society being enriched when individuals attain their personal ends" (Kliewer, 1998, p. 3). People considered to have cognitive disabilities, some of whom may never be able to function in ways that are considered independent according to Western traditions, are often seen or constructed as less then fully human. I would argue, however, that none of us operates truly independently and that the idea of inviolate boundaries is a myth for everyone. Unfortunately, if you require support from others to dress, or move or communicate those dependencies become justification for exclusion from the ranks of the American ideal and perhaps from the ranks of those who have a "voice" that merits attention. If we continue to conceptualize voice as speech, certain individuals with disabilities will always be constructed as being without one. If we only listen to a normative voice (Mazzei, 2009), one that looks and sounds familiar, we will recreate that which we already "know." However, if we think of voice more broadly as the ability to express oneself and be heard by others, that can encompass typed text, non-verbal communication, gestural communication or silence, which leaves the door open for a more expansive conceptualization of participation and engagement. Mazzei (2009) argues for an orientation of "listening in the cracks," hearing voice in all aspects of interaction, from the words spoken — or typed — to the gestures and silences. Listening for the unvoiced and the differently voiced can be messy, uncomfortable work, but it creates the opportunity for a fuller, richer understanding.
	4	+Ableism is a tactic of oppression that permeates all forms of discrimination – categorization based on normative biological standards justifies every form of discrimination and violence.
	5	+Siebers 9 Tobin Siebers (Professor of Literary and Cultural Criticism @ University of Michigan), “The Aesthetics of Human Disqualification”, 10/28/9, Lecture, http://disabilities.temple.edu/media/ds/lecture20091028siebersAesthetics_FULL.doc
	6	+Oppression is the systematic victimization of one group by another. It is a form of intergroup violence. That oppression involves “groups,” and not “individuals,” means that it concerns identities, and this means, furthermore, that oppression always focuses on how the body appears, both on how it appears as a public and physical presence and on its specific and various appearances. Oppression is justified most often by the attribution of natural inferiority—what some call “in-built” or “biological” inferiority. Natural inferiority is always somatic, focusing on the mental and physical features of the group, and it figures as disability. The prototype of biological inferiority is disability. The representation of inferiority always comes back to the appearance of the body and the way the body makes other bodies feel. This is why the study of oppression requires an understanding of aesthetics—not only because oppression uses aesthetic judgments for its violence but also because the signposts of how oppression works are visible in the history of art, where aesthetic judgments about the creation and appreciation of bodies are openly discussed. One additional thought must be noted before I treat some analytic examples from the historical record. First, despite my statement that disability now serves as the master trope of human disqualification, it is not a matter of reducing other minority identities to disability identity. Rather, it is a matter of understanding the work done by disability in oppressive systems. In disability oppression, the physical and mental properties of the body are socially constructed as disqualifying defects, but this specific type of social construction happens to be integral at the present moment to the symbolic requirements of oppression in general. In every oppressive system of our day, I want to claim, the oppressed identity is represented in some way as disabled, and although it is hard to understand, the same process obtains when disability is the oppressed identity. “Racism” disqualifies on the basis of race, providing justification for the inferiority of certain skin colors, bloodlines, and physical features. “Sexism” disqualifies on the basis of sex/gender as a direct representation of mental and physical inferiority. “Classism” disqualifies on the basis of family lineage and socioeconomic power as proof of inferior genealogical status. “Ableism” disqualifies on the basis of mental and physical differences, first selecting and then stigmatizing them as disabilities. The oppressive system occults in each case the fact that the disqualified identity is socially constructed, a mere convention, representing signs of incompetence, weakness, or inferiority as undeniable facts of nature. As racism, sexism, and classism fall away slowly as justifications for human inferiority—and the critiques of these prejudices prove powerful examples of how to fight oppression—the prejudice against disability remains in full force, providing seemingly credible reasons for the belief in human inferiority and the oppressive systems built upon it. This usage will continue, I expect, until we reach a historical moment when we know as much about the social construction of disability as we now know about the social construction of race, class, gender, and sexuality. Disability represents at this moment in time the final frontier of justifiable human inferiority.
	7	+
	8	+Perception of difference as negative impacts how we understand what constitutes valuable discourse. Disabled speech isn’t perceived as politically meaningful speech – that turns case
	9	+Zelinger 7/7 (Julie Zeilinger: a freelance author from the Barnard College class of 2015. Mic.com: “6 Forms of Ableism We Need to Retire Immediately” published July 7th, 2015. Accessed July 24th, 2015. http://mic.com/articles/121653/6-forms-of-ableism-we-need-to-retire-immediately)TheFedora
	10	+Nearly 1 in 5 people in the United States has a disability, according to a 2012 Census Bureau report. Yet many forms of discrimination against the disability community not only persist, but are actually largely normalized and even integrated into our culture's very understanding (or, more accurately, disregard) of disabled people's experiences. Ableism refers to "discrimination in favor of able-bodied people," according to the Oxford English Dictionary. But the reality of ableism extends beyond literal discriminatory acts (intentional or not) to the way our culture views disabled people as a concept. Ableism is also the belief that people with disabilities "need to be fixed or cannot function as full members of society" and that having a disability is "a defect rather than a dimension of difference," according to the authors of one 2008 Journal of Counseling and Development article on the topic, as reported by Feminists with Disabilities. This interpretation of difference as defect is the true root of ableist acts that cause far too many to feel marginalized, discriminated against and ultimately devalued in this society. Here are just six forms of this behavior that, though largely normalized, need to be retired immediately. 1. Failing to provide accessibility beyond wheelchair ramps Source: Getty Perhaps the most obvious form of discrimination people with disabilities face is the inability to access places and services open to their able-bodied counterparts — even with laws in place to prevent such inequality. As Tumblr user The (Chronically) Illest noted, while most people think "just putting wheelchair ramps everywhere" is sufficient, true accessibility accommodates all types of disabilities — not just physical disabilities that specifically bind people to wheelchairs. Accommodations can also include "braille, seeing-eye dogs/assistant dogs, ergonomic workspaces, easy to grip tools, closed captions ... class note-takers, recording devices for lectures" and other services and alterations. Though accessibility is certainly a matter of convenience and equity, a lack of accessible resources can impact the very wellbeing of people with disabilities. Individuals with disabilities have reported not being able to receive health care because their providers' facilities weren't accessible, and one study found that women with disabilities particularly face increased difficulty accessing reproductive health care, just to name two examples. 2. Using ableist language Source: Getty Ableism has become undeniably naturalized in the English language. Many people not only use words like "crazy," "insane" or "retarded" without a second thought, but many adamantly defend their use of these terms, decrying anybody who questions their right to do so as too "politically correct" or "sensitive." But this personal defense fails to recognize that ableist language is not about the words themselves so much as what their usage suggests the speaker feels about the individuals they represent. "When a critique of language that makes reference to disability is not welcome, it is nearly inevitable that, as a disabled person, I am not welcome either," Rachel Cohen-Rottenberg wrote in a 2013 Disability and Representation article. But beyond individual feelings, ableist language can contribute to a foundation of more systemic oppression of people with disabilities as a group. "If a culture's language is full of pejorative metaphors about a group of people," Cohen-Rottenberg continued, that culture is more likely to view those individuals as less entitled to rights like "housing, employment, medical care, education, access, and inclusion as people in a more favored group." 3. Able-bodied people failing to check their privilege Source: Getty It may not seem like a big deal in the moment, but able-bodied individuals fail to recognize the privilege of having access to every and any space accessible. As Erin Tatum points out at Everyday Feminism, plenty of people may not directly discriminate against people with disabilities but effectively do so by using resources allocated for them. For example, many able-bodied people use handicapped bathroom stalls or take up space in crowded elevators, rather than taking the stairs and leave room for people with disabilities who don't have other options, without a second thought. While these actions may not be the product of ill will, they are evidence of the way able-bodied privilege manifests in our society. There's a general cultural notion that "disability is something inherently negative," Allie Cannington, a board member of the American Association of People with Disabilities, told Mic. "There's a level of silencing that happens, and erasing of the disabled experience as an important experience because able-bodied experiences are the privileged experiences in our society."
	11	+
	12	+The alternative is to conceptualize speech as encompassing more than just traditional conversation. Recognizing the importance and existence of non-verbal communication is key to deep understanding and inclusion of people with disabilities.
	13	+Ashby 11. Christine. Professor at Syracuse University, Degree in Leadership and Communications. “Whose ‘Voice’ is it Anyway?: Giving Voice Qualitative Research Involving Individuals that Type to Communicate.” Disabilities Study Quarterly.
	14	+¶ People considered to have cognitive disabilities, some of whom may never be able to function in ways that are considered independent according to Western traditions, are often seen or constructed as less then fully human. I would argue, however, that none of us operates truly independently and that the idea of inviolate boundaries is a myth for everyone. Unfortunately, if you require support from others to dress, or move or communicate those dependencies become justification for exclusion from the ranks of the American ideal and perhaps from the ranks of those who have a "voice" that merits attention. If we continue to conceptualize voice as speech, certain individuals with disabilities will always be constructed as being without one. If we only listen to a normative voice (Mazzei, 2009), one that looks and sounds familiar, we will recreate that which we already "know." However, if we think of voice more broadly as the ability to express oneself and be heard by others, that can encompass typed text, non-verbal communication, gestural communication or silence, which leaves the door open for a more expansive conceptualization of participation and engagement. Mazzei (2009) argues for an orientation of "listening in the cracks," hearing voice in all aspects of interaction, from the words spoken — or typed — to the gestures and silences. Listening for the unvoiced and the differently voiced can be messy, uncomfortable work, but it creates the opportunity for a fuller, richer understanding.¶ section¶ Facilitating Agency in Research Methods¶ The issues raised in this article have implications and import both to educators and researchers. Broadening the conceptualization of voice in the classroom is emancipatory for people who do not speak. The emphasis on verbal speech leaves many non-speaking people with disabilities further marginalized in their school and classroom communities. When speech is considered the only, or at least, preferred, way to express one's wants and ideas, that can limit the access and support provided for those individuals who communicate in nontraditional ways.

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2016-12-17 20:44:01.697

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Felix Tan

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Lynbrook NS

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+12

Round

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2

Team

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Immaculate Heart Dosch Neg

Title

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+JANFEB - Ableism K

Tournament

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+College Prep Invitational