Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Videos

  • 714208328.mp4

Downloads

Content

Files

Comments

Dando

"Ableism cuts across all our movements because it dictates how bodies should function in relation to a mythical norm. (...) Ableism paved the way for queer and trans people to be institutionalised as mentally disabled; for communities of colour to be perceived as less capable, clever and intelligent, and therefore ‘naturally’ suited to slave labour; for women’s bodies to be used to produce children, when, where and how men required them; for people with disabilities to be regarded as ‘disposable’ in a capitalist and exploitative culture because we are not seen as ‘productive’..." This paragraph strikes me as central. To be beautiful and desirable, therefore, means fulfilling the expectations of a normative order, subject to a naturalised ideal that we also refer to as society or civilisation. It shapes and restricts our innate dispositions through exclusion, socialisation and biotechnological optimisation. Mingus calls for more authentic interpersonal relationships that do not focus on the individual’s submission to a set of expectations, but rather on their real-life experiences. On the whole, one can agree with this. However, is the definition and determination of ‘beautiful’ and ‘ugly’ not arbitrary, or bound up with this false order that is to be overcome?