Staring to center bodies

As a child I'm sure we all wish Rosmarie Garland-Thomson had been our mother at times when we were caught staring at disabled bodies because she is pro-staring. She is pro-staring when the staring allows for people to see an individual as they are. However staring becomes bad when the starer is looking for what an individual is expected to be. It is the lack of recognition, which leads to exploitation of bodies and the creation of spectacles that feed our imagination. I think most of our mothers scolded us for staring as children because navigating intentions behind staring can be difficult.

While, Thomson supports staring as political activism I think conversation needs to be a part of staring. Without communication the act of staring usually becomes rude as seen by the way Robert Wadlow was treated. Thomson's work strives to normalize all human bodies as they are in their natural state. I would argue that recognition is only the first step in changing the way we value bodies in American Society. My younger sister is partially paralyzed on the left side of her body. Watching her grow up in an "able" bodied world I've seen many of the ways she has had to adapt and validate herself to others as a worthy body. She often uses humor when talking to peers to make them feel comfortable. The way her body is stared at as a spectacle reflects peoples able bodied expectations. It usually takes a personal interaction with my sister for people to actually see her. Thomson's theory of staring attempts to make space for individuals like my sister where they do not have to explain themselves, "The people who inhabit such bodies are misfits in the literal sense of the word. Their unexpected bodies do not fit into a world built for others" (167). I often find myself being extremely protective of my sister because I have grown to expect the violating look of expectations.

All bodies should be valued. The difficulty is determining how to change peoples expectations of bodies? Thomson discuses body dialogue in “Theorizing Disability”. She presents physical disabilities in a positive light through a linguistic binary comparison. She labels able-bodies as “non-disabled” and non-able bodies as “disabled”. She attaches the negative connotation to what society considers the norm and allows for disabled people and issues to be centered instead of the usual marginalization disabled people normally encounter.

We should criticize the isolating nature of the environments we have created instead of the bodies so we can change social constructions of bodies. To do so requires a stare and in this sense political activism is at work. Allegheny College has a long way to go in altering the way people stare. This is reflected in the inaccessibility of dorms; classrooms and even the brick sidewalks are difficult to maneuver. Many people are prevented from attending Allegheny because of normalized able bodied rhetoric. How do you think we can change the way bodies are constructed at Allegheny? Is staring enough?