Gender, Disability, Difference and Normality

Disabled people have long been ascribed the roles of eternal children, been subjects to myths about asexuality and deprived of gender (Hollomotz, 2008). Thus, existing societal expectations of traditional gender roles do not seem to apply to men and women with physical or intellectual impairments perceived as sexless, childlike and therefore unfit for reproduction and parenthood (Priestley, 2003). Siebers (2010) stresses that the ideology of ableism forms perspectives of disability, ignoring the many embodiments created by disability and their purpose for understanding human variety. However, when the various embodiments of disability fail to meet social norms, difference emerges from variety and can result in pejorative treatment.

We argue that embodiments of disability, as a form of socially situated knowledge, do not attend to socially defined norms of the embodiment of gender, emerging from concepts of ideology, normality and difference. Creativity is required to extend normative boundaries for diverse ways of life and embodiments, to evolve from the dichotomy of protonormalism to the fluent ranges of flexible normalism (Hall & Link, 2004).

Our argument draws on empirical data from two dissertation projects, one focusing on gender, identity and body modification, the other emphasizing disability and parenting.  Underlying principles of gender, disability, difference and normality are theoretically presented and linked to empirics. We present findings based on an empirical example from one of the projects in context of a phenomenological reading. The conclusion considers the ambivalent and opaque ratio between normal and different bodies, showing itself creatively through the process of body modification.