I resist the notion of “ableism” because it suggests that all nondisabled people (whoever they may be) discriminate against disabled people, which isn’t true. However, a visually impaired friend of mine, his sighted wife and sighted six-year-old daughter had an experience last month that cries out, “Ableism!” Here’s his email message on the event, edited only to honor his request to hold back his family’s identities:
Today, we took my daughter to see the Harlem Globetrotters at the Barclays Center with another family. Through some connection of the dad’s, we were in one of the luxury boxes, which we had all to ourselves. during the halftime show, the mascot, whatever it was came out and did some kind of skit. During the performance, somebody pulled the big eyes off the mascot’s costume and the mascot, presumably now blind, proceeded to stumble around, getting laughs from the crowd.
My daughter got really angry and yelled down to the court, “That’s really disrespectful to my dad!” Then she stormed off and sat back down in her seat, genuinely pissed off.
I asked my friend whether there was any audience reaction. Apparently not. It seems the occupants in that luxury box were out of view from the rest of the arena. I’d love to have heard that the crowd leapt up in support of his daughter. She was right: That act was disrespectful. So was the crowd’s indulgence and laughter.
I Googled the Globetrotters and their “blind” mascot with a variety of search terms and combinations, but to my surprise, I found no online reference to this prank. On the other hand, I did find items lauding the Globetrotters’ work with visually impaired people. (See, for example, this article about the Globetrotters and a legally blind thirteen-year-old.)
Here are some reasons why the venerated Globetrotters were this time in the wrong:
1. Blind people care very much about their dignity, and they work perhaps even harder than others to maintain grace as they move through the world.
2. The stumbling act reinforced existing prejudices about blind people’s clumsiness. Saturday Night Live pulled a similar stunt when they mocked David Paterson, New York’s then governor who was visually impaired. (See my 2016 post “On Comedy and Disability.”)
3. Many blind and visually impaired people have healthy senses of humor. Forcing someone like my friend and me to condemn this kind of comedy could signal that we lack perspective.
I don’t take the position that only blind and short-sighted people can make fun of blind and short-sighted people. I don’t want to get caught up in a disabilities equivalent of the cultural appropriation debacle. But I doubt any disabled person would endorse what the Globetrotters did the Sunday my friend and his family were in the audience. If the target of your humor wouldn’t do it, don’t do it yourself, unless you really mean to offend.
Let’s hope that as my friend’s daughter grows older, more and more disabled people are accepted into the mainstream and that mocking them ceases to get laughs. It won’t be a question of censorship. The joke will simply fall flat.
And to my friend’s daughter: Brava!
To be quite honest, from one disabled person to another, I have no idea what you were going for with this blog entry.
You go on at length as to why you think the blind mascot routine was wrong and give your friend’s daughter a hearty “brava” for yelling into the crowd and storming off. Yet, you also go out of your way to claim you don’t believe in ableism as a concept and equate raising any objection to ableist words or actions with humorlessness and censorship. (By the way, you seem to be conflating ableism and systemic ableism, both of which, for the record, exist.)
Even when explaining what you found offensive about the blind mascot routine, you equivocate by saying had your friend (or any other Blind person) been the one to yell out, they would have come off as humorless and “lack[ing] perspective.” Certainly to someone unwilling to consider things from your friend’s perspective, they might have come off that way had they raised an objection. Are you suggesting disabled people should never complain (or that the duty to complain should only be shouldered by our allies)?
People in this world constantly do and say ableist things, whether you want to admit that or not. This includes people who actively mean us harm and disrespect and people who don’t. If you want to one day live in a world where mockery of the disabled is a distant memory (or lay the groundwork so that future generations can live in such a world), then you have to abandon respectability politics and stop assigning such a high value to how non-disabled people perceive you. Obsequiousness is not the road to liberation.
Dear Anonymous,
I agree, systemic discrimination against people with disabilities does exist. Right now, I’m trying to get my alma mater and one of our city’s largest hospital organizations to address some discriminatory practices. I’m even working with a certain rehabilitation organization for the blind to make its website accessible.
You correctly write that I say: “[H]ad your friend (or any other Blind person) been the one to yell out, they would have come off as humorless and “lack[ing] perspective.” From there, you make a big leap to this question: “Are you suggesting disabled people should never complain (or that the duty to complain should only be shouldered by our allies)?”
No, I’m being realistic. Disabled people should be, and are, free to complain and to do so on their own behalf. But it is enormously helpful when nondisabled people say the same things that disabled people either say or would say. Without widespread recognition of our concerns and needs in the general population, we risk remaining voices in the wilderness.
Here’s a likely scenario had my friend followed your prescription. He could have yelled out to the performers and the crowd, “this is insulting to me as a blind person.” Many would have been annoyed at the disruption. Others would have nodded in sympathy, the last emotion a disabled person wants to elicit. Maybe one or two would have yelled out in support, but it’s unlikely. By contrast, the little girl advocating for her dad would have been seen, at worst, as charming and, best of all, as making a really good point. I am not suggesting this is ideal. However, I am saying that these are the most likely outcomes to the two scenarios.
By the way, Anonymous, you might disapprove of my using the word “disabled.” Anyone interested in why I still use this word might read my essay, “Disability and Censorship”: https://adrianspratt.com/disability-and-censorship/
I appreciate your comment because it enabled me to elaborate on my thinking behind “Big Eyes.” I hope you are truly an advocate for disabled people. To that end, I suggest you refrain from hiding behind a pseudonym. All my advocacy, along with the essays on this website, is done in my own name. It’s all too easy to complain when people conceal their identity. Besides, it makes complaints less effective.