Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.04 AVERAGE
4.04 AVERAGE
Interesting and fairly high-level overview of history in the USA through a disability-focused lens, including how the definition of disability has evolved over the years. Definitely quite general/broad, but it doesn't claim to be otherwise, and I think it made for an interesting read and a good starting place to learn more about disability and ableism.
hopeful
informative
reflective
medium-paced
challenging
informative
slow-paced
informative
reflective
medium-paced
Content Warnings
Moderate: Ableism
This is an interesting view of history through disability. It is wrongly titled with "United States" because it includes pre-Colombian time and Colonial as a significant part of the book and with significant information, so the title might be misleading. Nielsen covers some territory that was new to me, particularly the connection to labor unions and women's rights. I wish she had continued more into modern day, but she speed-up considerably as we approach the ADA.
informative
reflective
medium-paced
Having read a number of lower reviews, I'm sticking with a five-star review for a number of reasons -- not the least of which is simply the topic. As someone with an autistic brother, I can affirm so much of what Nielsen discusses in this book -- as well as the fact that so much of disability history and justice is not discussed as part of American history or even in general discourse.
As others have written, this is a PRIMER -- it introduces readers to how disabilities have been framed and how people with disabilities have been treated since the earliest documented history. Spoiler alert: People suck. Although let's be honest -- the suckiness of how people with disabilities was/is, like every other prejudice, framed by the white cis-male and -female power majority and informed by (you guessed it!) fundamentalist Christianity.
As Nielsen describes, Indigenous Americans viewed disability through a community lens -- ok, so you lost a leg in a fight with a wild animal, so you can't hunt any more. But you can do this, this and this -- and as such, are not seen as "less than," because you continue to contribute to society. White Puritan Americans? Disability was/is a moral failing -- you pissed off G_d, and as such you were punished. Therefore, if you have a disability, you are morally and socially inferior -- someone to be controlled and pitied, as opposed to being valued for what you have to contribute.
Now, what I just wrote was about physical disability -- the ways in which neurological and psychological disabilities were treated historically -- and terrifyingly recent in our history -- will likely keep me up at night.
What I also appreciated about this book is the intersectional lens she brought to it, at least to an extent. She writes expressly about how being Black, and being an enslaved person, was actually seen by white people of the time as a disability. Inferior = disabled = devalued = be afraid of = must be controlled. As such, when a Black person was also disabled, the depth of the dehumanization continued (and continues today) to plummet.
I agree with some other reviewers who would have liked to have read more about the roles of disability justice advocates although that is sprinkled throughout, especially in the late 19th, 20th and 21st centuries. The last chapter delves deeper, since much more was done intentionally and intersectionally beginning in the 1960s with the Civil Rights movement. People then recognized that human rights for disabled people reinforce human rights for people of all races, ethnicity, religious backgrounds, genders and sexual orientations -- especially since just about every person of a non-majority background was seen "disabled" at some point. LGBTQI+ people? Psychologically "deviant," and therefore disabled and inferior. To be feared and stigmatized.
Immigrants, who couldn't speak English? Must be intellectually inferior and therefore disabled. Put them in separate (but "equal") schools, but do not keep them near the "average" child. It is eugenics, it's white supremacy, it's about institutionalizing and separating out those who are not perfect -- and my goodness, who does THAT sound like?
I wish this book were volume one of a series that went a bit deeper -- but for what it was, I thought it was a truly excellent, compelling read. I look forward to reading more about disability justice in more nuanced, deeper ways and in books that are written by folks who live with disabilities (or anything that the dominant power culture decides are disabilities...).
As others have written, this is a PRIMER -- it introduces readers to how disabilities have been framed and how people with disabilities have been treated since the earliest documented history. Spoiler alert: People suck. Although let's be honest -- the suckiness of how people with disabilities was/is, like every other prejudice, framed by the white cis-male and -female power majority and informed by (you guessed it!) fundamentalist Christianity.
As Nielsen describes, Indigenous Americans viewed disability through a community lens -- ok, so you lost a leg in a fight with a wild animal, so you can't hunt any more. But you can do this, this and this -- and as such, are not seen as "less than," because you continue to contribute to society. White Puritan Americans? Disability was/is a moral failing -- you pissed off G_d, and as such you were punished. Therefore, if you have a disability, you are morally and socially inferior -- someone to be controlled and pitied, as opposed to being valued for what you have to contribute.
Now, what I just wrote was about physical disability -- the ways in which neurological and psychological disabilities were treated historically -- and terrifyingly recent in our history -- will likely keep me up at night.
What I also appreciated about this book is the intersectional lens she brought to it, at least to an extent. She writes expressly about how being Black, and being an enslaved person, was actually seen by white people of the time as a disability. Inferior = disabled = devalued = be afraid of = must be controlled. As such, when a Black person was also disabled, the depth of the dehumanization continued (and continues today) to plummet.
I agree with some other reviewers who would have liked to have read more about the roles of disability justice advocates although that is sprinkled throughout, especially in the late 19th, 20th and 21st centuries. The last chapter delves deeper, since much more was done intentionally and intersectionally beginning in the 1960s with the Civil Rights movement. People then recognized that human rights for disabled people reinforce human rights for people of all races, ethnicity, religious backgrounds, genders and sexual orientations -- especially since just about every person of a non-majority background was seen "disabled" at some point. LGBTQI+ people? Psychologically "deviant," and therefore disabled and inferior. To be feared and stigmatized.
Immigrants, who couldn't speak English? Must be intellectually inferior and therefore disabled. Put them in separate (but "equal") schools, but do not keep them near the "average" child. It is eugenics, it's white supremacy, it's about institutionalizing and separating out those who are not perfect -- and my goodness, who does THAT sound like?
I wish this book were volume one of a series that went a bit deeper -- but for what it was, I thought it was a truly excellent, compelling read. I look forward to reading more about disability justice in more nuanced, deeper ways and in books that are written by folks who live with disabilities (or anything that the dominant power culture decides are disabilities...).
informative
slow-paced
dark
informative
reflective
fast-paced