Understanding Disability: Biopsychology, Biopolitics, and an In-Between-All Politics

in Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly
Dan Goodley*,1
View More View Less
  • 1 University of Sheffield
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1123/apaq.2017-0092
Keywords:
disability identity development; intellectual disability; sociological perspectives
In Print:
Volume 35: Issue 3
Page Range:
308–319
Restricted access

Purchase Article

USD  $24.95

Student 1 year online subscription

USD  $66.00

1 year online subscription

USD  $88.00

Student 2 year online subscription

USD  $125.00

2 year online subscription

USD  $167.00
Subscribe to this Journal

  • Purchase Article

    USD  $24.95

  • Student 1 year online subscription

    USD  $66.00

  • 1 year online subscription

    USD  $88.00

  • Student 2 year online subscription

    USD  $125.00

  • 2 year online subscription

    USD  $167.00

What do disability labels give us and what do they steal from us? How possible is it to live our lives without categories when life is necessarily categorical? In this brief provocation, I want to explore the disability labels through recourse to three perspectives that have much to say about categorization, disability, and the human condition: the biopsychological, the biopolitical, and, what I term, an in-between-all politics. It is my view that disability categories intervene in the world in some complex and often contradictory ways. One way of living with contradictions is to work across disciplinary boundaries, thus situating ourselves across divides and embracing uncertainty and contradiction to enhance all our lives. I will conclude with some interdisciplinary thoughts for the field of adapted physical activity.

The author is with the School of Education and iHuman: The Research Inst. for the Study of the Human, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom.

Address correspondence to d.goodley@sheffield.ac.uk.

Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly

Cover Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly

  • Abbinnett, R. (2007). Untimely agitations: Derrida, Klein and Hardt & Negri on the idea of anti-capitalism. Journal for Cultural Research, 11(1), 41–56. doi:10.1080/14797580601149742

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Balakrishnan, G. (2000). Virgilian visions: Review of Hardt and Negri’s Empire. New Left Review, 5(Sept/Oct), 142–148.

  • Baron-Cohen, S., Leslie, A.M., & Frith, U. (1985). Does the autistic child have a “theory of mind”? Cognition, 21(1), 37–46. PubMed doi:10.1016/0010-0277(85)90022-8

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Butler, J. (1993). Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of sex. London, UK: Routledge.

  • Fanon, F. (1993). Black skins, white masks (3rd ed.). London, UK: Pluto Press.

  • Goodley, D. (2014). Dis/ability studies: Theorising disablism and ableism. London, UK: Routledge.

  • Goodley, D. (2016). Disability studies: An interdisciplinary introduction (2nd ed.). London, UK: Sage.

  • Goodley, D., & Lawthom, R. (2013). Hardt and Negri and the geo-political imagination: Empire, multitude and critical disability studies. Critical Sociology, 39(3), 369–384. doi:10.1177/0896920511431500

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Goodley, D., & Runswick-Cole, K. (2014). Becoming dishuman: Thinking about the human through dis/ability. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 37(1), 1–15. doi:10.1080/01596306.2014.930021

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Hardt, M., & Negri, A. (2000). Empire. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

  • Mallett, R., & Runswick-Cole, K. (2016). The commodification of autism: What’s at stake? In K. Runswick-Cole, R. Mallett, & S. Timimi (Eds.), Re-thinking autism: Critical approaches in a global context (pp. 110–131). London, UK: Jessica Kingsley.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Michalko, R. (2002). The difference that disability makes. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.

  • Mitchell, D., & Snyder, S. (2015). The biopolitics of disability: Neoliberalism, ablenationalism, and peripheral embodiment. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Oliver, M. (1990). The politics of disablement. Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan.

  • Oliver, M. (1996). Understanding disability: From theory to practice. London, UK: Macmillan.

  • Puar, J. (2012). I would rather be a cyborg than a goddess: Becoming-intersectional in assemblage theory. Philosophia, 2(1), 49–66.

  • Rabinow, P., & Rose, N. (2006). Biopower today. BioSocieties, 1, 195–217. doi:10.1017/S1745855206040014

  • Rose, N., & Novas, C. (2004). Biological citizenship. In A. Ong & S.J. Collier (Eds.), Global assemblages: Technology, politics, and ethics as anthropological problems (pp. 439–463). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Runswick-Cole, K., Mallett, R., & Timimi, S. (Eds.). (2016). Re-thinking autism: Critical approaches in a global context. London, UK: Jessica Kingsley.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Rustin, M. (2002). Empire: A postmodern theory of revolution. New Political Economy, 7(3), 451–462. doi:10.1080/1356346022000018784

  • Shakespeare, T. (2006). Disability rights and wrongs. London, UK: Routledge.

  • Steadward, R.D., Wheeler, G.D., & Watkinson, E.J. (2003). Adapted physical activity. Edmonton, AB, Canada: University of Alberta Press.

  • Thomas, C. (1999). Female forms: Experiencing and understanding disability. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.

  • Thomas, C. (2007). Sociologies of disability, ‘impairment’, and chronic illness: Ideas in disability studies and medical sociology. London, UK: Palgrave.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Titchkosky, T. (2003). Disability, self, and society. Toronto, ON, Canada: University of Toronto Press.

  • Titchkosky, T. (2011). The question of access: Disability, space, meaning. Toronto, ON, Canada: University of Toronto Press.

  • Tremain, S. (Ed.). (2005). Foucault and the government of disability. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

  • Union of the Physically Impaired Against Segregation. (1976). Fundamental principles of disability. London, UK: Author.

  • Vehmas, S., & Watson, S. (2013). Moral wrongs, disadvantages, and disability: A critique of critical disability studies. Disability & Society, 29(4), 638–650. doi:10.1080/09687599.2013.831751

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Watson, N. (2004). The dialectics of disability: Thoughts towards a social model for the 21st century? In C. Barnes (Ed.), From theory to practice: Implementing the social model of disability (pp. 101–117). Leeds, UK: Disability Press.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Wing, L. (1981). Asperger’s syndrome: A clinical account. Psychological Medicine, 11(1), 115–129. PubMed doi:10.1017/S0033291700053332.

  • Wynter, S. (2003). Unsettling the coloniality of being/power/truth/freedom: Towards the human, after man, its overrepresentation—An argument. CR: The New Centennial Review, 3(3), 257–337. doi:10.1353/ncr.2004.0015

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Žižek, S. (2008). Violence. London, UK: Profile Books.

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 1894 749 34
Full Text Views 64 11 1
PDF Downloads 52 20 5