In the Introduction chapter of Ableism: The Causes and Consequences of Disability Prejudice, Michelle R. Nario-Redmond begins with selections from Maria Palacios’s 2017 poem, Naming Ableism. It is an apt way to introduce a dauntingly researched book about the multi-layered term. It is also a forecast of how Nario-Redmond will parse, analyze, and contextualize ableism. While the majority of the content consists of findings from her own research, and of many other social-science and social-psychology researchers, Nario-Redmond also includes provocative images and helpful resources between the chapters and in the Appendix, such as links to blogs and websites. The author also personalizes the quantitative data with autobiographical voices between sections. They act as useful breathing spaces within the density of scientific research. As she explains, while this subject is replete with personal narratives, it is lacking in multi-disciplinary research about the conditions that cause ableism in intergroup, group and individual identity formation, and as a result of stereotyping. The purpose of the book is to fill this void in disability studies scholarship and to call for future research. The five primary questions she addresses are: What does ableism look like? What are its common manifestations? What are the causes of ableism against disabled people, and how are these perpetuated? How do disabled people respond to ableism, and how do responses affect well-being? What works to reduce ableism, promote understanding, and increase equality? And finally she asks, what research questions remain unanswered for a future research agenda? Nario-Redmond methodically examines these questions within the eight chapters of the book. She reminds the reader that the study of ableism, often defined as disability discrimination and prejudice, is still in a nascent stage compared with racism, homophobia, and sexism. Therefore, this book is seminal in its ambitious reach; it includes studies of people with physical, mental, and developmental disabilities, intersectional identities, and terminal and temporary disabilities in diverse geographical locations and social positions, and the stereotyping and hate crimes against these individuals and groups.

In the chapters that follow, Nario-Redmond describes the historical roots of ableism as embedded in the DNA of early hominids, and our success in passing on the heritable dispositions of danger avoidance. Even superficial differences that have no possibility of contagion can set off alarms of danger. This alarm system is interpreted as unconscious avoidance behavior, which often leads to conscious decisions about human value on individual and institutional levels. One of the existential origins of ableism lies in disability’s inconvenient reminder of our mortality. Violent responses to the disabled body are explained by the author as the profound fear of death, especially in Western society. These ancient unconscious hold-overs translate today into institutional language, particularly the terminology of special education, such as “special needs,” which has massive repercussions in how we perceive, treat, and understand disabled students and adults. As Simi Linton noted (1998), separation and low expectation in schools predict how children will internalize their own worth and will be valued as adults. Nario-Redmond suggests that the significantly broader consequence of institutional language, embedded in social discourse and reinforced in popular media and literature, is its negative influence on medical decisions, allocation of resources, and policies: the non-recognition that disability accommodation is a civil right.

Nario-Redmond introduces a large body of research in Chapter five and six (Chapter six is written in collaboration with Dr. Arielle Silverman) that examines how these learned and deeply embedded fears are manifested in ableist behaviors, from subtle non-verbal gestures, microaggressions, and inappropriate questions, to overt violence and harm. Yet the complexity of intergroup relations does not often result in purely negative attitudes, but rather ambivalence resulting from unfulfilled expectations of disability dependency and incompetency. As such, competent and ambitious disabled people pose a threat to non-disabled people in professional positions. The opposite and equally demeaning attitude toward disabled people who disrupt stereotypical expectations is the so-called object of admiration and inspiration. The danger of “inspirational porn” is the assumption that all people with disabilities have the power to “overcome” their disability, and are thus not in need of environmental support and legal protections.

Perhaps the most comprehensive messages are found in the final chapter, which also serves as a summary for the book. Nario-Redmond reminds us what the American landscape looked like before the passage of ADA. The benefits that contributed to the lives of both disabled and non-disabled people in its aftermath would not have been possible were it not for the struggle for disability rights. Chapter eight begins with a history of the disability rights movement that transformed US society beginning in the late 1970s with protests demanding the enforcement of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. The protests included the well-known occupation of the San Francisco Office of Housing, Education, and Welfare for 25 days. The legislative breakthroughs of IDEA and the ADA in the 1980s and 1990s, were not without their failures, however, such as the slow enforcement of the latter and the limitations of both. Parallel to these political events was the theoretical shift from the medical definition of disability to a social-political framework: the reframing of disability as existing within an oppressive, dehumanizing, and discriminatory environment. The culminating effect was the collective action of disability groups in which the common experiences of oppression, misrepresentation, and discrimination were the primary issues that held these disparate groups together.

In conclusion, Nario-Redmond returns to the five critical queries that were introduced in the Introduction chapter and restated in the beginning of this review. In response to the first question, “what does ableism look like?,” the author explains that depending on context, ableism has a range of visible effects—the primary components of prejudice: benevolence, paternalism, envy, derision and hostility. For example, benevolent ableism might look like inspiration porn, paternalism might take the form of pity, and envy might appear as a backlash when disabled people compete for positions of power and resources. The most damaging effects are derision and hostility, the result of the deeply embedded evolutionary fear rooted in survival, the fear of death, and the primitive need to dehumanize, violate, and pathologize the Other. Manifesting social change and equality in society will require collective action that confronts both interpersonal and institutionalized prejudice. Ambitious change, she says, lies in the action of allies that have the power to influence public opinion and policies that discriminate against disadvantaged groups. Finally, Nario-Redmond asks non-disabled readers to assume that disabled people will be in your life, in your audience, in your community, and that they are living quality lives; she asks her readers to discuss and acknowledge disability experiences without fear; to become an ally. I question, however, if being an ally of disabled people makes for true collaboration if uneven power relations remain unchanged. Does this framework perpetuate the dualism of self/other? I wonder whether support might instead become a form of collaboration. For example, Estée Klar (2020) suggests that activation might indicate more possibility and movement than activism, and intra-dependency might be a more dynamic word (in the sense of movement, change and relation) than interdependency, since both evoke connected rather than hierarchical relationships. Shouldn’t we go all the way and envision disability futures as existing in an altered system, a world of relations “that cultivate mutual collaboration and new possibilities to emerge?” (p. 36, footnote 29), especially for neurodiverse people who have a more relational and saturated connection to the environment.

In the Introduction chapter of Ableism: The Causes and Consequences of Disability Prejudice, Michelle R. Nario-Redmond begins with selections from Maria Palacios’s 2017 poem, Naming Ableism. It is an apt way to introduce a dauntingly researched book about the multi-layered term. It is also a forecast of how Nario-Redmond will parse, analyze, and contextualize ableism. While the majority of the content consists of findings from her own research, and of many other social-science and social-psychology researchers, Nario-Redmond also includes provocative images and helpful resources between the chapters and in the Appendix, such as links to blogs and websites. The author also personalizes the quantitative data with autobiographical voices between sections. They act as useful breathing spaces within the density of scientific research. As she explains, while this subject is replete with personal narratives, it is lacking in multi-disciplinary research about the conditions that cause ableism in intergroup, group and individual identity formation, and as a result of stereotyping. The purpose of the book is to fill this void in disability studies scholarship and to call for future research. The five primary questions she addresses are: What does ableism look like? What are its common manifestations? What are the causes of ableism against disabled people, and how are these perpetuated? How do disabled people respond to ableism, and how do responses affect well-being? What works to reduce ableism, promote understanding, and increase equality? And finally she asks, what research questions remain unanswered for a future research agenda? Nario-Redmond methodically examines these questions within the eight chapters of the book. She reminds the reader that the study of ableism, often defined as disability discrimination and prejudice, is still in a nascent stage compared with racism, homophobia, and sexism. Therefore, this book is seminal in its ambitious reach; it includes studies of people with physical, mental, and developmental disabilities, intersectional identities, and terminal and temporary disabilities in diverse geographical locations and social positions, and the stereotyping and hate crimes against these individuals and groups.

In the chapters that follow, Nario-Redmond describes the historical roots of ableism as embedded in the DNA of early hominids, and our success in passing on the heritable dispositions of danger avoidance. Even superficial differences that have no possibility of contagion can set off alarms of danger. This alarm system is interpreted as unconscious avoidance behavior, which often leads to conscious decisions about human value on individual and institutional levels. One of the existential origins of ableism lies in disability’s inconvenient reminder of our mortality. Violent responses to the disabled body are explained by the author as the profound fear of death, especially in Western society. These ancient unconscious hold-overs translate today into institutional language, particularly the terminology of special education, such as “special needs,” which has massive repercussions in how we perceive, treat, and understand disabled students and adults. As Simi Linton noted (1998), separation and low expectation in schools predict how children will internalize their own worth and will be valued as adults. Nario-Redmond suggests that the significantly broader consequence of institutional language, embedded in social discourse and reinforced in popular media and literature, is its negative influence on medical decisions, allocation of resources, and policies: the non-recognition that disability accommodation is a civil right.

Nario-Redmond introduces a large body of research in Chapter five and six (Chapter six is written in collaboration with Dr. Arielle Silverman) that examines how these learned and deeply embedded fears are manifested in ableist behaviors, from subtle non-verbal gestures, microaggressions, and inappropriate questions, to overt violence and harm. Yet the complexity of intergroup relations does not often result in purely negative attitudes, but rather ambivalence resulting from unfulfilled expectations of disability dependency and incompetency. As such, competent and ambitious disabled people pose a threat to non-disabled people in professional positions. The opposite and equally demeaning attitude toward disabled people who disrupt stereotypical expectations is the so-called object of admiration and inspiration. The danger of “inspirational porn” is the assumption that all people with disabilities have the power to “overcome” their disability, and are thus not in need of environmental support and legal protections.

Perhaps the most comprehensive messages are found in the final chapter, which also serves as a summary for the book. Nario-Redmond reminds us what the American landscape looked like before the passage of ADA. The benefits that contributed to the lives of both disabled and non-disabled people in its aftermath would not have been possible were it not for the struggle for disability rights. Chapter eight begins with a history of the disability rights movement that transformed US society beginning in the late 1970s with protests demanding the enforcement of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. The protests included the well-known occupation of the San Francisco Office of Housing, Education, and Welfare for 25 days. The legislative breakthroughs of IDEA and the ADA in the 1980s and 1990s, were not without their failures, however, such as the slow enforcement of the latter and the limitations of both. Parallel to these political events was the theoretical shift from the medical definition of disability to a social-political framework: the reframing of disability as existing within an oppressive, dehumanizing, and discriminatory environment. The culminating effect was the collective action of disability groups in which the common experiences of oppression, misrepresentation, and discrimination were the primary issues that held these disparate groups together.

In conclusion, Nario-Redmond returns to the five critical queries that were introduced in the Introduction chapter and restated in the beginning of this review. In response to the first question, “what does ableism look like?,” the author explains that depending on context, ableism has a range of visible effects—the primary components of prejudice: benevolence, paternalism, envy, derision and hostility. For example, benevolent ableism might look like inspiration porn, paternalism might take the form of pity, and envy might appear as a backlash when disabled people compete for positions of power and resources. The most damaging effects are derision and hostility, the result of the deeply embedded evolutionary fear rooted in survival, the fear of death, and the primitive need to dehumanize, violate, and pathologize the Other. Manifesting social change and equality in society will require collective action that confronts both interpersonal and institutionalized prejudice. Ambitious change, she says, lies in the action of allies that have the power to influence public opinion and policies that discriminate against disadvantaged groups. Finally, Nario-Redmond asks non-disabled readers to assume that disabled people will be in your life, in your audience, in your community, and that they are living quality lives; she asks her readers to discuss and acknowledge disability experiences without fear; to become an ally. I question, however, if being an ally of disabled people makes for true collaboration if uneven power relations remain unchanged. Does this framework perpetuate the dualism of self/other? I wonder whether support might instead become a form of collaboration. For example, Estée Klar (2020) suggests that activation might indicate more possibility and movement than activism, and intra-dependency might be a more dynamic word (in the sense of movement, change and relation) than interdependency, since both evoke connected rather than hierarchical relationships. Shouldn’t we go all the way and envision disability futures as existing in an altered system, a world of relations “that cultivate mutual collaboration and new possibilities to emerge?” (p. 36, footnote 29), especially for neurodiverse people who have a more relational and saturated connection to the environment.

References

• Klar, E. (2020). Neurodiversity in relation: An artistic intraethnography. Doctoral dissertation, York University, Toronto Ontario.
• Linton S. (1998). Claiming disability: Knowledge and identity. New York University Press.

Alice Wexler

Professor Emerita

SUNY New Paltz

Email: awex26@gmail.com

Of the dozens of juicy questions for future inquiry that Dr. Michelle Nario-Redmond provides at the end of Ableism: The Causes and Consequences of Disability Prejudice (Published by Wiley in 2019), the following stands out the most to me, in my various group-membership roles:

How do we build common ground between disadvantaged groups for effective cross-impairment coalitions?

Though it seemed impossible for this question to feel any more urgent after over a year and a half of COVID-19 and the parallel prominence of social movements to make Black Lives Matter, a recent article by my latest author crush unpacking a profoundly intersectional moment in the meme culture of what we should be calling (thanks to Neal Stephenson’s 30-year old book) Metaverse 1.0 – AKA social media, especially those platforms now owned by the maybe-monopoly formerly known as Facebook – reminded me again of the immense possibilities of disability as a political identity (see Annamma & Morrison, 2018, particularly the footnotes for more background on this). Nicole Froio’s article-that-should-become-a-book extrapolates from a celebrity’s (whack!) Instagram post as an exemplification of what the writer dubs the masculine “performativity of doing the least,” in which the “‘model’ heterosexual family consists of an all-sacrificing mother, a paternalistic father, and children free from disability.”

The timing of Froio’s deft analysis and the 34,000 likes it has garnered–compared to the upwards of 2 million bestowed upon the post in question—remind me of beloved if nuclear boomer Bill Maher’s synchronous editorial segment comparing “model citizen” Greta Thunburg (who is autistic), with 13 million followers, to the “model” (capitalist straight femme normate) Kylie Jenner, with 279 million.

So to return to the question put forth in Nario-Redmond’s Ableism: In our polarized, productivist socio-cultural context, how the f*#% do we build coalitions?!?

Discussions of disability can often involve references to ableism – and disableism, anapirophobia, anapirism, depending on your capability (a related construct I am using cheekily) for nuance in interaction with a given situation’s need for linguistic exactitude.

Ableism is both a straightforward and a complex concept. By opening with a lengthy excerpt from Maria Palacios’ 2017 poem, “Naming Ableism,” and citing numerous scholarly sources from over the years, Nario-Redmond’s Introduction exemplifies the individual, systemic, scholarly, and artistic dimensions inherent in any meaningful undertaking of the issues at hand – a phrase that could easily be considered ableist, and which I employ purposefully as a pedagogical illustration of the point. As Nario-Redmond (2021) writes after citing numerous sources published over the last few decades,

While multiple definitions help frame the scope of the concept, in the present volume, ableism is simply defined as prejudice and discrimination toward individuals simply because they are classified as disabled—regardless of whether the impairments are physical or mental, visible or invisible. In the field of social psychology, prejudice is traditionally conceptualized in terms of three related components…Affective emotions or attitudinal reactions, Behavioral actions/practices, and Cognitive beliefs/stereotypes that go beyond general negativity….Ableism can operate at multiple levels affecting personal self-perceptions, interpersonal interactions, and intergroup relations. (p. 6)

In defining ableism as a sprawling and yet specific construct, Nario-Redmond sets the book up as an expansion beyond the majority of social-scientific literature, which is “narrowly focused on a specific aspect of the subject or limited in scope to psychoanalytic tradition,” as the back cover states.

At nearly 400 pages, Ableism: The Causes and Consequences of Disability Prejudice, is indeed a thorough scholarly critique of how social psychology has failed “to conceptualize disability as a social category, a group membership,” and neglected to develop “an intergroup perspective on ableism [which] recognizes that while prejudice often occurs between individuals…prejudice also represents beliefs and motivations that derive from belonging to particular groups…often motivated to maintain their status differences (Tajfel & Turner, 1979)” (p. 9). With Activist Pages drawing from a wide range of media and resources at the conclusion of every chapter, the book is also a generous offering to current and emerging work involving disability studies, social/community psychology, and—in my opinion—clinical and behavioral psychology, sociology, and education. By systematically analyzing how disability prejudices function across social contexts, Nario-Redmond extends not only the literature, but also readers’ very bodyminds (a so-helpful phrase that further demonstrates the importance of word choice, which I have picked up thanks to disabled folks advancing disability justice discourses in multiple modalities, such as Leah Piepzna-Samarasingha’s Care Work in the Apocalypse: Dreaming Disability Justice).

If you live with a disability or an impairment, or are familiar with the interstitial connections between the communities with concerns common, if not adjacent, to disability justice and rights movements (e.g., neurodiversity, chronic pain, mental health), ableism is a word that readily makes sense to you. If not, there are excellent resources readily available online. Andrew Pulrang’s articles on ableism and disability in Forbes elucidate everything from the individual to the systemic, from current accessibility legislation/funding to the American work ethic. Definitions of these topics are like verbal infinity pools: the edges are at once very real, and also elusive; and if you don’t have one in your house, you probably contemplate them only occasionally. However, as Nario-Redmond (2021) shows throughout Ableism, the implications of pejorative stereotyping and associated reactions ranging from contempt to inspiration are vast.

Christina Anderson Bosch is an assistant professor of special education at the California State University, Fresno, also on Twitter @DocCABosch.

Michelle Nario-Redmond’s Ableism: The Causes and Consequences of Disability Prejudice is a comprehensive review and an incisive critical analysis of theory and research on stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination toward people with disabilities. From a multi-faceted investigation of the roots of ableism to a theoretically and empirically grounded analysis of strategies for social change, this book is a sophisticated and compelling examination of ableism and its consequences. Readers new to the study of disability as well as experienced disability studies scholars will benefit from Ableism, which offers its readers a wonderful introduction to and analysis of many critical concepts in social psychology. Those who are deeply familiar with the social psychology of stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination in the domains of race and gender will find new meaning in that work when viewed through a disability lens. With end-of-chapter discussion questions/activities and the voices of disabled people present throughout, this book is more than a means to understanding ableism, it’s a guide for dismantling it. A theoretically and empirically sophisticated social psychologist, a committed mother of a daughter with a physical disability, and a trusted ally in the disability studies community, Nario-Redmond is extremely well positioned to take on the task of organizing, synthesizing, and critically analyzing the research literature on ableism. She has given us a tremendous gift by having done just that.

Joan M. Ostrove

Macalester College

Saint Paul, Minnesota

Professor of Psychology and Director of the Serie Center for Scholarship and Teaching

Book Review of Ableism: The Causes and Consequences of Disability Prejudice

The interdisciplinary intervention Nario-Redmond is doing in her new book, Ableism: The Causes and Consequence of Disability Prejudice, is exactly what disability researchers across disciplines need. In her timely and extremely rich account of psychological theories and applications of stigma and stereotypes, Nario-Redmond transforms what has been traditionally considered an issue distinctive to rehabilitation psychology into knowledge applicable to all fields studying disability as a diversity category. Never before there has been a comprehensive review of empirical social science in such close conversation with the language, values and themes that encompass disability studies as this book does.

The connections Nario-Redmond makes between the socio-psychological forces that perpetuate prejudice against people with disabilities, ranging from evolutionary psychology and social Darwinism to popular culture, are crucial to the holistic understanding of how disability rights play out in society and in courts. I can easily see how legal studies, political science and law school professors could use those insights when discussing the impact that disability law has on our society.

I was excited to see how Nario-Redmond’s previous revolutionary work on the development of disability stereotypes, identity and the unintended consequences of disability simulations have been further developed and put into much broader context in this book. Another highlight for me is the inclusion of qualitative data that incorporates the voices of disabled individuals. This move of including voices not frequently heard in academic writing helps in bringing the carefully described quantitative findings and theoretical accounts to life. This book has something for everyone who is interested in the myriad aspects related to disability. There is no doubt in my mind that due to its accessible nature and broad appeal it would be used by academics and students for years to come.

Doron Dorfman Associate Professor of Law

Syracuse University College of Law

T 315.443.4108 ddorfman@law.syr.edu

Dineen Hall, Room 415, 950 Irving Ave., Syracuse, NY 13244 law.syr.edu

You can access my papers on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) here.