Hi I had attached the pdf and video lecture captions … I just want you to write on this question …. And pls cite The page number as well In this chapter, Alison Kafer writes, “I want to imagine a

Hi I had attached the pdf and video lecture captions … I just want you to write on this question …. And pls cite The page number as well In this chapter, Alison Kafer writes, “I want to imagine a
Welcome back. I’m here on treaty one territory and the homeland. 0:02 And today we’ll be looking at the phenomenon of fetishization in relation to disability, specifically in the form of devoteeism. 0:07 As much as the section’s lecture video is focused on the week’s content, 0:17 And as Alison Kafer does in her chapter, reflecting on the whys behind our feelings and responses. 0:25 The image that I’ve chosen to start us off with on our content slide is a photo of a multimedia installation by artist Mari Katayama. 0:32 Katayama is a Japanese artist and photographer who was born with a condition called tibial hemimelia, 0:41 which causes foreshortening and distortion of the lower limbs and a pronounced limb difference affecting her left hand. 0:47 As a young person, 0:54 she made the difficult decision to opt for amputation of portions of her legs to allow her to walk more freely with prosthetic legs. 0:55 She frequently appears in her own works, where her unusual body challenges the viewer to think about body, representations and expectations. 1:03 In this photo titled Shell, Katayama is seated with her amputations very visible and is surrounded by a variety of objects, 1:13 textiles and backgrounds in a dreamy and surreal, washed out tone. 1:22 Also within the photo are prosthetic legs and feet and other objects that suggest forms of body parts. 1:27 In order to think in a nuanced and critical way about fetishization, we need to start with what the term fetish means. 1:38 Well, what it means depends on whom you ask. In anthropology, a fetish is an object that’s considered to be imbued with supernatural power, 1:45 such as the object pictured on the upper right from Togo, made of dried gourds, fibers and other natural materials. 1:54 It might be owned or tended to by a shaman or priest or healer, and is generally considered powerful, 2:01 holy and even dangerous. In the realms of psychology and psychiatry, 2:08 the term fetish has traditionally been applied to sexual attraction or arousal 2:13 Well, that’s kind of a problem because who decides what is or is not sexual? 2:22 The Cambridge English Dictionary presents one definition: an object or a body part other than the sexual organs. 2:27 They’re not sexual organs as such. And what about legs, body shape, eyes? 2:38 Smile? It’s not usually considered a fetish to be aroused by these things. 2:45 But what about, if not legs, but feet? Well, that one usually gets the fetish label. 2:50 And what about arousal by legs, but only by legs that don’t fit cultural ideals? 2:56 What about legs that are fat or especially hairy or otherwise different in form or function than most people’s, 3:01 or partially or fully amputated or prosthetic? 3:08 In thinking about fetishization, it’s useful to think critically about what parts of the body and what varieties of those parts are widely 3:12 considered appropriate to regard as objects of attraction and how these norms are culturally influenced. 3:20 Among those who study fetishes, there’s no universally accepted explanation as to why people develop them. 3:28 Probably the most common explanation draws on Sigmund Freud’s psychoanalytic foundation, 3:34 asserting that early life conditioning from specific experiences, 3:40 especially at key moments of psychosexual development, manifest as fetishes during sexual maturity. 3:44 Others have argued that fetishes stem from inborn neurological factors, that those with a fetish are, as it were, 3:51 born this way. Today in mental health disciplines, fetishes may be referred to as paraphilias, 3:58 which is a little more scientific sounding than its predecessor term sexual perversions. 4:06 Over the course of the late 20th and early 21st centuries, there’s been an increasing move to pathologize fetishes. 4:11 That is, to shift away from viewing them through the lens of abnormalities that need treatment and towards viewing them as more benign variations. 4:19 Kinks, if you like, 4:27 provided that they don’t cause harm to those who have them or to others. When they are linked to risk of physical or psychological harm, 4:29 the psychiatric system labels them paraphilia disorders. As the very notion of 4:37 disability assumes a normate body and mind against which people are evaluated, 4:43 the designation of attraction to disabled bodies as a fetish also assumes that there are types of 4:49 bodies that a quote-unquote normal person would be attracted to — bodies that are acceptable to desire. 4:55 We’ve already encountered this idea in some of our earlier materials, especially the Sins Invalid documentary. Within an ableist society, 5:03 some bodies are generally not seen as appropriate to desire or as capable of being legitimately desired. 5:11 To have such a body or to desire such a body is to mark one as deviant, as a freak, 5:18 to use the language of one to Mat Fraser’s performances. 5:25 In the context of our course and our reading this week, it’s desire for physically disabled bodies and especially amputee bodies, 5:28 that’s of interest to us, especially in the form of so-called devoteeism and selective attraction towards such bodies. 5:36 Abasiophilia refers to attraction specifically towards those with mobility related disabilities, 5:50 especially wheelchair users and those with leg braces, canes or other assistive devices. 5:56 Remember ET Russian expressing concern over whether they were fetishizing the cane of a person to whom they were attracted? 6:02 This is the phenomenon that they were referencing. 6:09 Acrotomophilia refers to those with amputations or otherwise partially or fully missing limbs, 6:12 acroto- means cut off, 6:18 though this label also encompasses those who are aroused by congenital limb differences as well. 6:20 Is it harmful to disabled people and amputees when others’ selective arousal or attraction to their physical differences is given a pathological label? 6:26 Or is this pathologization merited in certain cases? 6:35 These can be difficult questions. The boundaries of what constitutes fetishization of disability are anything but clear. 6:40 Putting aside for now the debate over what, if any, line exists between erotica and pornography, 6:50 these categories of creative work contain bodies of writings, photography and films that specifically and explicitly involve disabled people. 6:56 The two almost-randomly selected books from an Amazon search whose covers I’ve highlighted on 7:06 the right are examples of this — probably not future winners of the Booker Prize for literature, 7:10 but erotica rarely aspires to be such. 7:16 The first from a book titled Disabled Erotica Volume Three 7:19 pictures a young female figure standing with crutches and leg braces, features blurred to obscure her identity. 7:23 The second, called Disabled Desires Wicked Wheels, shows a male figure seated in a wheelchair turned away from the viewer with a downcast expression. 7:31 Given the focus of our reading this week, it might be a little surprising to encounter a story in the second book here about a 7:41 disabled man who is desired by an able bodied woman and which is written by a woman, 7:47 too. Most self-identified devotees are men, but not all. 7:52 But also, are written or visual sexual narratives that center disabled people and their disabilities inevitably fetishizing? 7:58 Where is the line, if there is one, 8:07 between what we might call a disability inclusive — or keeping with the language of many of our readings — a crip erotica or porn and a fetishizing one? 8:09 another step yet, is fetishization itself, even always a negative or harmful thing? 8:21 These are legitimately challenging questions which defy easy answers. 8:28 Please take a moment and look at each of these photos. 8:35 Each represents an image of a person who uses a wheelchair dressed or posed in a way that suggests a sexual context of some sort. 8:38 Do you think that any or all of these photos are fetishizing? 8:46 How would you explain to someone else what makes each of these photos fetishizing or not? 8:50 There’s no right or wrong answers here. 8:57 But there is, I think, usefulness in reflecting on what determines fetishization versus crip desire or the like in these images. 9:00 Does the pose matter? The perspective, the clothing, the facial expression, the body type, the gender, 9:09 or whether or not we’re familiar with the individual beyond the context of a single photo, 9:18 being able to relate to them as multifaceted people? Some interesting points to reflect upon, 9:23 and we’ll return to them in Zoom meeting this week. The film work of Loree Erickson is an interesting example to consider. 9:29 Erickson teaches at the University of Toronto’s Sexual Diversity Studies Centre. 9:39 She’s the director and star of several porn films and a past winner at the Feminist Porn Awards based in Toronto. 9:43 She’s a disabled white woman originally from the U.S., but now living in Canada, 9:50 pictured here in a bright pink and leopard print mini dress and seated in a wheelchair. She identifies herself as a femmegimp, 9:55 another reclamation, like crip, of a disability oriented slur with a touch of queering, too. 10:02 She’s one of the key figures in establishing what she calls queercrip as a distinct genre of pornography. 10:09 And she’s also an acquaintance of mine. I know her from grad school. 10:16 I’d love to show you her very short film, Sexxxy, but it’s only available on DVD in our campus library, not online. 10:20 So I’ll describe it to you. In the film, which is only about 3 minutes long, 10:27 which is being tuned up or fixed in a repair shop, interspersed with close ups of her face, 10:36 especially her hot pink lipstick as she makes what I would term lustful expressions. 10:42 The audio is a famous and controversial Cyndi Lauper song She Bop, which is supposedly about masturbation, 10:47 along with some bits of half muffled audio of Erickson and the repairman speaking about repairing the chair. 10:55 Does such a film, which depicts images of a wheelchair being — and forgive me — oiled and screwed, 11:02 combined with glimpses of sexualized facial expressions and a sexy soundtrack constitute the fetishization of disability, 11:09 specifically in the form of fetishizing a mobility device? 11:16 Does it matter in this case that the disabled star of the film is also the filmmaker? 11:20 Does it depend on who the viewer is or what their motivations are for viewing the film? 11:25 Would it be different if the mechanic here were touching Erickson’s flesh body rather than what is effectively her mechanical body? 11:31 These categorizations can be hard to make. 11:39 In the reading this week, the focus is placed in not only on disability in general, but primarily on amputees, 11:43 specifically female amputees and the straight men who express desire for them. As a culture, 11:50 do we think differently about amputation from other forms of disability in terms of the acceptability of sexual desirability? 11:56 I’ve included two screenshots here of dating websites oriented towards dating people with disabilities and people with amputations respectively. 12:04 When you look at them, do you have different responses to each? They’re pretty similar in design and text. 12:12 A light skinned woman and a light skinned man in each, language of finding love or finding your perfect match. 12:18 And ambiguity over whether the intent is for disabled people and amputees to find other disabled and amputee folks. 12:25 If you had a different first reaction to each — or if you didn’t, 12:37 but you think others might — give some thought to what might be behind these responses. 12:41 The chapter we’re reading this week is by Alison Kafer, 12:49 who’s an associate professor in feminist studies at the University of Texas, and she works primarily in disability studies. 12:52 She’s a queer white woman and is also an amputee herself. 12:59 And her lived experience is at the heart of this chapter, which comes from her acclaimed 2013 book, Feminist Queer Crip. 13:02 Including her affective or felt responses to attention from men who identify with this community, 13:16 specifically seeking amputee women for sex or relationships. 13:23 the logic of devoteeism, or the underlying way of conceiving of desire towards and desirability of amputees. 13:32 Specifically, she argues, devotee men insist that they’re the only ones who are genuinely attracted to women with amputations without any reservations, 13:41 while insisting that all non-devotees feel disgusted by amputations. 13:51 Kafer speaks of amputation sites as never neutral in devotees discourse. 14:00 They’re framed as always attractive to devotees and repulsive to others, and as the, quote, 14:06 defining aesthetic factor in devotees’ attraction, the place where the value of a potential partner lies. 14:12 In this sense, Kafer argues, there is, quote, no position outside of the desire-disgust binary. 14:20 These are the only two conceivable possibilities in relation to amputation sites in the mind of devotees, 14:27 either their own desire towards amputation sites or everyone else’s disgust. 14:34 While this is a problematic perspective, it also has a certain power or pull that comes from its apparent plausibility. 14:40 Society at large really does tend to treat amputations as something that disqualifies or at least detracts from potential romantic or sexual partners. 14:48 And most amputee women have likely experienced something of this attitude expressed towards them. 14:57 Beyond the underlying problem with this way of thinking about amputees, 15:04 another set of less-abstract problems are presented by some of the attitudes and 15:07 behaviors that devotee men have exhibited to Kafer and other amputee women. 15:11 She encounters these men attributing self-hatred to women who reject them, claiming that they don’t fully accept their own amputations. 15:17 woman in an ableist world. 15:30 And often identify women’s insecurity with their own sexual attractiveness 15:33 as amputee women’s true problem, to which these men’s love and devotion act as a solution, 15:37 as the way for amputee women to achieve the greatest happiness and potential. 15:43 Consistently, they represent amputee women’s problems as individual level, largely attitudinal ones, and not as systemic structural ones. 15:48 Some of the problematic behaviours Kafer identifies include secretly following amputee women and 16:00 photographing them without their knowledge, and occasionally outright harassing them. 16:05 Online communities allow devotees to share their photos and sightings or accounts of spotting amputees in public, 16:11 sometimes with identifying details of time and place. 16:18 Kafer even refers to one man who proposed setting up an online register of attractive amputees, including names and addresses without their consent. 16:24 In some ways, the problems that such behavior presents for amputee women are ones that are familiar 16:33 even to many non-disabled and non amputee women and femme presenting people. 16:38 But the intensity of the targeting here, at least, seems distinctive. 16:43 In an attempt to defend themselves, 16:48 devotee men often frame their attention as harmless and flattering and believe themselves to be misunderstood by society, 16:50 insisting that greater acceptance of devoteeism will lead to greater happiness for amputees. 16:57 Who should, they maintain, be pleased to be the target of their desire. 17:03 It’s really not surprising that with this kind of sexist and heterocentric rhetoric and behavior, 17:07 many amputee women find devotees to be at least an annoyance and at worst, a threat to their physical safety and psychological well-being. 17:13 But this also leaves Kafer with questions about why, then, quite a few female amputees choose to participate in devotee communities. 17:23 and exchanging or selling photos and videos of themselves, among other activities. 17:37 Reflecting on this in light of her own experiences, challenges and observations, 17:42 Kafer suggests that many amputee women find it meaningful to see images of others with similar bodies being presented as positive and desirable, 17:47 something which, as we know, is rare in the culture at large. 17:55 Many women seem to find support and community, especially connections with other amputee women, through these online sites, 18:00 as well as information and resources about practical matters ranging from health care to shoe exchanges 18:07 (where people with only one foot exchange footwear with others who have only the opposite foot). 18:14 Kafer speculates on how amputee women in these communities may act as something of sexual role models, 18:19 offering a rare opportunity for other female amputees to see and hear about engagement in sexual activities, 18:26 the use of medical or mobility equipment as part of sex play, 18:32 and examples of sexual self-acceptance. Partway through her chapter, Kafer also speaks directly to her non amputee readers. 18:36 If you happen to be a non amputee, non-disabled and a non devotee, 18:45 then she calls you to contemplate the reasons that these discussions may hold interest for you, 18:50 and to think about how people with bodies and desires that are closer to the norm may derive pleasure and affirmation out of comparing themselves 18:55 to amputees and devotees and experiencing their own body and their own desires as normative in contrast to the non-normative bodies and desires, 19:04 respectively, of amputees and devotees. 19:14 Now this experience will depend on what other identities a person has. 19:19 Many other people who are not disabled, not amputees and not devotees, also have other types of socially stigmatized bodies or desires. 19:24 But there’s still a reaffirmation of ableist privilege and being reminded of one’s 19:33 status as outside of this particular dynamic and logic of disabled person and devotee. 19:37 But what then is the way out of this pattern of thinking that underlies devotee logic, 19:44 out of the belief that finding disability desirable in a partner is always pathological or abnormal in some way? 19:49 Kafer looks for inspiration to the example of one fairly high profile relationship 19:56 within the world of disability justice, that between Eli Clare and his partner, 20:01 Samuel Lurie. The photo at right shows Clare and Lurie standing together in a partial embrace. 20:05 Eli Clare, a white trans man with cerebral palsy, is a very well known disability 20:12 writer, and activist Sam Lurie is also a white trans man who founded and runs an organization 20:17 that trains clinicians and other service providers regarding trans people’s needs. 20:23 And Clare, for his part, has written about how the acceptance from Lurie of this distinct, 20:34 usually stigmatized aspect of his physical and sexual interactions has profoundly 20:39 impacted the ways that he understands and accepts his own body and sexuality, 20:45 helping him to overcome a sense of shame about these tremors. 20:50 prompts Kafer, for her part, to reflect on what this relationship has to teach us. 21:00 to a relationship without reducing the desirability of a person to that particular quality. 21:11 But also the ways their relationship is based on an understanding of how broader social, 21:18 cultural, economic and political systems, 21:22 structured as they are by ableism, impact sexuality, including desire, desirability and shame. 21:25 Devotee 21:34 logic, by contrast, relies on the belief that disability and bodily difference are inherently and inevitably repulsive to all but a select few. 21:35 But disability justice points to the ways that ableist bias, including disgust towards amputations or other forms of disability, 21:45 are constructed, and with collective effort can be dismantled to facilitate greater acceptance of 21:54 disabilities and physical differences as gifts that can add value and enjoyment to a relationship, 22:00 not as fetishized qualities to which desirability can be reduced. 22:06 It’s this idea of sexual possibilities that I’d like us to look at through this week’s response. 22:13 Here’s the prompt to which I’d like you to respond in your writing. 22:19 In this chapter, Alison Kafer writes: I want to imagine a sexuality that is rich and robust, 22:22 not in spite of impairment and not fetishistically because of impairment, but in relationship to it. 22:29 Thinking about the various individuals whose thoughts and lives we’ve encountered in our written audio and video sources in the course so far, 22:36 identify two people whom you believe express views that fit well with Kafer’s vision of sexuality, 22:45 as presented here in her chapter. Relying on course sources, 22:51 explain in your response how each person’s writing, interview, performance and or other work offers such a perspective. 22:56 Again, the rest of our week follows our usual pattern of a Zoom meeting and response submission, assessments, and feedback. 23:11 We’re going to be looking at a theoretical approach known as Crip Theory, which has become very important in disability studies in recent years, 23:26 drawing on both queer theory and disability studies to offer a new analytical lens. 23:33 The scholar who first named and wrote at length about Crip theory, 23:40 American researcher Robert McRuer, has written quite a bit, 23:43 rather than read a selection from one of his books or articles, 23:51 we’re going to watch a very short video on his work, 23:55 and read an interview/discussion among McRuer and two Canadian scholars about Crip Theory and McRuer’s work and Crip Theory perspectives. 23:58 so please give yourself time to read it. The second reading that’s part of the same section, by Swedish scholar Lotta Lofgren 24:10 Martenson, 24:17 performs a sort of bridging between Crip theory and the topic of intellectual disability, 24:18 which we’ll then continue with for the remainder of the course. 24:23 If you’re new to discussions around sexuality in the lives of people with intellectual disabilities, this should be a particularly helpful reading. 24:26 The argument that the author makes is a fairly nuanced one, however. 24:35 So please do read it with care. I look forward to seeing you later in the week. 24:38 And bye for now.