The class reading
entitled, The Normality of Doing Things Differently: Bodies, Spaces and
Disability Geography, by Nancy Hansen and Chris Philo, examined the
way in which society behaved towards individuals considered to be
"disabled." Interviews with disabled women revealed a shared feeling
of pressure to "pass as normal, to perform in a manner as closely
corresponding as possible to an able-bodied way of doing things" (Hansen
and Philo, 495). A common theme being ridiculed, chastised and belittled emerged
from the accounts of the differently abled women. Basic manners preach the
importance of not staring and respecting the privacy of others, yet, this rule
doesn't appear to count for those unable to meet the norm.
In recent years, an
interesting trend has grown in popularity in the form of reality TV shows.
Programs such as,“My
Giant Face Tumor,” “Little People, Big World,” and “The 1,000 Lb. Man” are just
a few of the several series and specials on national networks like TLC,
National Geographic Channel and Discovery Fit & Health. It seems as though
every week a new show featuring individuals with physical or mental
abnormalities is being advertised. In fact, these shows are wildly popular and
often lead in ratings for the network.
Not
only are television networks benefitting from the challenges and altered
lifestyles of disable persons, but social networking sites are also a platform
for similar content. Excerpts from a xojane.com article
expand on this movement.
"In
general, videos of people with unusual disabilities are view magnets on
YouTube. One video of a 13-year-old girl with a terrible growth on her face has
10 million views, while
another of two 16-year-old conjoined twins has 44 million. Long ago
folks would pay 5 cents to see the "freaks" hiding behind a circus
curtain, but now the same experience comes for free through a YouTube
search."
The most important
questions is what effect this exposure has on those who put their lives and
disabilities in front of the camera. What is the motive? Is it to gain easy
ratings and attention without considering the potentially negative effects on
the participants? Or, are producers and at-home video uploaders truly
attempting to promote awareness and acceptance of individuals with unique
conditions?
As Hansen and Philo
describe in their article, “impaired bodies—somehow ‘broken,’ ‘crumpled’ or ‘disfigured’—have
always risked being regarded in some ways sub-human, pre-human, ‘freak,’ ‘mutant’
or ‘monster.’” (Hansen and Philo 496). In this age of modern technology, are we
becoming more accepting of disabled individuals or merely exploiting them?
I think you bring up a great example of disability geographies here. I ask myself a similar question to the one that concluded your post almost every time I watch television. And I think, to risk a simplistic answer, it's a little bit of both. To some extent, these television shows are exploitative, especially on the part of networks who know people will tune in to marvel at those who literally embody "otherness."
ReplyDeleteBut at the same time, no one is forcing these people to be on television. At some point in the process they chose to let themselves be filmed, and I think what that boils down to is incredible bravery, no matter how much they're getting paid. Unfortunately, the question becomes significantly murkier when the internet and youtube get involved, and that's a can of worms I don't want to open.
I'm looking forward to watching AMC's "Freakshow," as the people who are filmed for it seem to view the show as a platform for the reclamation of the word "freak." I expect the program to showcase some interesting exampled of the normality of doing things differently.