No one is ever more than temporarily able-bodied. This fact frightens those of us who half-imagine ourselves as minds in a material context, who have learned to resent the publicness of raceor sexor otherwise-marked bodies and to think theories of embodiment as theories about the subjectivity of able-bodied comportment and practice under conditions of systematic injustice. From this perspective, disability studies may be twice marginalized—first, by able-bodied anxiety; second, by a tendency to treat disability as just another hindrance to social mobility, perhaps one best left to medical discourse or descriptive sociology. New work in disability studies, however, challenges established habits of thought about “having” a body. Disability studies dissolves deeply entrenched mind-andbody distinctions and further destabilizes the concept of the normal, whose charted internal ambiguities have themselves become too familiar. An ethics and a politics of disability are crucial to the work of the university—pedagogically, theoretically,
[1]
Carole Gallagher,et al.
American Ground Zero: The Secret Nuclear War
,
1993
.
[2]
Sharon L. Snyder,et al.
The body and physical difference : discourses of disability
,
1997
.
[3]
J. Porter.
The Body in Theory
,
1999
.
[4]
E. Clare.
Exile and Pride: Disability, Queerness, and Liberation
,
1999
.
[5]
Tabata Hideomi.
The Bather: Self-Portraiture from a Movable Chair
,
1999
.
[6]
Ruth Vanita.
Queering India: Same-Sex Love and Eroticism in Indian Culture and Society
,
2002
.