Ready or not: intersectionality is sweeping across classrooms in largely student-led strokes. Luckily, Patricia Hill Collins and Sirma Bilge, women who’ve penned texts to the tune of critical inquiry and praxis for years, remind us what intersectionality means and how it emerges in their latest collaboration, Intersectionality. Their book highlights concerns with intersectionality’s institutionalization while simultaneously arguing that many colleges and universities have missed opportunities to connect with the ways students live intersectionally (through jobs, sports, care-roles, and so on) (47). Urging readers away from insincere “diversity” and “cultural competence” claims, they explain that readers with vested interested in education work in contexts where “some forms of diversity remain more desirable than others” and that taking intersectionality seriously means engaging in critical, collaborative, coalition-building work “with people who really are different” (174, 169).
This descriptive study examined the topography, rate, and function of gestures expressed by seven children who are congenitally deaf-blind. Participants expressed a total of 44 conventional and idiosyncratic gestures. They expressed 6–13 communicative functions through gestures and 7 functions through a single type of gesture. They also expressed idiosyncratic gestures and used specific gestures for functions other than those that are typically associated with those gestures.
The study of transinstitutionalization necessarily varies by context. In this issue we guard against misconceptions that institutionalization is an action that took place in the past, whose loose ends we are now trying to tie together and where contemporary institutionalizing conditions are merely legacies that will, in time, fade away. To think of institutionalization as something of the past is to gently scratch its surface. And, given the wide breadth of transinstitutionalization and the many lives and stories it encompasses, we are aware of the limitations of covering this vast topic in one special issue. Yet, following a call to include disability in developing new approaches to understanding modernity (Van Trigt, 2019), our aim with this collection is to gather the latest research and reflections on transinstitutionalization as a topic that can take flight in our theoretical and cultural imaginations, a topic that can help us transcend the dangers of “theoretical complacency” that come with imagining the ongoing as a past, one-time thing (Bauman, 2000, p. 3).
The obligation to make broadcast media accessible is often taught as the last step in media production. This article describes a year-long project that paired disabled media-makers with students to create three films and a podcast rooted in critical access theory and disability justice, which necessitated creative, collaborative access planning at the onset of each production. This public pedagogy project promoted technical skills and attitudinal change by applying an intellectual partnership model that allowed students to develop resistance to dominant discourses about access that centered disability in new ways—as a desirable production feature rather than as simply an “add-on.”
This roundtable dialogue foregrounds the pragmatic experiences of five disabled journalists, four of whom are blind or visually impaired. The journalists speak to the politics of disability identity in the newsroom, their career trajectories amid ableist environments, and the ways in which they grapple with the longstanding traditions of disability representation. They engage in larger theoretical conversations about the relationship between disability and media in the fields of communication, journalism, and critical disability studies.Cette table ronde met au premier plan les expériences pragmatiques de cinq journalistes handicapés, dont quatre sont aveugles ou malvoyants. Les journalistes discutent la politique autour l’identité du handicap dans la salle de presse, de leurs trajectoires de carrière dans des environnements capacitistes et comment ils affrontent les grandes traditions des représentations du handicap. Ils s’engagent dans des conversations théoriques au sujet des relations entre l’handicap et les médias dans les domaines de la communication, du journalisme et des études d’incapacité critique.
In the context of an alarmingly sped up “slow death” for disabled people living under emergency COVID-19 medical triage protocols in Ontario, Canada, that produce, naturalize, and weaponize our vulnerability, we assert that slow digital story-making opens a threshold space filled with complex, relational, lively collaborative worldmaking. Here, we analyze videos made by three digital/multimedia story-makers, known as experimenters, who express the turbulence they lived through via storywork that described their unique yet entwined vantage points. Following Rosi Braidotti’s caution against capitalizing on tragedy, we offer Donna Haraway’s “compost writing” as an alternative to building theory. By compos(t)ing online multimedia stories that straddle digital/human/more-than-human realms, we take up “digital composting” as an unfinished methodology wherein we move collectively, even from the isolation of our own homes. We posit slow digital story-making as a way of “staying with the trouble” as we find ourselves worldmaking at the complex threshold between life/death, vulnerability/resistance, individual/relational, human/nonhuman. To compost digital multimedia stories is to leave them to ruminate in the complex entanglements of posthuman existences in urgent times.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.