This is a pdf and there is a quiz in which there are 8 mcq that you have to answer me

We can write your essays! Let our essay writing experts help you get that A in your next essay. Place your order today, and you will enjoy it. No plagiarism.


Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper

This is a pdf and there is a quiz in which there are 8 mcq that you have to answer me

This is a pdf and there is a quiz in which there are 8 mcq that you have to answer me
1 Introduction Sexual Ableism e xposed In January 2011, the Honorable Mr. Justice Mostyn of the Court of Protection in the United Kingdom ruled that a forty- one- year- old man, “Alan,” who has an intellectual disability, was banned from participat – ing in sexual relations, particularly with his male partner, “Kieron.” In the ruling, Alan is described as having “a vigorous sex drive” that “has led to sexual relations with persons of both genders, although it is not suggested that Alan has ever had heterosexual coitus.” 1 The judge remarks in his ruling that Alan and Kieron’s relationship in – volved penetrative anal sex, mutual masturbation, and oral sex. Both Alan and Kieron live in public housing. Kieron’s disability status is not disclosed in the court ruling or subsequent journalistic accounts. The local housing council that provides residential housing and support for Alan brought the suit to restrict the relationship. This judicial example reflects an ableist trend to deny the sexual agency of individuals based on assumptions of inappropriateness and incompetency. Ableism in its most broad interpretation reflects discrimination or oppression of disabled people, which can take the form of denial of rights and access and the perpetuation of stigma, hatred, and othering. The judge based his ruling on an assessment of Alan’s inability to understand the following three areas: (1) the mechanics of the act; (2) that there are health risks involved, particularly the acquisition of sexually transmitted and sexually transmissible infections; (3) that sex between a man and a woman may result in the woman becoming preg – nant. 2 In the final ruling, the judge instructed the support staff at Alan’s home to provide him with sex education. After a period of nine months, Alan was to return to the court for a final ruling on his ability to engage and consent to sexual activities. 3 This case helps to illuminate the following questions regarding sexu – ality and intellectual disability: Why is the sexuality of those with Gill, Michael. Already Doing It : Intellectual Disability and Sexual Agency, University of Minnesota Press, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwinnipeg/detail.action?docID=2011451. Created from uwinnipeg on 2021-01-01 15:24:01. Copyright © 2015. University of Minnesota Press. All rights reserved. 2 Introduction intellectual disabilities often seen as “risky” or “inappropriate” by teachers, parents, support staff, professionals, judges, and the media as well as those with the most daily contact with them (people with intel – lectual disabilities)? Does having an intellectual disability generate the perception of higher “risk ” than having a physical disability? Is intel – lectual functioning a prerequisite to sexual behaviors? Should sexual citizenship depend on IQ levels? There are individuals who would an – swer affirmatively to those last two questions. In their view, people with an atypical level of intelligence should not be allowed to engage in sexual activity. Despite their faith in the ability of intelligence tests to accurately diagnose and measure, this constituency might not agree on what the cutoff point should be. This is further problematized by inconsistent and ever- changing assessments of intelligence. The court ruling raises important questions around the intersec – tions of homophobia and ableism. For example, legal blogger Anna Raccoon remarks that “this may not be outright homophobia— but I think a general distaste for gay sex underpins the council’s attitudes. The court debates issues of informed consent, wondering if any part – ner might be accused of raping him. Would this issue even have been raised if they were discussing a heterosexual relationship?” 4 Disability rights activist Dennis Queen brings up important points regarding privacy and professional oversight: “Landlords don’t usually get the right to police our behaviour in the bedroom, but for people in sup – ported living this is not unusual.” 5 While both critics shy away from the other category at work in the case (disability for Raccoon and homo – sexuality for Queen), the case cannot be fully understood by con – sidering one category and ignoring the other. Rather, it is instructive to consider how ableism and heteronormativity function to regulate Alan’s sexual expression. This case is useful when considering the ways in which private decisions about sexuality are made public, particularly through judicial rulings and journalistic accounts. The case highlights how certain categories (here intellectual disability) seem to warrant explicit mention and interrogation of sexual activity in the name of denial of sexual rights. As this case illustrates, there remains a culture of sexual repression where individuals struggle to advocate for their claim to equal citizenship and right to privacy. Disabled people who participate in same- sex sexual activities in group homes are subjected Gill, Michael. Already Doing It : Intellectual Disability and Sexual Agency, University of Minnesota Press, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwinnipeg/detail.action?docID=2011451. Created from uwinnipeg on 2021-01-01 15:24:01. Copyright © 2015. University of Minnesota Press. All rights reserved. Introduction 3 to heightened surveillance. Private sexual decisions and actions are increasingly being made public. Given the unstable nature of assessments of ability as they pertain to sexuality, as well as an understanding that not everyone needs to be or is sexual, I would like to consider why the sexuality of individu – als with intellectual disabilities is seen as dangerous, or needing over – sight, as illustrated in this recent court case. Considering prerequisites to become sexual, it is helpful to refer to Tobin Siebers’s notion of “the ideology of ability,” which he defines as “the preference for able- bodiedness” that governs sexual qualifications. 6 To what extent is the denial of ability to be sexual (or desexual – ization) for individuals with intellectual disabilities connected to the idea that they (individuals with intellectual disabilities) lack the abil – ity (as assumed by those without intellectual disabilities) to be sexual? Connected to the “we know what’s best” paternalism is the applica – tion of able- bodied standards to adults with intellectual disabilities, who are perceived as perpetual children (as IQ is often translated into mental age), thereby erasing the embodied knowledge and unique epistemology about life and physical maturity of individuals with in – tellectual disabilities. The erasure of knowledge and experience, espe – cially in relation to purposeful, meaningful, and sexual life, further illustrates the denial of disability as a worthwhile and meaningful state to occupy. Rod Michalko writes of the “difference that disability makes” and how disability is an embodied experience, one that “finds its sensibility within the ways in which a collective conceives of what it means to be human and how it makes a place for the individual in what it socially organizes as a human community. Making a place for difference, including disability, is a feature of every culture and society.” 7 The judge’s desire to regulate the queer sexuality between Alan and Kieron illustrates what I call sexual ableism. Sexual ableism is the system of imbuing sexuality with determinations of qualifica – tion to be sexual based on criteria of ability, intellect, morality, physi – cality, appearance, age, race, social acceptability, and gender confor – mity. Intellectual disability remains a characteristic or condition that disqualifies participation because of sexual ableism, which denies an understanding of disability as a valuable difference that yields unique perspectives of personhood, competence, sexuality, agency, and abil – ity. In Already Doing It, I trace the contours of sexual ableism while Gill, Michael. Already Doing It : Intellectual Disability and Sexual Agency, University of Minnesota Press, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwinnipeg/detail.action?docID=2011451. Created from uwinnipeg on 2021-01-01 15:24:01. Copyright © 2015. University of Minnesota Press. All rights reserved. 4 Introduction exploring the ways in which certain bodies exhibit their sexuality with – out regulation or scrutiny, whereas others are subject to continual over – sight and regulation. In Aberrations in Black, Roderick Ferguson writes that “queer of color analysis presumes that liberal ideology occludes the intersect – ing saliency of race, gender, sexuality, and class in forming social practices. Approaching ideologies of transparency as formations that have worked to conceal those intersections means that queer of color analysis has to debunk the idea that race, class, gender, and sexual – ity are discrete formations, apparently insulated from one another.” 8 Ferguson’s answer to the myth of discreteness is to facilitate a “queer of color critique,” which fosters disidentification with exclusionary representations and theoretical formations and points to “the ruptural possibilities” of “minority cultural forms.” 9 Ferguson’s pronunciation of the falsehood of discreteness helps me to articulate a system of sex – ual regulation, sexual ableism that operates through the suturing of notions of appropriateness and fitness that are in turn informed by assumptions based on identity categories. Already Doing It explores the intersections of notions of competency, agency, risk, and sexual citizenship to examine how individuals labeled as intellectually dis – abled disidentify with systems of regulation and oversight in their sexual and reproductive lives. Robert McRuer argues that systems of exclusion based on limited conceptions of heterosexuality and able- bodiedness inherently depend on each other to maintain their domi – nance. 10 McRuer considers that crip/queer perspectives can challenge assumptions about which bodies are able to inhabit and lay claim to normative conceptions of agency, family, and, ultimately, identity. 11 Individuals with intellectual disabilities are productively unruly bod – ies that challenge the sexual ableist notion that their sexual practices are naïve, deviant, immoral, or dangerous. Alan’s expression of sexu – ality with Kieron demonstrates how systems of domination rarely op – erate in isolation. The notion that Alan’s experience is an aberration, an isolated event, hides the potential coalitions that can challenge sexual ableism. In what follows, I explore the ways in which reproduc – tive justice, critical disability studies, and queer theory can articulate notions of kinship not tied to ableist, sexist, racist, classist, gendered, or heterosexist qualifications of family, agency, citizenship, and ability. One manifestation of sexual ableism is a suspicion that those whose Gill, Michael. Already Doing It : Intellectual Disability and Sexual Agency, University of Minnesota Press, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwinnipeg/detail.action?docID=2011451. Created from uwinnipeg on 2021-01-01 15:24:01. Copyright © 2015. University of Minnesota Press. All rights reserved. Introduction 5 sexuality is regulated (or denied) should also not reproduce. Michel Desjardins writes of parental negotiation in Quebec to seek steril – ization of children with intellectual disabilities in order to facilitate their sexual lives. Parents created an “extraordinary sexuality” that “is neither the sexuality of the angel, or the eternal child, not that of the majority of the population (who are not prohibited from repro – ducing).” 12 The parents who Desjardins interviewed wanted their chil – dren to remain sexual without the “threat” of reproduction. In order to manage these seemingly conflicting desires, the parents “arrived at the same conclusion: the need to liberate their children from the threatening ability to reproduce in order that they might express geni – tal sexuality in safety. To achieve this goal, the parents required that their child adopt permanent contraceptive devices. Thus, a new sexu – ality is created for the disabled adolescent or young adult: a ‘special sexuality’— or, if you prefer, ‘an adapted sexuality,’ conceived at the scale of the individual’s unfitness— that includes sexual intercourse but prohibits reproduction.” 13 I am struck with the language of lib – eration and threat in the above quote. Parental liberation hides the agency of the individual, whereas threat transforms the act of repro – duction into an action, or outcome, which requires intervention. I also find myself wondering about the implications of this “adapted sexual – ity” for individuals who seek intimacy without participating in sexual actions, as well as individuals who desire reproduction and would pro – vide nurturing environments to their children. On one hand, these parents recognized that their children could be (or ought to be) sexual beings and that in order to remain sexual they sought sterilization as a way to guarantee the ability to participate in heterosexual sexual – it y. 14 On the other hand, the parents engage their children in a con – version process wherein “the intellectually disabled person’s desire for offspring” transitions into “a desire for infertility.” 15 This brief exam – ple, from Desjardins, illustrates the conflicting desires that are present when discussing aspects of sexuality and reproduction for individu – als with the label of intellectual disability. Various communities con – nected to the individual seek expressions of sexuality that can run the gamut from active desexualization to sexual intimacy to expressions of sexual activity divorced from reproduction to a linking of sexuality with reproduction and parenthood. Some commentators link freedom of sexuality and lack of oversight Gill, Michael. Already Doing It : Intellectual Disability and Sexual Agency, University of Minnesota Press, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwinnipeg/detail.action?docID=2011451. Created from uwinnipeg on 2021-01-01 15:24:01. Copyright © 2015. University of Minnesota Press. All rights reserved. 6 Introduction around reproduction. Reproduction, or the ability to reproduce, trans – lates, according to Siebers, to fewer restrictions placed on sexual life and expression. Gay men and lesbians, gender queer and gender non – conforming persons, racial minority populations, poor people, and disabled people are often discouraged to reproduce for fear that they “cannot, will not, or should not contribute to the future of the human race. They will not reproduce, but if they do, the expectation is that the results will be tainted.” 16 Early on, disability studies theorists argued that discussions of disability rights should also include an articula – tion of sexual rights. 17 When sexuality and disability are discussed, it is often in the context of medicine and rehabilitation: disability as a con – dition that limits sexual expression and reproductive capacity. 18 Many of the materials examined here illustrate this reality. The annals of in – tellectual disability and sexuality are dominated by materials authored by individuals in the medical and rehabilitative sciences. In an effort to shift attention away from the reductive equation of sexual rights as freedom of reproduction, Siebers presents ways in which disabled people can “explore an alternative sexual culture based on the artfulness of disability” and imagines disability as a “complex embodiment that enhances sexual activities and pleasure.” 19 People with intellectual disabilities certainly are already participating in the “artfulness of disability.” This project explores the restrictive oversight that can exist in group homes and other residential facilities while also demonstrating that people with intellectual disabilities have an adap – tive and subversive potential to remain sexual despite professional re – striction. Sexual pleasure can emerge in spaces where sexual ableism operates. Public expressions of masturbation, even if considered in – appropriate, can be examples of people expressing sexual desire. This work recognizes that people with intellectual disabilities are already active agents in their own sexual expression, despite compromised pri – vacy in living arrangements and systematic intrusions and oversights. Disabled people can challenge the lack of privacy in hospital rooms, nursing homes, and group homes in order to transform these spaces into sexually viable locations. 20 By mapping out restrictive trends in sexuality for people with intellectual disabilities, we are able to rec – ognize that people experience and express sexuality in contradictory or complex ways. I want to underscore that not everyone desires a life that incorporates sexual activity. Intimacy might be “a greater prior -Gill, Michael. Already Doing It : Intellectual Disability and Sexual Agency, University of Minnesota Press, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwinnipeg/detail.action?docID=2011451. Created from uwinnipeg on 2021-01-01 15:24:01. Copyright © 2015. University of Minnesota Press. All rights reserved. Introduction 7 ity” for some individuals. 21 Complexity and contradictions highlight the sexual cultures of people with intellectual disabilities, and provide the theoretical impetus in this work. By disidentifying with notions of competency, citizenship, and agency, individuals with labels of intel – lectual disability foreground their unruly potential to challenge inter – locking systems of domination. Advocating for the sexuality of people with intellectual disabilities challenges sexual ableism insomuch as intellectual disability assumes inability to consent because of the manifestation of an intellectual impairment. Much of the discourse around intellectual disability and sexuality can be classified as “crisis responsive” or “harm reducing.” For example, as I discuss in Chapter 2, sex education materials use “stranger danger” in an attempt to reduce sexual assault rates among people with intellectual disabilities. This approach gives individuals the tools to respond defensively when approached by a stranger, but the intense focus on harm reduction denies individuals sex education that recognizes their ability to actively choose sexual partners and activities. Already Doing It argues that the regulatory framework of sexuality operates to delegitimize sexual desire and activities of indi – viduals with intellectual disabilities. As such, sexuality might be seen as nonexistent, despite some individuals maintaining active, diverse, and pleasurable sexual lives, regardless of the surroundings in which they live, learn, or work. In fact, the “already doing it” portion of the title takes the focus on sexuality away from a question of ability (or frequency), to an analysis of the structural and material conditions that facilitate or attempt to limit sexuality and reproduction. “Already” is about temporality and the existence of practices regardless of severity of restrictions. “Doing,” as opposed to “being,” emphasizes the way in – dividuals with intellectual disabilities may express sexuality in diverse ways rather than through scripted heteronormative practices of invok – ing and resolving desires. Failure to recognize an individual’s sexual agency might deny recognition of sexual citizenship but not sexual ac – tivity. Recognition of sexual citizenship and facilitation of sexual agency are equally compelling activities that forward the attainment of indi – vidual and group rights. I explore how the sexuality of individuals with intellectual disabilities challenges private versus public construc – tions of sexuality and heteronormative patriarchal society. I am fully aware that in advocating that the sexual and reproductive Gill, Michael. Already Doing It : Intellectual Disability and Sexual Agency, University of Minnesota Press, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwinnipeg/detail.action?docID=2011451. Created from uwinnipeg on 2021-01-01 15:24:01. Copyright © 2015. University of Minnesota Press. All rights reserved. 8 Introduction rights of individuals with intellectual disabilities be respected, I run the risk of alienating various constituents. In exploring sexuality, re – production, and intellectual disability, I acknowledge that the category of intellectual disability (and individuals that can claim membership in such a category) is marked by a diversity of experiences, desires, and practices. Specificity and context help to illuminate diverse desires, practices, and experiences. I also am aware that this book contains inconsistencies and seemingly contradictory logics and argumenta – tion. For example, in later chapters I adopt a rights- based approach to advance an argument that an individual’s reproductive desires be re – spected. I do so fully aware of the potential exclusionary mechanisms embedded in such a claim. Nevertheless, it seems urgent to make such a claim in the face of a sexually ableist culture that seeks to sterilize individuals and break apart families. In a later chapter, I am critical of such a rights- based claim because of the potential for exclusion. I embrace these contradictions and eagerly await challenges, complica – tions, and expansions of my work here by others. A Word on Terminology Disability is an incredibly complicated term with multiple contested meanings. Context can make all the difference. Disability means dif – ferent things in the courtroom, doctor’s office, classroom, and sheltered workshop. Representations of disability can create diverse meanings as well. Traditionally there are two models used in disability studies to explain disability: the medical and social models. These models initi – ate in two different realms, the individual and the environment. The medical model of disability defines disability as a result of a “physical, cognitive, intellectual, appearance or sensory impairment, or other medical condition that limits a person’s major daily activities.” 22 In the medical model of disability, an individual body and the way that body functions becomes the marker of disability. Inability to walk, environ – mental allergies, deafness, autism, and dyslexia are tangible indicators of the presence of disability. There is a “normative” or “normal” idea of bodies; for example, bodies are assumed able to walk. 23 If a person is unable to walk because of impairment, the medical model attempts to correct the inability through medical intervention and rehabilitation. The goal is to return the impaired body to some semblance of “nor – mal” function. Disability studies theorists have commented that this Gill, Michael. Already Doing It : Intellectual Disability and Sexual Agency, University of Minnesota Press, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwinnipeg/detail.action?docID=2011451. Created from uwinnipeg on 2021-01-01 15:24:01. Copyright © 2015. University of Minnesota Press. All rights reserved. Introduction 9 “normal body” goal of rehabilitation highlights a constructed embodi – ment that very few are able to achieve. 24 The medical model of disabil – ity often prioritizes medical knowledge and authority over individual autonomy and decision- making. It individualizes the experience of disability, effectively isolating an individual’s differently functioning body as needing intervention and correction. 25 Whereas the medical model of disability relies on diagnosing, treat – ing, rehabilitating, and eliminating impairment, the social model of disability considers disablement as a social process. Michael Oliver is best known for articulating an understanding of the social model of disability. Oliver considers that “all disabled people experience disability as a social restriction, whether those restrictions occur as a consequence of inaccessible built environments, questionable no – tions of intelligence and social competence, the inability of the general population to use sign language, the lack of reading material in Braille or hostile public attitudes to people with non- visible disabilities.” 26 In the social model of disability, a person becomes disabled not because of biological difference but rather because of the ways that biologi – cal difference is not accommodated. Impairment, here referring to the condition that results in a loss of functioning, is supposedly neutral in the social model of disability; human diversity results in a multiplicity of bodies that function in varied ways. The inability to accommodate, or actively eliminate, specific impairments becomes a manifestation of ableism. The apparently neat separation between the medical and social models of disability, which is based on the partition of impairment and disability, has received much discussion in disability studies circles. Various theorists have advocated for a social model of impairment that takes into account the experience of living with impairment. 27 As Shelley Tremain remarks, regarding the split between impairment and disability, “Proponents of the [social] model [of disability] explic – itly argue (1) disablement is not a necessary consequence of impair – ment; and (2) impairment is not a sufficient condition for disability. Nevertheless, an implicit premise of the model is (3) impairment is a necessary condition for disability, because proponents of the social model do not argue that people who are excluded or discriminated against on the basis of (say) skin color are by virtue of that fact disabled, nor do they argue that racism is a form of disability.” 28 The notion of Gill, Michael. Already Doing It : Intellectual Disability and Sexual Agency, University of Minnesota Press, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwinnipeg/detail.action?docID=2011451. Created from uwinnipeg on 2021-01-01 15:24:01. Copyright © 2015. University of Minnesota Press. All rights reserved. 10 Introduction impairment as a prerequisite for disablement is important. For exam – ple, the Americans with Disabilities Act has a three- part definition that considers someone disabled if they have a record of an impair – ment, or are regarded as having an impairment. Intellectual disability is first and foremost usually a label given to someone because of an im – pairment that results in apparent compromised intellectual capacity. An individual’s intelligence quotient can become a marker of atypical intelligence, and can result in being diagnosed as having an intellec – tual impairment. Levels of intelligence are not the only criteria for a diagnosis of intellectual disability. The meaning that this impairment takes can lead to an experience of disablement. I do not define intellectual disability in this work. 29 This is an in – tentional and political move. There are many definitions of intellectual disability available, if the reader wants to seek these out. Some consider that individuals have intellectual disabilities when they have measur – ably lower intelligence than the “average” citizen. Measuring intellect using various tests can be a problematic endeavor; biases based on class, race, culture, and language, for example, are present in different standardized tests. Intelligence can also fluctuate. Historically, those with intellectual disabilities were given the label “mental retardation.” The American Association of Mental Retardation, the professional or – ganization of researchers, academics, professionals, and policy makers working in the field of intellectual disability, changed its name to the American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities. A growing number of individuals consider mental retardation an out – dated and discriminatory diagnosis. Intellectual disability has become the latest acceptable term in most American circles. Mark Rapley expertly questions the utility of defining intellectual disability, and considers intellectual disability and the meaning associated with it to be a socially constructed phenomenon. 30 I agree with Rapley that the meaning behind intellectual disability is largely socially constructed. The social construction of intellectual disability is explained in this book through an exploration of sexuality. My intention in not defin – ing intellectual disability is to highlight the artificial and problematic ways in which intellectual disability is defined. Those with intellec – tual disabilities are often assumed to be incompetent and unable to make meaningful decisions in their lives, let alone make and execute sexually fulfilling choices. Childlike connotations, religious– spiritual Gill, Michael. Already Doing It : Intellectual Disability and Sexual Agency, University of Minnesota Press, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwinnipeg/detail.action?docID=2011451. Created from uwinnipeg on 2021-01-01 15:24:01. Copyright © 2015. University of Minnesota Press. All rights reserved. Introduction 11 “innocence,” and the concept of mental age traditionally associated with intellectual disability (such as naïveté and gullibility) can result in conflicting assumptions about individuals’ capabilities, a manifesta – tion of sexual ableism. Chapter 1 offers a sustained discussion of com – petence in relation to intellectual disability. There is also a geographical consideration to intellectual disabil – ity. Terms like “learning disability,” “intellectual disability,” “cogni – tive disability,” and “developmental disability” encompass different categories of people in various locations. What may be considered a learning disability in a U.S. classroom is potentially different from one in a classroom in the U.K. and other English- speaking countries. The geographical focus of this book is largely the United States. This is not to say that some of the conclusions offered are not applicable to other locations; however, it is not my intention to provide a univer – sal account of intellectual disability across all societies. That type of academic generalization does not take into account the ways in which disability is programmed and professionalized in diverse locations. Intellectual disability as a “thing,” a diagnosis that can sup – posedly be discerned by certified individuals, might include certain impairments such as brain injuries, autism, or Alzheimer’s. The dis – cussion on professional oversight of masturbation practices in Chap – ter 3 applies to individuals in nursing homes, including those with Alzheimer’s. Masturbation control in nursing homes is discussed as a way to make a comparison across impairment categories. At vari – ous moments in this work, the readers might find themselves won – dering which bodies and impairments I am talking about. Does this apply to those with Down syndrome? Or individuals on the autism spectrum? Are people with intellectual disabilities capable of consent – ing to sexual relations? While I cannot control the curiosity or “di – agnostic gaze” that might arise at these moments, withholding this type of inquiry for the sake of momentary confusion allows us to see how certain categories are not stable, preexisting entities. 31 My aim is to demonstrate that while certain characteristics or themes emerge in the study of sexuality for people with intellectual disabilities, each situation requires an examination of the context and social forces at play. I argue that the professional control and generalization about sexuality for people with intellectual disabilities capitalizes on creat – ing rigid perceptions of intellectual disability. Supposedly, people with Gill, Michael. Already Doing It : Intellectual Disability and Sexual Agency, University of Minnesota Press, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwinnipeg/detail.action?docID=2011451. Created from uwinnipeg on 2021-01-01 15:24:01. Copyright © 2015. University of Minnesota Press. All rights reserved. 12 Introduction intellectual disability do this and feel that. This project problematizes these assumptions about sexuality and intellectual disability and seeks to analyze the mechanisms that bind them together in a sexually able – ist way. Disability, then, in accordance with Tanya Titchkosky’s assertion, is a diverse social phenomenon that highlights individuals’ percep – tions of what disability means, which usually contradicts disabled people’s experiences of disability. 32 Disability as a process is an inter – action between what is called the biological and the social. Certainly people are disabled by social processes that exclude particular bod – ies from participation. The bodily manifestations and experiences of these impairments are a direct result of the disablement process. The politics around language remains a site of contestation in disability studies. Categorizing disabled people as separate from people with disabilities is seen as one of the central linguistic concerns. “Disabled people” implies that people are disabled (or experience disablement) because of social oppression. “People with disabilities” pays attention to the person before the impairment. As such, I want to explain my use of “people with intellectual dis – abilities” in this work as opposed to “intellectually disabled people,” not because disability has to be separated from the person but because I respect the commitment of the advocacy movement to the term. The self- advocacy movement, led by people with intellectual disabili – ties and nondisabled people, has been quite clear on their desire to be referred to in person- first language. While I argue that intellectual disability is an inconsistent and inexact impairment and that person – hood as neutral has to be problematized, I use mostly self- advocacy language out of deference for the movement. However, I do at times highlight the problematic and constructed nature of the impairment and resulting social meanings. Intellectual Disability and Sexuality Since 2002 there has been increased journalistic coverage in such places as the New York Times of individuals with intellectual disabilities doing a multiplicity of common tasks: obtaining gainful employment, living independently, or competing in the Special Olympics. 33 In April 2006, the New York Times ran an article that addressed teaching individu – als with intellectual disabilities sex education in hopes of facilitating Gill, Michael. Already Doing It : Intellectual Disability and Sexual Agency, University of Minnesota Press, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwinnipeg/detail.action?docID=2011451. Created from uwinnipeg on 2021-01-01 15:24:01. Copyright © 2015. University of Minnesota Press. All rights reserved. Introduction 13 “fuller lives.” The article described two sets of partnerships and their discussions of sex. One couple, Mary Kate Graham and Gary Ruvolo, are being “coach[ed] in dating, romance and physical intimacy by a social service agency at the cutting edge of a new movement to promote healthy sexuality for the seven million Americans with mental retarda – tion and related disabilities.” 34 For the last several decades, the general public’s perception of intellectual disability has been largely depen – dent on journalistic accounts and other representations in popular culture: actors Chris Burke in the television show Life Goes On and Lauren Potter in Glee, Special Olympians, the greeter at Wal- Mart, the Kennedy family, the special interest piece on a television news pro – gram, a video circulated through social media of an individual going to prom or playing on a sports team, the popular image of the kids on the “special bus.” Simultaneously, media references around sexuality within the United States have been changing from primarily heterosexual affairs to a multiplicity of sexual and gender identities and various methods of reproduction. Couples, married or not; individuals, gay, straight, bi – sexual, queer, asexual, and otherwise, can utilize adoption, surrogacy, or in vitro fertilization and other assistive reproductive technologies to create families. Many of these technologies are restricted to (white) wealthier individuals and those from geographic locations where pri – vate insurance covers these services. Ability to adopt is also restricted based on able- bodied heteronormative assumptions of parental fitness that can exclude gay, lesbian, single, transgender, or disabled parents. Gay marriage has polarized municipalities and communities through – out the United States. Social media sites such as Facebook allow users to publicly display their sexual identity for other users to see, albeit using a medium that allows for self- fashioned identities. Within the United States, sexual behaviors and their purposes are all subject to public inquiry, particularly on the Internet. As Altman argues, in this age of globalization, or “Americanization,” technology is being uti – lized to allow for a diversity of sexual identities and opportunities for sexual expression. 35 Individuals with intellectual disabilities might not be given access to technologies such as the Internet, which can facilitate exposure to these representations of sexuality. A lack of financial resources, as well as the structure of a group home, might result in limited exposure to Gill, Michael. Already Doing It : Intellectual Disability and Sexual Agency, University of Minnesota Press, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwinnipeg/detail.action?docID=2011451. Created from uwinnipeg on 2021-01-01 15:24:01. Copyright © 2015. University of Minnesota Press. All rights reserved. 14 Introduction television and films that represent sexuality. The presence of popular cultural representations about the sexuality of intellectually disabled individuals is also not reflected in similar stories involving other seg – ments of the population. Simultaneously, however, professionals are expending a tremen – dous amount of research dollars studying and educating individuals with intellectual disabilities about their sexuality. This increase in pro – fessional discourse of sexuality has its roots in a historical manage – ment and treatment for a host of individuals labeled as sexual devi – ants in relation to reproduction of disability. Within the United States, individuals with intellectual disabilities have historically been subject to eugenic practices of sterilization and subsequent institutionaliza – tion in order to control the numbers of disabled people. Sharon Snyder and David Mitchell argue that this is a type of transatlantic eugenic exchange of information and policies aimed at regulating the sexual – ity of individuals with disabilities, a precursor to the contemporary global exchange of sexuality. 36 According to Winifred Kempton and Emily Kahn, “Their [individuals with intellectual disabilities’] sexual needs were ignored; their sexual behavior was punished; they were randomly sterilized; they were closeted in their homes or isolated in large institutions, segregated by sex to prevent them from repro – ducing. In fact, they were actually oppressed largely because of their sexuality. ”37 This regulation of sexuality through institutionalization, sterilization, and residential patterns to limit reproduction resulted in the oppression of entire generations of individuals with intellec – tual disabilities within the United States. These activities to regulate sexuality are slowly being acknowledged. For example, in 2002 and 2003, Oregon and California apologized for sterilizations performed on individuals with intellectual disabilities. 38 More recently, legislators in North Carolina decided to authorize compensation payments for people sterilized under the state’s eugenic sterilization program. The number of eugenic sterilizations point to influential historical ideas about the sexuality of individuals with disabilities in dominant U.S. discourse. 39 Eugenic sterilizations were also practiced on ethnic and racial minorities in the United States; Nelson and Gutiérrez document the ways in which sterilization abuses were inflicted on women of color well into the 1970s. 40 Although these sterilization procedures are no longer a dominant practice, entire generations of disabled people, Gill, Michael. Already Doing It : Intellectual Disability and Sexual Agency, University of Minnesota Press, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwinnipeg/detail.action?docID=2011451. Created from uwinnipeg on 2021-01-01 15:24:01. Copyright © 2015. University of Minnesota Press. All rights reserved. Introduction 15 mostly women, have been forcibly sterilized. Countless women of color have also been coerced into sterilization. Many of the sterilized individuals with intellectual disabilities are still living and working in professionally controlled locations. These sterilized bodies serve as signifiers of the degree of regulation that occurs on disabled people’s reproduction and, further, their sexuality in general. The historical control and management of the sexuality of disabled bodies, including individuals with intellectual disabilities in the United States, informs this project, which explores the historical process of constructing the sexuality of intellectually disabled people as needing professional oversight. It would be misleading, however, to focus exclu – sively on historical or professional literature, as professional literature and historical regulations of sexuality are in conversation with more popular cultural representations of contemporary times. This book analyzes these components of disabled sexuality by examining con – temporary popular films depicting the sexuality of individuals with in – tellectual disabilities and professional visual images, including sex edu – cation videos that are used to train professionals, within the contexts of a historical examination of sexuality discourse. The triangulation of professional literature, historical practices, and cultural representa – tions creates a more comprehensive understanding of how the sexual – ity of individuals with the label of intellectual disability is imagined, represented, and subsequently controlled. The analyses focus on the as – sumptions and normalcy of sexuality and the sites of sexual oppression of people with intellectual disabilities. This sexual oppression reveals the necessity for libratory action in the form of a sexualized revolution for individuals with intellectual disabilities. In the interstitial space among the historical practices, cultural representations, and profes – sional knowledge- making, an understanding of intellectual disability can be found as constituting parts of the sexual oppression of disabled people. In other words, this study aims to explain and understand the dynamics of the historical, professional, and cultural processes of constructing, managing, representing, and imagining the sexuality of adults with intellectual disabilities in the United States. Professional Oversight People with intellectual disabilities typically interact with multiple pro – gramming efforts in their lives, starting in special education classes Gill, Michael. Already Doing It : Intellectual Disability and Sexual Agency, University of Minnesota Press, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwinnipeg/detail.action?docID=2011451. Created from uwinnipeg on 2021-01-01 15:24:01. Copyright © 2015. University of Minnesota Press. All rights reserved. 16 Introduction and continuing through some sort of vocational activities and, most likely, residential settings. Even if intellectually disabled adults live with their parents or other family members, they will have some sort of day programming whether it is vocational or recreational. In each of these locations, professionals determine which training and educational initiatives are most appropriate for the clientele in these settings. 41 While working in a sheltered workshop in the northwest United States, I learned that the county board of developmental dis – abilities determined most of the programming and subsequently the ideas about what constituted “work.” For example, if our workshop wanted to transition from sheltered employment into more individu – alized vocational settings, the board of directors would have to pe – tition the county for approval. This expert- controlled programming ensures that individuals have very little agency in determining their educational, residential, and vocational choices. 42 Disability remains highly medicalized in these locations. Medical authorities diagnose impairment, and these diagnoses determine qualification for services. In addition, the medical conception of impairment helps to formulate assumptions about these individuals’ abilities and potentials. These assessments can become the basis for the services offered in profes – sionally controlled locations. Jack Levinson traces histories of profes – sional management of intellectual disability, including various efforts to facilitate community integration. 43 Levinson’s in- depth analysis of Driggs House, a group home in New York State, illustrates the produc – tive tensions between notions of professional authority, freedom, and individual choice. In response to this professionally controlled programming, many different stakeholders in the field, from professionals and academ – ics to family members and intellectually disabled persons, argue for more control over what type of services are offered. These stakeholder groups try to influence this programming, often through participation on consumer or parent advisory boards and councils. The motivation for this springs from different philosophies about which life situa – tion is most appropriate for individuals labeled as intellectually dis – abled. 44 Although programming attempts which allow for increased self- determination exist in each of the locations, many service options are under direction of professionals at all levels. In reality, there are not many people with intellectual disabilities who do not interact with Gill, Michael. Already Doing It : Intellectual Disability and Sexual Agency, University of Minnesota Press, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwinnipeg/detail.action?docID=2011451. Created from uwinnipeg on 2021-01-01 15:24:01. Copyright © 2015. University of Minnesota Press. All rights reserved. Introduction 17 some sort of professionally run organization. Often at least one major feature of daily living, including vocational activities and housing set – tings, is administered by professionals. Therefore it is important that professionals and people with disabilities work together toward com- mon goals of greater autonomy and increased rights. A large number of Americans with intellectual disabilities pass through these loca – tions, which are suggested as ideal settings for work, home, play, and socialization. Their experiences can be represented and understood by cultural discourse, which shapes certain images of their lives. A Need to Be Sexual? There are, perhaps, very few categories of adult citizens who are ex – pected to be celibate. Those who vow celibacy for religious reasons, including nuns, priests, and monks, are expected to live with the an – ticipation that sexual relations will not become central to their lives. Convicted sex offenders are another group of individuals that are ex – pected to largely remain celibate, and multiple laws and regulations attempt to control their interaction with populations at risk of sexual assault. While the elderly are not always considered as having fulfill – ing sexual lives, their sexuality is not necessarily frowned upon or ex – pected to be absent. Some individuals consider disabled people to be the exception when it comes to sexuality. The “myth of asexuality” is common for disabled people. Anne Finger remarks that sexual oppression can be a source of deep pain for disabled people and individuals, stating that “sexuality is often the source of our deepest oppression; it is also often the source of our deepest pain. It’s easier for us to talk about— and formulate strategies for changing— discrimination in employment, education, and housing than to talk about our exclusion from sexu – ality and reproduction.” 45 Desexualization and assessments of asexu – ality can warrant interventions, including requests for government- subsidized sexual services and a loosening of sex work monitoring. Being sexual is not central to being human; certainly many people live satisfying lives without sexual activity. Eunjung Kim discusses the intersectional ramifications of recognizing that asexuality is a valid sexual orientation for both disabled and nondisabled people. 46 Notions about the ability to be sexual are intertwined with gendered, classed, and racialized assessments of fitness. Some bodies are able Gill, Michael. Already Doing It : Intellectual Disability and Sexual Agency, University of Minnesota Press, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwinnipeg/detail.action?docID=2011451. Created from uwinnipeg on 2021-01-01 15:24:01. Copyright © 2015. University of Minnesota Press. All rights reserved. 18 Introduction to be sexual, without oversight and intervention. Others appear to need regulation or oversight. Children under the age of sixteen (or eighteen, depending on the location) are assumed not legally able to consent to sexual activity; adults participating in sexual activities with minors are rendered criminal partially because of an assessment that the minor lacks the ability to consent to and understand the ramifica – tions of the sexual act. One of the lasting contributions to discussions of sexuality that feminists have offered include a reminder that sexual relations can be as much about power and control as they are about pleasure and desire. In discussing the sexuality of men and teenage boys with significant and moderate intellectual disabilities, Nathan Wilson and colleagues forward a notion of “conditionally sexual,” “that the developmen – tal capacity of the individual was central to the construction of one’s sexuality, together with the perspective and influence of paid disabil – ity support workers. That is, variations, and staff perceptions of these variations, in cognitive, emotional, physical, anatomical, hormonal, functional and social development were central to how one’s mascu – line sexuality was constructed and to the gate- keeping role of staff in overseeing sexual behaviour.” 47 The authors discuss how staff in group homes interpreted activities as sexual or helped facilitate sexual activ – ity (e.g., allowing privacy to masturbate) based on assessments of self- discovery, hormones, pleasure, personal beliefs, a sense of duty to care, and ability to act as gatekeepers. 48 Describing sexual actions as “condi – tional” illustrates how disability, assessments of capacity, and capability combine with morality and decorum, as perceived by staff members, to create a situation in which individuals with intellectual disabilities act out their sexuality. Wilson and colleagues note that being conditionally sexual results in a “life that is reduced to a penis/body- centric experi – ence. Furthermore, the focus on these men and teenage boys’ mascu – line sexuality is not geared toward what is developmentally normative, what feels nice and what is fun. Instead, their sexuality is problem- led within a service- centric risk- hierarchy that renders to a secondary con – sideration the ‘right’ to develop a healthy masculine sexuality. Their lives, and their masculine sexualities, are circumscribed by an envi – ronment whose prime purpose is led by their day- to- day high ‘physi – cal’ support needs at the expense of supporting an individual within a broader socio- cultural ‘sexually healthy’ framework.” 49 Gill, Michael. Already Doing It : Intellectual Disability and Sexual Agency, University of Minnesota Press, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwinnipeg/detail.action?docID=2011451. Created from uwinnipeg on 2021-01-01 15:24:01. Copyright © 2015. University of Minnesota Press. All rights reserved. Introduction 19 Normative sexual experiences, according to Wilson and co- authors, are sacrificed in this “management” of sexuality. If sexual experiences are largely reduced to regulation of masturbation, especially for men with intellectual disabilities, it is little wonder that individuals can be ill equipped to navigate their sexual lives with limited sex educa – tion and increased professional oversight of their sexual activities. Women’s sexual lives are largely constructed around the twin poles of “regulation of pregnancy/reproduction” and “protection from sexual abuse and assault.” It can be extremely rare for women with intellec – tual disabilities to be recognized as competent sexual agents. Later chapters address how sex education materials as well as masturbation training work not to proffer sexual knowledge to achieve agency but rather to construct sex as risky and masturbation as primarily about the reduction of behavioral issues. There is a long history of trying to regulate the reproductive potential of individuals with intellectual disabilities, primarily women, through prescriptions of invasive birth control measures and eugenic sterilizations. Women with intellectual disabilities share this common history with other disenfranchised women, including poor women and women of color, and women from multiple identity groups. Sexual expression for individuals with intellectual disabilities, re – gardless of knowledge and desire, becomes almost too risky a proposi – tion to undertake. In addition to forbidding sexual expression, such as the court case between Alan and Kieron, constructing masturba – tion as the only sanctioned type of sexuality becomes another mode of sexually ableist intervention. Even benign courting is the subject of much debate in group homes and families, the assumption being that dating can immediately lead to sex. Even if one affirms the sexual rights of people with intellectual disabilities, it is often conditional: only if there is no risk of pregnancy or sexually transmitted infection. We saw this in the judge’s ruling. Other qualifiers might include only if the individual is sexual with another person with an intellectual disability or only if the individual has “mild” intellectual disabilities. Other populations such as women in poverty, in prison, or in insti – tutions whose reproductive rights are historically curtailed, are also subjected to a similar “only if” clause. By no means are individuals with intellectual disabilities the only population whose sexual rights are infringed upon. Even so, adding “only i f” to the above question Gill, Michael. Already Doing It : Intellectual Disability and Sexual Agency, University of Minnesota Press, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwinnipeg/detail.action?docID=2011451. Created from uwinnipeg on 2021-01-01 15:24:01. Copyright © 2015. University of Minnesota Press. All rights reserved. 20 Introduction illustrates how individuals with intellectual disabilities are largely denied the right to express their sexuality. As U.S. society continues to debate the boundaries of sexual citizenship, the sexuality of indi – viduals with intellectual disabilities challenges us to reconsider sexual agency and competency. It seems that the sexual and reproductive rights of individuals with intellectual disabilities have yet to capture the imagination of the U.S. public. The system of sexual ableism con – tinues to be tenuously upheld through proscriptions of deviancy, in – competence, and a redirecting of sexual desire and activities. I conclude this introduction with five theoretical case studies. This presentation is patterned after Cynthia Enloe’s efforts in Globaliza – tion and Militarism: Feminists Make the Link to invite the reader to consider the diversity of people whose experiences might fall under purview of this work. 50 My goal is to expand the reader’s understand – ing of what intellectual disability means and to challenge what is often associated with the diagnosis. Challenging the accepted meaning of intellectual disability through our exploration of sexuality begins to upset the “naturalness” associated with the diagnosis. Constructs such as competence begin to be exposed as fictions. Context and individual will help to challenge sexually ableist blanket assessments of people with intellectual disabilities as in need of oversight, unable to partici – pate in sexual relationships free of abuse and coercion. Susan is a twenty- year- old African American woman with an in – tellectual disability from the north side of Chicago. She is the youngest of five siblings and recently graduated from a Chicago public school. Susan wanted to attend college, but her parents decided that she should try to get a job and live in a group home in the community. At the group home, Susan shares a room with June, another young woman with an intellectual disability. Shortly after moving in, June and Susan started a sexual relationship. One night while they were engaged in sexual activity, a staff member entered the room without knocking. There is a meeting scheduled next week to discuss June and Susan’s relationship. Susan’s parents are planning on attending and want to move their daughter out of the group home and back to her childhood residence. June and Susan are not invited to the meeting. Will June and Susan’s wishes be respected or even considered at this meeting? John is forty- five, a white man living on a combination of food stamps and disability benefits in a one- room apartment in Atlanta. Gill, Michael. Already Doing It : Intellectual Disability and Sexual Agency, University of Minnesota Press, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwinnipeg/detail.action?docID=2011451. Created from uwinnipeg on 2021-01-01 15:24:01. Copyright © 2015. University of Minnesota Press. All rights reserved. Introduction 21 John grew up in poverty and remains there. Unemployed and without any family, John frequently takes art classes at the local community center, funded through the county board of intellectual and develop – mental disabilities. One day while John was at the center before class, he saw a seven- year- old boy walking outside by himself. Without pause, John goes to check on the boy. At the exact moment John reaches the boy to check on him, the child’s mother shows up and accuses John of trying to sexually molest her son. John has never received any sort of sex education class and likewise does not know what is meant by the terms “molest” and “pervert.” The police are called. What will happen to John? Who will believe him? Tony never knew his parents. He grew up in a state institution in Maryland. When the institution closed because of a reduction in state funding and pressure from disability activists, Tony moved into the community and started attending a day center, where he met Grace. After getting to know each other, Tony and Grace decide that they want to date. After a few months pass, Tony and Grace decide that they want to become sexually active with each other. Neither individual has ever received any sort of sex education. When Tony and Grace ap – proach a staff member at the day center asking if they can receive some sort of sex education, the staff member decides that there is a need for this service. The staff member advertises the upcoming sex educa – tion class and within weeks thirty adults with intellectual disabilities are enrolled in the class. Although some staff members complain that “these people” should not be taught about sex, the classes continue. Can Tony and Grace become parents? If they want to have children, will they retain custody? Or will the state take their children away? Sara is sixty- five and living in a nursing home. Although she has siblings, they live out- of- state and would rather their sister be looked after by those who are better trained to meet her needs. At night a male nurse enters Sara’s room and sexually molests her. The assault is a nightly occurrence. Even though Sara, who is largely nonverbal, tries to communicate with the staff members at the nursing home, nobody listens to her. No one takes the time to understand Sara’s concerns. With no one to listen to her and her family not in the picture, what will happen to Sara? Will the assault continue? How can the nurse committing the assault be caught? And when he is caught, what is the most effective response that demands justice but does not pity Sara? Gill, Michael. Already Doing It : Intellectual Disability and Sexual Agency, University of Minnesota Press, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwinnipeg/detail.action?docID=2011451. Created from uwinnipeg on 2021-01-01 15:24:01. Copyright © 2015. University of Minnesota Press. All rights reserved. 22 Introduction Finally, Jose is eighteen and beginning to take a sexual interest in his peers. Although his parents gave him the “birds and the bees” dis – cussion, Jose still feels unsure about sexuality and is questioning his sexual identity. He thinks he might be gay, but something about this label makes him feel ashamed and embarrassed. Jose wants to explore his sexual inclinations but is unsure how he can do so without fearing reprisal or public identification of his sexual identity. Jose decides to obtain a gay pornographic magazine from the adult bookstore down the street from his house. While at the bookstore, an adult man, who is twice Jose’s age, approaches Jose and leads him to a private room. Jose and the man masturbate in front of each other. When the encounter is over, Jose leaves the bookstore not feeling any guilt or remorse over what just transpired. Was the encounter sexual abuse, even though Jose enjoyed it? Is it significant that the two men only masturbated? Will Jose later regret this encounter? Did the other man know Jose was an individual with an intellectual disability? Does it matter? These are all complex and difficult questions. Each vignette pro – vides a different vantage point from which we can explore the issues around intellectual disability and sexuality. The reader might think that not enough details are provided to adequately gauge whether the individuals should be sexual or whether they experienced abuse. These stories illustrate that any conversation about intellectual dis – ability and sexuality is not monolithic— diverse people, motivations, practices, and situations require more nuanced conversations. The issues raised should provoke discussion about what we think about intellectual disability, what it means to be sexual, and how all types of individuals can express their sexuality without fear of reprisal and oversight. This work addresses intellectual disability and sexuality, but also attends to larger issues around sexuality for all individuals, re – gardless of intellectual ability or diagnosis. Sexual ableism as a theory articulates how different types of bodies, regardless of labels of intel – lectual disability, experience oversight and regulation of sexual and reproductive behaviors. Remember the stories of Jose, Tony, Grace, Sara, June, Susan, and John as we examine what it means to be sexual and how competence, citizenship, and intellectual capacity intersect with sexuality. Gill, Michael. Already Doing It : Intellectual Disability and Sexual Agency, University of Minnesota Press, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwinnipeg/detail.action?docID=2011451. Created from uwinnipeg on 2021-01-01 15:24:01. Copyright © 2015. University of Minnesota Press. All rights reserved. 199 notes Preface 1. A sheltered workshop is a location that offers employment services for intellectually and developmentally disabled individuals in a segregated set – ting where employees receive sub– minimum wage remuneration. 2. http://w w w.ted.com/talks/chimamanda_adichie_the_danger_of_a _single_story.html. 3. Ibid. 4. Perhaps more controversial, I wonder why individuals with intellectual or cognitive disability are not allowed to participate in self- harm. Are efforts of behavior redirection in the name of avoiding harm ableist? 5. Home site staff work where individuals with intellectual and develop – mental disabilities live. Often these staff members are nondisabled. They are also usually paid barely above minimum wage, resulting in a high level of staff turnaround. Home site staff have no affiliation or relation to the shel – tered workshop. At the workshop there was one executive director, one job developer, a workshop supervisor, a woodshop manager, and direct support staff. I was one of the direct support staff. 6. In an attempt to ensure confidentiality, I have changed the names of people here and elsewhere in the book. 7. The 2007 documentary film Doin’ It: Sex, Disability, and Videotape by the Empowered Fe Fes, in conjunction with Beyondmedia and Salome Chasnoff, narrates how a group of disabled young women from the Chicago area explore their sexual lives (and desires) affected by experiences of disability informed by race, ethnicity, and class. The title of my book is inspired by the Fe Fes video exploring diverse sexual cultures and experiences. 8. Examples include Paul Cambridge and Bryan Mellan, “Reconstruct – ing the Sexuality of Men with Learning Disabilities: Empirical Evidence and Theoretical Interpretations of Need,” Disability and Society 15, no. 2 (2000): 293– 311; LeeAnn Christian, Jennifer Stinson, and Lori Ann Dotson, “Staff Values Regarding the Sexual Expression of Women with Developmental Dis – a bi l it ie s ,” Sexuality and Disability 19, no. 4 (2001): 283– 91; E. M. Coleman and W.  D. Murphy, “A Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Sex Education Programs Gill, Michael. Already Doing It : Intellectual Disability and Sexual Agency, University of Minnesota Press, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwinnipeg/detail.action?docID=2011451. Created from uwinnipeg on 2021-01-01 15:25:09. Copyright © 2015. University of Minnesota Press. All rights reserved. 200 Notes to Preface among Facilities for the Mentally Retarded,” Applied Research in Mental Retar – dation 1, nos. 3– 4 (1980): 269– 76; Monica Cuskelly and Rachel Bryde, “Atti – tudes towards the Sexuality of Adults with an Intellectual Disability: Parents, Support Staff, and a Community Sample,” Journal of Intellectual and Devel – opmental Disability 29, no. 3 (2004): 255– 64; Lori Dotson, Jennifer Stinson, and LeeAnn Christian, “‘People Tell Me I Can’t Have Sex’: Women with Dis – abilities Share Their Personal Perspectives on Health Care, Sexuality, and Reproductive Rights,” Women and Therapy 26, nos. 3– 4 (2003): 195– 209; Jennifer Galea et al., “The Assessment of Sexual Knowledge in People with Intellectual Disability,” Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability 29, no. 4 (2004): 350– 65; Bob Heyman and Sarah Huckle, “Sexuality as a Per – ceived Hazard in the Lives of Adults with Learning Difficulties,” Disability and Society 10, no. 2 (1995): 139– 56; Delores D. Walcott, “Family Life Educa – tion for Persons with Developmental Disabilities,” Sexuality and Disability 15, no. 2 (1997): 91– 98; Pamela S. Wolfe, “The Influence of Personal Values on Issues of Sexuality and Disability,” Sexuality and Disability 15, no. 2 (1997): 69– 90. These represent just a small sample of the massive literature on sexu – ality and intellectual disability in journals in the social and applied health sciences. Introduction 1. The Honorable Justice Mostyn, “England and Wales High Court (Court of Protection) Decisions,” January 28, 2011, http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/ EWHC/COP/2011/101.html. 2. Ibid. The judge writes that Alan doesn’t understand about reproduc – tion or the mechanics of vaginal/penile sex. Additionally, he was unable to correctly put a condom on a model penis. 3. A final determination of Alan’s ability to participate in sexual activity has not been made. He is still receiving sex education. 4. Jane Fae, “Disabled Man Banned from Having Sex with Male Partner,” Pink News, February 8, 2011, http://w w w.pinknews.co.uk/2011/02/08/disabled -man-banned-from-having-sex-with-male-partner/. 5. I bid. 6. Tobin Siebers, Disability Theory (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2008), 8. He argues that this preference for nondisability is connected to “the baseline by which humanness is determined, setting the measure of body and mind that gives or denies human status to individual persons. It affects nearly all our judgments, definitions, and values about human beings, but because it is discriminatory and exclusionary, it creates social locations outside of and critical of its purview, most notably in this case, the perspec – tive of disability.” Gill, Michael. Already Doing It : Intellectual Disability and Sexual Agency, University of Minnesota Press, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwinnipeg/detail.action?docID=2011451. Created from uwinnipeg on 2021-01-01 15:25:09. Copyright © 2015. University of Minnesota Press. All rights reserved. Notes to Introduction 201 7. Rod Michalko, The Difference That Disability Makes (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2002), 14. 8. Roderick A. Ferguson, Aberrations in Black: Toward a Queer of Color Critique (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2004), 4. 9. Ibid., 26. Ferguson utilizes Muñoz’s ideas of disidentification as central to a queer of color critique. José Esteban Muñoz, Disidentifications: Queers of Color and the Performance of Politics (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1999). 10. Robert McRuer, Crip Theory: Cultural Signs of Queerness and Disabil – ity (New York: New York University Press, 2006). 11. Robert McRuer, “Critical Investments: AIDS, Christopher Reeve, and Queer/Disability Studies,” Journal of Medical Humanities 23, no. 3 (2002): 236. 12. Michel Desjardins, “The Sexualized Body of the Child: Parents and the Politics of ‘Voluntary’ Sterilization of People Labeled Intellectually Dis – abled,” in Sex and Disability, ed. Robert McRuer and Anna Mollow (Durham: Duke University Press, 2012), 74. 13. Ibid., 78. 14. Desjardins mentions that the parents interviewed were somewhat open to their children participating in same- sex sexual activity, but the primary reason for sterilization is to prevent reproduction while allowing sexual ac – tivity, presumably conceived as heterosexual and penetrative. 15. Desjardins, “The Sexualized Body of the Child,” 79. In Quebec, the dis – abled individual has to fill out a petition to seek sterilization, so the con – version process involves the parents communicating their desire to their children, having their children change their desire from reproduction to in – fertility, and then communicating that desire to a bioethics committee. 16. Siebers, Disability Theory, 148. 17. Tom Shakespeare, Kath Gillespie- Sells, and Dominic Davies, The Sex – ual Politics of Disability: Untold Desires (New York: Cassell, 1996), 131. 18. Siebers, Disability Theory, 142. 19. Ibid., 148. 20. Ibid., 152. 21. Tom Shakespeare, Disability Rights and Wrongs (New York: Routledge, 2006), 168. 22. Mark Sherry, Disability and Diversity: A Sociological Perspective (New York: Nova Science Publishers, 2008), 1. 23. Lennard J. Davis, Enforcing Normalcy: Disability, Deafness, and the Body (New York: Verso, 1995); Rosemarie Garland- Thomson, Extraordinary Bodies: Figuring Physical Disability in American Culture and Literature (New York: Columbia University Press, 1997). 24. Garland- Thomson, Extraordinary Bodies, 8. Gill, Michael. Already Doing It : Intellectual Disability and Sexual Agency, University of Minnesota Press, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwinnipeg/detail.action?docID=2011451. Created from uwinnipeg on 2021-01-01 15:25:09. Copyright © 2015. University of Minnesota Press. All rights reserved. 202 Notes to Introduction 25. Paul K. Longmore, Why I Burned My Book, and Other Essays on Dis – ability (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2003), 3– 5. 26. Michael Oliver, The Politics of Disablement: A Sociological Approach (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1990), xiv. 27. Dan Goodley, Self- Advocacy in the Lives of People with Learning Diffi – culties: The Politics of Resilience (Philadelphia: Open University Press, 2000); Bill Hughes and Kevin Paterson, “The Social Model of Disability and the Dis – appearing Body: Towards a Sociology of Impairment,” Disability and Society 12, no. 3 (1997): 325– 40; Tom Shakespeare and Nicholas Watson, “The Social Model of Disability: An Outdated Ideology?” in Research in Social Science and Disability, Volume 2: Exploring Theories and Expanding Methodologies, ed. Sharon Barnartt and Barbara Altman (Oxford: Elsevier Science, 2001), 9– 2 8. 28. Shelley Tremain, “Foucault, Governmentality, and Critical Disability Theory: An Introduction,” in Foucault and the Government of Disability, ed. Shelley Tremain (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2005), 10. 29. I do, however, discuss definitions of intellectual disability, especially as they relate to notions of competence in chapter 1. 30. Mark Rapley, The Social Construction of Intellectual Disability (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004). 31. Petra Kuppers refers to this process of scanning bodies to determine impairment as the “diagnostic gaze.” Kuppers, Disability and Contemporary Performance: Bodies on Edge (New York: Routledge, 2003), 15, 39. 32. Tanya Titchkosky, Disability, Self, and Society (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2003). 33. For example, in each of the last five years, over a thousand articles about intellectual disability have appeared in U.S. newspapers. As a compari – son, during 1990 to 1995, the total number of articles was around six hundred. 34. Jane Gross, “Learning to Savor a Full Life, Love Life Included,” New York Times, April 20, 2006. 35. Dennis Altman, Global Sex (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001), 86– 105. 36. Sharon L. Snyder and David T. Mitchell, Cultural Locations of Disabil – ity (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2006). 37. Winifred Kempton and Emily Kahn, “Sexuality and People with Intel – lectual Disabilities: A Historical Perspective,” Sexuality and Disability 9, no. 2 (1991): 93 – 94. 38. Dave Reynolds, “The Eugenic Apologies: How a Pair of Disability Rights Advocates Score the First State Apology for Eugenics, and What They Have Planned Next,” Ragged Edge Magazine, November– December 2003. It is es – timated that at least sixty thousand intellectually disabled adults were forc – ibly sterilized against their will during the early- to- mid twentieth century Gill, Michael. Already Doing It : Intellectual Disability and Sexual Agency, University of Minnesota Press, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwinnipeg/detail.action?docID=2011451. Created from uwinnipeg on 2021-01-01 15:25:09. Copyright © 2015. University of Minnesota Press. All rights reserved. Notes to Introduction 203 (Kempton and Emily Kahn, “Sexuality and People with Intellectual Disabili – ties,” 96). Thirty- three U.S. states had eugenics sterilization laws (Reynolds, “The Eugenic Apologies”). 39. See V.  V. Anderson for an example of this historical eugenic rhetoric: “Feeble- minded persons are especially prolific and reproduce their kind with greater frequency than normal persons, and through such reproduction pro – vide a legitimate outlet for the exercise of charitable impulses in each genera – tion, and an endless stream of defective progeny, which are a serious drain on the resources of the nation.” Georgia Commission on Feeblemindedness, V. V. Anderson, and National Committee for Mental Hygiene, Mental Defect in a Southern State: Report of the Georgia Commission on Feeblemindedness and the Survey of the National Committee for Mental Hygiene (New York: Na – tional Committee for Mental Hygiene, 1919). 40. Jennifer Nelson, Women of Color and the Reproductive Rights Move – ment (New York: New York University Press, 2003); Elena R. Gutiérrez, Fer – tile Matters: The Politics of Mexican- Origin Women’s Reproduction (Aust i n: University of Texas Press, 2008). 41. David J. Rothman and Sheila M. Rothman, The Willowbrook Wars: Bringing the Mentally Disabled into the Community (New Brunswick, N.J.: Aldine Transaction, 2005). 42. Michael Gill, “The Myth of Transition: Contractualizing Disability in the Sheltered Workshop,” Disability and Society 20, no. 6 (2005): 613– 23. 43. Jack Levinson, Making Life Work: Freedom and Disability in a Commu – nity Group Home (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2010), 19– 56. 44. Joe Caldwell, “Experiences of Families with Relatives with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities in a Consumer-Directed Support Program,” Disability and Society 22, no. 6 (2007): 549– 62; Allison C. Carey, On the Margins of Citizenship: Intellectual Disability and Civil Rights in Twentieth- Century America (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2009); Sheryl A. Larson and K. Charlie Lakin, “Parent Attitudes about Residential Placement before and after Deinstitutionalization: A Research Synthesis,” Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps 16, no. 1 (1991): 25– 38; Steven Noll and James W. Trent, Mental Retardation in America: A Historical Reader (New York: New York University Press, 2004); James W. Trent, Inventing the Feeble Mind: A History of Mental Retardation in the United States (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994); David L. Braddock et al., The State of the States in Developmental Disabilities (Washington, D.C.: American Associa – tion on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 2008); K. Johnson et al., Deinstitutionalization and People with Intellectual Disabilities: In and Out of Institutions (Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley Publishers, 2005). 45. Quoted in Shakespeare, Gillespie- Sells, and Davies, The Sexual Politics of Disability, 5– 6. Gill, Michael. Already Doing It : Intellectual Disability and Sexual Agency, University of Minnesota Press, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwinnipeg/detail.action?docID=2011451. Created from uwinnipeg on 2021-01-01 15:25:09. Copyright © 2015. University of Minnesota Press. All rights reserved. 204 Notes to Introduction 46. Eunjung Kim, “Asexuality in Disability Narratives,” Sexualities 14, no. 4 (2011): 479– 93. 47. Nathan J. Wilson et al., “Conditionally Sexual: Men and Teenage Boys with Moderate to Profound Intellectual Disability,” Sexuality and Disability 29, no. 3 (2011): 279. 48. Ibid., 279– 85. 49. Ibid., 286. 50. Cynthia H. Enloe, Globalization and Militarism: Feminists Make the Link (Lanham, Md.: Rowman and Littlefield, 2007). 1. Questions of Consent 1. Sherene Razack, Looking White People in the Eye: Gender, Race, and Culture in Courtrooms and Classrooms (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1998), 51. 2. Glenn Beck, “Transcript of Glenn Beck Show: July 27th, 2006,” CNN, http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0607/27/gb.01.html. On his show Beck criticizes the rhetoric of Kalie McArthur as enjoying abuse with the fol – lowing: “Well, this district is amazing, because they have said in this particu – lar sexual abuse case that Kalie enjoyed the experience of the sexual abuse, and it’s phenomenal to me. The reason why I’m staying on this story, Mike [Michael Cook, attorney], is because I have yet to talk to anyone, anyone in charge of the school district, of the town, of anything that has any power.” I discuss the case of Kalie McArthur in this chapter. 3. Anne Fausto- Sterling, Sexing the Body: Gender Politics and the Construc – tion of Sexuality (New York: Basic Books, 2000); Razack, Looking White People in the Eye. 4. Cynthia H. Enloe, Maneuvers: The International Politics of Militarizing Wo m e n’s Li v e s (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2000). 5. Mark Sherry discusses the relationship between poverty and intel – lectual disability. There is a class- based element to an individual’s socially perceived “vulnerability,” especially if a lack of resources and a diagnosis of disability are mutually constructed. Mark Sherry, Disability and Diversity: A Sociological Perspective (New York: Nova Science, 2008). 6. The American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabil – ities defines intellectual disability as “a disability characterized by significant limitations both in intellectual functioning and in adaptive behavior, which covers many everyday social and practical skills.” American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, “Definition of Intellectual Dis – ability,” http://aaidd.org/intellectual-disability/definition. Later in this chap – ter, I explore how intellectual disability is defined and how this definition limits individual agency and choice, perhaps leading to an increase of sexual abuse. Gill, Michael. Already Doing It : Intellectual Disability and Sexual Agency, University of Minnesota Press, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwinnipeg/detail.action?docID=2011451. Created from uwinnipeg on 2021-01-01 15:25:09. Copyright © 2015. University of Minnesota Press. All rights reserved. Notes to Chapter 1 205 7. There is a historical tradition that calls on white men to “defend” vir – ginal white women’s bodies from predators. This problematic view of gender and race relations is replayed below, where McArthur’s purity “requires” de – fense from the threat that her attacker represents. Of course, the notion of defense contributes to her perceived vulnerability. McArthur’s whiteness is not remarked on in the journalistic accounts of the case. I argue, however, that others see her abuse as more “horrific” because she is a white woman. Whiteness creates an inconsistent response to experiences of sexual abuse. 8. Razack, Looking White People in the Eye. 9. Glenn Beck, “Transcript of Glenn Beck Show: June 30th, 2006,” CNN, http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0606/30/gb.01.html. 10. Ibid. 11. Where else would individuals be forced to clean the school except in a special education class? I discuss this issue in another publication. See Michael Gill, “The Myth of Transition: Contractualizing Disability in the Sheltered Workshop,” Disability and Society 20, no. 6 (2005): 613– 23. 12. Jeffrey Weeks, “Court Brief on Behalf of Kalie McArthur,” Weeks and Luchetta Law Firm, http://w w w.wrightslaw.com/law/pleadings/mcarthur .academy.complaint.pdf. 13. Ibid. 14. Brian Newsome, “Entire Family Affected by What Teen Calls a Lapse of Judgment,” The Gazette, January 15, 2008. 15. I bid. 16. Deborah Frazier, “Lawyer Sees School Hush- Up: Girl’s Parents Sue over Alleged Assault by Young Caretaker,” Rocky Mountain News, June 13, 2006. 17. Razack, Looking White People in the Eye. 18. Newsome, “Entire Family Affected by What Teen Calls a Lapse of Jud g ment .” 19. Frazier, “Lawyer Sees School Hush- Up”; Associated Press, “Parents: Expert Says Attack Pleasurable,” Associated Press , June 13, 2006; Glenn Beck, “Transcript of Glenn Beck Show: June 28th, 2006,” CNN, http://transcripts .cnn.com/TR ANSCRIPTS/0606/28/gb.01.html; Newsome, “Entire Family Af – fected by What Teen Calls a Lapse of Judgment.” 20. Weeks, “Court Brief on Behalf of Kalie McArthur.” 21. Newsome, “Entire Family Affected by What Teen Calls a Lapse of Jud g ment .” 22. Ibid. 23. Ibid. 24. Ibid. 25. I bid. 26. Brian Newsome, “Innocence Undone,” The Gazette, January 12, 2008. 2 7. I b i d . Gill, Michael. Already Doing It : Intellectual Disability and Sexual Agency, University of Minnesota Press, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwinnipeg/detail.action?docID=2011451. Created from uwinnipeg on 2021-01-01 15:25:09. Copyright © 2015. University of Minnesota Press. All rights reserved.

Writerbay.net

Everyone needs a little help with academic work from time to time. Hire the best essay writing professionals working for us today!

Get a 15% discount for your first order


Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper