Pub Date : 2022-02-14DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190093167.013.47
Allison C. Carey
A complex web of social structures enforces the exclusion of people with intellectual disabilities, and, if radically transformed, could instead foster belonging. In this chapter, we examine four structural dimensions of belonging, including legal rights, culture, and the accordance of moral value, power, and access. For each dimension, we examine how exclusion is enacted via informal social patterns and formal policy, and we offer examples of potential avenues to creating and embracing a broad sense of belonging that includes people with intellectual disabilities. Only a multifaceted approach to belonging can dissemble the complex structural factors that continue to enforce exclusion.
{"title":"Intellectual Disability and the Dimensions of Belonging","authors":"Allison C. Carey","doi":"10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190093167.013.47","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190093167.013.47","url":null,"abstract":"A complex web of social structures enforces the exclusion of people with intellectual disabilities, and, if radically transformed, could instead foster belonging. In this chapter, we examine four structural dimensions of belonging, including legal rights, culture, and the accordance of moral value, power, and access. For each dimension, we examine how exclusion is enacted via informal social patterns and formal policy, and we offer examples of potential avenues to creating and embracing a broad sense of belonging that includes people with intellectual disabilities. Only a multifaceted approach to belonging can dissemble the complex structural factors that continue to enforce exclusion.","PeriodicalId":127198,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of the Sociology of Disability","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125064029","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-14DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190093167.013.5
B. Hughes
This chapter argues that able power is and has been embodied in what Plato called “those of the best,” men who claim to ennoble the world with their eugenic superiority. Able power, legitimated by this view of congenital superiority, represented the disabled body in a pejorative language of humiliating tropes, the most common of which, in the terminology of antiquity, were deformity, defectiveness, and monstrosity. In modernity, able power absorbs scientific and pseudoscientific ideology into its agenda of legitimation by superimposing on top of the ancient and debilitating ideological categories medical terms that pathologize disabled people and ethnic others who are caught in the civilizing web of White European colonialism. The colonizing predilection of Western able power and its racist representations of non-Western ethnicities as inferior and defectively embodied is explored in a “historical sociology” of disability. Antique and modern imperialisms are examined. In these two moments, able power deploys economic and military might to subdue inferior persons abroad while simultaneously oppressing “dysgenic” bodies at home. The focus is on these two sociological moments because they, it is argued, represent the policies and practices of able power and the “ideology of able-bodiedness” at its most aggressive and violent.
{"title":"The Able Body and the Pursuit of Power","authors":"B. Hughes","doi":"10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190093167.013.5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190093167.013.5","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter argues that able power is and has been embodied in what Plato called “those of the best,” men who claim to ennoble the world with their eugenic superiority. Able power, legitimated by this view of congenital superiority, represented the disabled body in a pejorative language of humiliating tropes, the most common of which, in the terminology of antiquity, were deformity, defectiveness, and monstrosity. In modernity, able power absorbs scientific and pseudoscientific ideology into its agenda of legitimation by superimposing on top of the ancient and debilitating ideological categories medical terms that pathologize disabled people and ethnic others who are caught in the civilizing web of White European colonialism. The colonizing predilection of Western able power and its racist representations of non-Western ethnicities as inferior and defectively embodied is explored in a “historical sociology” of disability. Antique and modern imperialisms are examined. In these two moments, able power deploys economic and military might to subdue inferior persons abroad while simultaneously oppressing “dysgenic” bodies at home. The focus is on these two sociological moments because they, it is argued, represent the policies and practices of able power and the “ideology of able-bodiedness” at its most aggressive and violent.","PeriodicalId":127198,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of the Sociology of Disability","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114421230","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-14DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190093167.013.43
Carrie L. Shandra
Participation is considered a key component of many disability frameworks, yet the concept of social participation remains amorphous and contested. This chapter reviews how common disability frameworks conceptualize activities, roles, and environments in relation to participation. It then discusses challenges to measuring (social) participation through the elements of activities, roles, and environments and describes how time diary data can be used to understand daily life with disability. Finally, it analyzes the nationally representative American Time Use Survey to compare how individuals with and without disabilities spend time in 15 activity categories, across six physical locations and eight types of social interactions. Results indicate that people with disabilities spend more time at home, less time in public places, and less time in transportation than people without disabilities. They also spend more time alone and have less contact with others. However, these results depend upon activity type, illustrating the importance of integrating social and environmental contexts in empirical and theoretical models of participation differences by disability status.
{"title":"Disability and Social Participation","authors":"Carrie L. Shandra","doi":"10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190093167.013.43","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190093167.013.43","url":null,"abstract":"Participation is considered a key component of many disability frameworks, yet the concept of social participation remains amorphous and contested. This chapter reviews how common disability frameworks conceptualize activities, roles, and environments in relation to participation. It then discusses challenges to measuring (social) participation through the elements of activities, roles, and environments and describes how time diary data can be used to understand daily life with disability. Finally, it analyzes the nationally representative American Time Use Survey to compare how individuals with and without disabilities spend time in 15 activity categories, across six physical locations and eight types of social interactions. Results indicate that people with disabilities spend more time at home, less time in public places, and less time in transportation than people without disabilities. They also spend more time alone and have less contact with others. However, these results depend upon activity type, illustrating the importance of integrating social and environmental contexts in empirical and theoretical models of participation differences by disability status.","PeriodicalId":127198,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of the Sociology of Disability","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131785288","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-14DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190093167.013.18
J. D. Stevens
As rates of disability have risen over the last decade for all age groups, families have taken on more care responsibilities. Current theoretical frameworks of disability and care work are largely unconnected, limiting the ability of researchers to account for experiences of care work and receipt. How can sociologists blend these disparate theoretical and empirical literatures to develop a more comprehensive understanding of care work in the context of disability? This chapter proposes the Life Course Disability Care Work Integrated Model (LCDCW) as a potential theoretical framework informed by life course theory, a sociopolitical model of disability, and theories of care work that could unite the literatures. The model enables researchers to identify overlapping and unique structural and interpersonal barriers to care for care workers and care recipients in the context of disability. The chapter then reviews the empirical literature on people’s experiences with disability receiving and providing family care to highlight the framework’s usefulness, emphasizing the unique and shared contexts that shape care relationships and the problems that arise therein. The empirical literature review identifies that people with disability are providers and recipients of care, an essential link between disability and care work literatures. The conclusion summarizes the main contributions of the review, highlights existing gaps in the literature and opportunities for future research, and illustrates how disability and family care work scholarship can influence disability-related policy and programs.
在过去十年中，所有年龄组的残疾率都在上升，家庭承担了更多的照顾责任。目前残疾和护理工作的理论框架在很大程度上是不相关的，限制了研究人员解释护理工作和接收经验的能力。社会学家如何将这些不同的理论和经验文献结合起来，以发展对残疾背景下护理工作的更全面的理解?本章提出生命历程残障照护工作整合模型(Life Course Disability Care Work Integrated Model, LCDCW)，作为生命历程理论、残障社会政治模型和照护工作理论的潜在理论框架。该模型使研究人员能够识别在残疾背景下护理工作者和护理接受者的重叠和独特的结构和人际障碍。然后，本章回顾了关于残疾人接受和提供家庭护理经验的实证文献，以突出框架的有用性，强调塑造护理关系和由此产生的问题的独特和共享背景。实证文献综述表明，残障人士是护理的提供者和接受者，是残障与护理工作文献之间的重要联系。结论总结了本综述的主要贡献，强调了文献中存在的差距和未来研究的机会，并说明了残疾和家庭护理工作奖学金如何影响残疾相关政策和项目。
{"title":"Disability and Family Care Work over the Life Course","authors":"J. D. Stevens","doi":"10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190093167.013.18","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190093167.013.18","url":null,"abstract":"As rates of disability have risen over the last decade for all age groups, families have taken on more care responsibilities. Current theoretical frameworks of disability and care work are largely unconnected, limiting the ability of researchers to account for experiences of care work and receipt. How can sociologists blend these disparate theoretical and empirical literatures to develop a more comprehensive understanding of care work in the context of disability? This chapter proposes the Life Course Disability Care Work Integrated Model (LCDCW) as a potential theoretical framework informed by life course theory, a sociopolitical model of disability, and theories of care work that could unite the literatures. The model enables researchers to identify overlapping and unique structural and interpersonal barriers to care for care workers and care recipients in the context of disability. The chapter then reviews the empirical literature on people’s experiences with disability receiving and providing family care to highlight the framework’s usefulness, emphasizing the unique and shared contexts that shape care relationships and the problems that arise therein. The empirical literature review identifies that people with disability are providers and recipients of care, an essential link between disability and care work literatures. The conclusion summarizes the main contributions of the review, highlights existing gaps in the literature and opportunities for future research, and illustrates how disability and family care work scholarship can influence disability-related policy and programs.","PeriodicalId":127198,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of the Sociology of Disability","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131474496","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-08DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190093167.013.46
S. Tomlinson, Stacy Hewitt
Governments around the world press for higher levels of education and skills for all their young people. They believe that, despite recessions and job losses, people are “human capital” who need to invest in their own training and help grow economies. In England in 2019, disabled adults made up 20% of potential workers, but only half of them were employed. This chapter discusses the changing nature of the labor market and the place of young people regarded as having special educational needs or disabilities in education and training, noting that despite a shift to a social model of disability, social and work environments often fail to adapt to those with disabilities. Education and training for disabled young people have usually been at lower levels and the jobs on offer for them lower skilled and waged. But, more recently in England, disabled students have been recognized as a significant presence with more taking higher skilled and professional jobs after graduation. The chapter briefly compares the situation in England with that of Germany and Finland.
{"title":"Disability, Education, and Work in a Global Knowledge Economy","authors":"S. Tomlinson, Stacy Hewitt","doi":"10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190093167.013.46","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190093167.013.46","url":null,"abstract":"Governments around the world press for higher levels of education and skills for all their young people. They believe that, despite recessions and job losses, people are “human capital” who need to invest in their own training and help grow economies. In England in 2019, disabled adults made up 20% of potential workers, but only half of them were employed. This chapter discusses the changing nature of the labor market and the place of young people regarded as having special educational needs or disabilities in education and training, noting that despite a shift to a social model of disability, social and work environments often fail to adapt to those with disabilities. Education and training for disabled young people have usually been at lower levels and the jobs on offer for them lower skilled and waged. But, more recently in England, disabled students have been recognized as a significant presence with more taking higher skilled and professional jobs after graduation. The chapter briefly compares the situation in England with that of Germany and Finland.","PeriodicalId":127198,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of the Sociology of Disability","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117165545","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-08DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190093167.013.26
Lisa A. Schur, D. Kruse
This chapter examines the prevalence, causes, and consequences of precarious work among people with disabilities. New US evidence from the government’s Current Population Survey, and reviews of prior studies, show that workers with disabilities are more likely than those without disabilities to be in precarious jobs. This is explained in part by many people with disabilities choosing precarious jobs due to the flexibility these jobs can provide. Other people with disabilities, however, face prejudice and discrimination in obtaining standard jobs and must resort to taking precarious jobs with less security, lower pay and benefits, little or no training and opportunities for advancement, and few, if any, worker protections. Workers with disabilities tend to have worse outcomes on these measures than workers without disabilities in every type of employment arrangement. The disability pay gap is higher in precarious jobs than in full-time permanent jobs. The mixed evidence suggests that precarious jobs create good employment outcomes for some workers with disabilities but bad outcomes for others. While continued efforts are needed to decrease barriers to traditional employment for people with disabilities, efforts are also needed to bring higher pay and greater legal protections to precarious workers, which would especially benefit workers with disabilities.
本章探讨了残疾人从事不稳定工作的普遍性、原因和后果。来自美国政府当前人口调查(Current Population Survey)的新证据以及对先前研究的回顾表明，残疾工人比非残疾工人更有可能从事不稳定的工作。这在一定程度上是由于许多残疾人选择不稳定的工作，因为这些工作可以提供灵活性。然而，其他残疾人在获得标准工作时面临偏见和歧视，必须从事不稳定的工作，这些工作缺乏保障，工资和福利较低，很少或根本没有培训和晋升机会，而且很少(如果有的话)工人保护。在所有类型的就业安排中，残疾工人在这些措施上的结果往往比没有残疾的工人差。在不稳定的工作中，残疾工资差距高于全职工作。这些混杂的证据表明，不稳定的工作为一些残疾工人创造了良好的就业结果，但对另一些人却产生了不利的结果。虽然需要继续努力减少残疾人传统就业的障碍，但也需要努力为不稳定的工人提供更高的工资和更多的法律保护，这将特别有利于残疾工人。
{"title":"Disability and Precarious Work","authors":"Lisa A. Schur, D. Kruse","doi":"10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190093167.013.26","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190093167.013.26","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter examines the prevalence, causes, and consequences of precarious work among people with disabilities. New US evidence from the government’s Current Population Survey, and reviews of prior studies, show that workers with disabilities are more likely than those without disabilities to be in precarious jobs. This is explained in part by many people with disabilities choosing precarious jobs due to the flexibility these jobs can provide. Other people with disabilities, however, face prejudice and discrimination in obtaining standard jobs and must resort to taking precarious jobs with less security, lower pay and benefits, little or no training and opportunities for advancement, and few, if any, worker protections. Workers with disabilities tend to have worse outcomes on these measures than workers without disabilities in every type of employment arrangement. The disability pay gap is higher in precarious jobs than in full-time permanent jobs. The mixed evidence suggests that precarious jobs create good employment outcomes for some workers with disabilities but bad outcomes for others. While continued efforts are needed to decrease barriers to traditional employment for people with disabilities, efforts are also needed to bring higher pay and greater legal protections to precarious workers, which would especially benefit workers with disabilities.","PeriodicalId":127198,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of the Sociology of Disability","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131513217","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-08DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190093167.013.41
P. Kermit, Terje Olsen
This chapter presents and discusses barriers that Deaf people who have Norwegian Sign Language as their first language face in encounters with the Norwegian criminal justice system. Since this system is based exclusively on spoken language, and mainly depends on the individual law professional’s ability to establish critical, self-reflective practices in each case, Deaf people’s legal safety, as demanded by the rule of law, cannot be taken for granted. Establishing a public, independent, professionalized sign language interpreter service in Norway, however, has helped to reduce risks for Deaf people. Independent interpreters can demand changes in the criminal justice system’s practices, thus making these practices more accessible to Deaf people. Empirical examples illustrating the interaction between Deaf people, law professionals, and interpreters are presented and analyzed. This interaction is less characterized by conflict and more by cooperation and mutual recognition, where both Deaf people and law professionals state their confidence and trust in their interpreters. The chapter concludes that structural change and organization, such as the establishment of an independent public interpreter service in Norway, trump general and well-meant inclusive intentions in organizations such as the Norwegian criminal justice system when it comes to secure Deaf peoples’ rights and the prevention of miscarriage of justice.
{"title":"Barriers to Access in the Norwegian Criminal Justice System","authors":"P. Kermit, Terje Olsen","doi":"10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190093167.013.41","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190093167.013.41","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter presents and discusses barriers that Deaf people who have Norwegian Sign Language as their first language face in encounters with the Norwegian criminal justice system. Since this system is based exclusively on spoken language, and mainly depends on the individual law professional’s ability to establish critical, self-reflective practices in each case, Deaf people’s legal safety, as demanded by the rule of law, cannot be taken for granted. Establishing a public, independent, professionalized sign language interpreter service in Norway, however, has helped to reduce risks for Deaf people. Independent interpreters can demand changes in the criminal justice system’s practices, thus making these practices more accessible to Deaf people. Empirical examples illustrating the interaction between Deaf people, law professionals, and interpreters are presented and analyzed. This interaction is less characterized by conflict and more by cooperation and mutual recognition, where both Deaf people and law professionals state their confidence and trust in their interpreters. The chapter concludes that structural change and organization, such as the establishment of an independent public interpreter service in Norway, trump general and well-meant inclusive intentions in organizations such as the Norwegian criminal justice system when it comes to secure Deaf peoples’ rights and the prevention of miscarriage of justice.","PeriodicalId":127198,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of the Sociology of Disability","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128444752","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-08DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190093167.013.44
R. Scotch, Kara Sutton
This chapter provides an overview of the social movement advocating for disability rights, including its origins, goals, strategies, structure, and impact. The chapter’s primary focus is on the movement in the United States, although developments in other nations are also discussed. The chapter reviews the origins of the disability rights movement in the 20th century in response to stigma and discrimination associated with disabilities and the medical model of disability; addresses the movement’s advocacy strategies, as well as the social model of disability that provided the conceptual underpinning for its goals and activities; and describes how the major components of the movement, including cross-disability organization, were brought together through collaboration and the common experiences of disability culture.
{"title":"The Disability Rights Movement","authors":"R. Scotch, Kara Sutton","doi":"10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190093167.013.44","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190093167.013.44","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter provides an overview of the social movement advocating for disability rights, including its origins, goals, strategies, structure, and impact. The chapter’s primary focus is on the movement in the United States, although developments in other nations are also discussed. The chapter reviews the origins of the disability rights movement in the 20th century in response to stigma and discrimination associated with disabilities and the medical model of disability; addresses the movement’s advocacy strategies, as well as the social model of disability that provided the conceptual underpinning for its goals and activities; and describes how the major components of the movement, including cross-disability organization, were brought together through collaboration and the common experiences of disability culture.","PeriodicalId":127198,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of the Sociology of Disability","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116322733","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-10DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190093167.013.15
J. Foster
The fashion industry has long neglected people with disabilities, opting instead for a cast of uniformly slender and (overwhelmingly) White models. But recent efforts toward diversity and inclusion suggest that change may be underway. This chapter examines these changes with a focus on fashion media published online. Specifically, this chapter looks to a collection of 50 editorial articles published by Teen Vogue between 2018 and 2020 to determine how disability is framed for consumers. It does this within a broader discussion on the cultural logics and industry conventions that shape the production of fashion content. The findings reported here suggest that online fashion media may hold unique opportunities for diversity and inclusion, with stories and images that cast disability in new and less narrow terms than have been previously reported. These include terms related to the importance of representation across cultural industries and stories that center disability rights in focus. Moving forward, more work is needed to ensure that this representation carriers forward in cultural productions within and outside of the fashion industry.
{"title":"Framing Disability in Fashion","authors":"J. Foster","doi":"10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190093167.013.15","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190093167.013.15","url":null,"abstract":"The fashion industry has long neglected people with disabilities, opting instead for a cast of uniformly slender and (overwhelmingly) White models. But recent efforts toward diversity and inclusion suggest that change may be underway. This chapter examines these changes with a focus on fashion media published online. Specifically, this chapter looks to a collection of 50 editorial articles published by Teen Vogue between 2018 and 2020 to determine how disability is framed for consumers. It does this within a broader discussion on the cultural logics and industry conventions that shape the production of fashion content. The findings reported here suggest that online fashion media may hold unique opportunities for diversity and inclusion, with stories and images that cast disability in new and less narrow terms than have been previously reported. These include terms related to the importance of representation across cultural industries and stories that center disability rights in focus. Moving forward, more work is needed to ensure that this representation carriers forward in cultural productions within and outside of the fashion industry.","PeriodicalId":127198,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of the Sociology of Disability","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121484660","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-10DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190093167.013.20
Fabrico E. Balcazar, N. Ramírez
This chapter identifies some of the main barriers and available supports that allow students with disabilities to participate in vocational rehabilitation (VR) transition programs. VR is a US federal program that attempts (as one of its goals) to introduce students with disabilities to employment experiences while they are still in school. The program uses access to paid internships and vocational counseling among several other components as key mechanisms to pursue its objectives. The chapter describes how the program is introduced from a best-practices perspective and proposes a conceptual model that highlights the individual, organizational, and contextual factors affecting employment outcomes for youth with disabilities. It also introduces the concept of entrepreneurship as another way to support the transition of high school youth with disabilities and discuss the implications of VR programs and supports on the employment outcomes of youth with disabilities.
{"title":"Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Outcomes","authors":"Fabrico E. Balcazar, N. Ramírez","doi":"10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190093167.013.20","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190093167.013.20","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter identifies some of the main barriers and available supports that allow students with disabilities to participate in vocational rehabilitation (VR) transition programs. VR is a US federal program that attempts (as one of its goals) to introduce students with disabilities to employment experiences while they are still in school. The program uses access to paid internships and vocational counseling among several other components as key mechanisms to pursue its objectives. The chapter describes how the program is introduced from a best-practices perspective and proposes a conceptual model that highlights the individual, organizational, and contextual factors affecting employment outcomes for youth with disabilities. It also introduces the concept of entrepreneurship as another way to support the transition of high school youth with disabilities and discuss the implications of VR programs and supports on the employment outcomes of youth with disabilities.","PeriodicalId":127198,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of the Sociology of Disability","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116827998","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：