On Oct. 8, 2024, I watched over 200 students, faculty and Fairfield University community members fill the Kelley Center Presentation Room to learn. They sought to learn about an issue that frankly is not discussed nearly enough, both on our campus and in our nation. I was overwhelmed with gratitude, pride and hope.
Gratitude that so many people had taken the time out of their busy day to come hear the Disability Awareness Committee and I present on the stigmatization of, discrimination towards and the struggle to properly accommodate community members with disabilities on our campus. Proud of the work that my colleagues and I put into this inaugural disability awareness event and we were hopeful that we as a community and yes, as a nation overall, could slowly but surely reject the ableism that exists both within our American institutions and society.
Twenty-nine days later, I and millions of Americans with disabilities woke up to an ableist President-elect.
Before this piece goes forward, we must define ableism. Ableism is defined as “discrimination and social prejudice against people who have disabilities or are perceived to have disabilities.” Ableism can be intentional through outright discriminatory language that belittles people with disabilities, but it can also be either unintentional or less explicit through our language and in the political arena through policy actions.
President-elect Donald Trump has repeatedly throughout his political career engaged in intentional ableism through his language. In 2016, then-candidate Trump openly mocked a disabled reporter. “Now, the poor guy—you ought to see the guy: ‘Uh, I don’t know what I said. I don’t remember,” Trump exclaimed at a rally, imitating the reporter, Serge Kovaleski, who has a condition which limits his arm mobility. Trump mimicked Kovaleski’s arm movement as his supporters bellowed with laughter.
More recently, Donald Trump referred to his political opponents in extremely derogatory language that is highly offensive towards people with disabilities. Mr. Trump, according to reports, called his political opponent Vice President Kamala Harris, “retarded” and “mentally challenged,” terms that have been used to insult people with intellectual disabilities for decades by conveying negative stereotypes about them.
The incoming president has promised to enact policies that would fundamentally change the ways that people with disabilities are accommodated in schools. As a candidate, Mr. Trump endorsed abolishing the Department of Education, a department that provides state funding and regulations under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and the Rehabilitation Act of 1972 to accommodate students with disabilities in both K-12 schools and public universities and colleges. This act of abolishing the Department of Education alone would decentralize how states accommodate students with disabilities in education, leading to immense fear in the disability community.
It is easy to think that this election result is not related to disability justice. It is easy to think that this election result has little to do with the disability awareness campaign and the social action project that my team and I are leading this academic year. It is easy to think that I am overreacting to this election. I understand that this campus is probably more conservative than liberal. I understand probably more than most that our campus and our country are polarized to extreme margins that did not exist before the students on this campus were old enough to be politically engaged. I understand that many will disagree with me publishing this Op-ed.
I frankly don’t care.
It is my strongest belief that the issue of disability justice is not, and must not be a political issue, but rather a human issue. It is clear to me as a disabled person and an aspiring disability justice advocate that this work that my team is doing at this particular moment in time could not be more important. Sometimes, we have to be willing to speak out and rise above party polarization.
How am I supposed to lead a disability awareness campaign without bringing awareness to the electoral consequences? How am I supposed to put on awareness events about microaggressions and stigmatization of people with disabilities, yet not speak out when I see America electing an individual who engages in the same stigmatization and ableism that I am fighting against on campus?
I was raised to take action where I see the need to, so I am. My ask to the Fairfield community is to do the same: Not necessarily in the political sphere, although I encourage those who are interested to do so, but in the everyday actions we take on our campus.
Reject ableism on campus. Call out people when they engage in microaggressions unintentionally. Explain to people why terms like “retarded” and “mentally challenged” are insults to people with disabilities. Discuss with our campus members how the policies that our government may take are harmful to people with disabilities. Part of our Jesuit mission is to be people for and with others. As stewards of the Jesuit mission statement, we have a sacred obligation to safeguard those who are being discriminated against on a national level, but also in our communities themselves. Now is the time to meet this obligation.
Just because our nation cannot fully reject ableism does not mean Fairfield University cannot.
Leave a Reply