DISABILITY HIERARCHIES AND INTERNALISED ABLEISM IN FLANNERY O’CONNOR’S THE LIFE YOU SAVE MAY BE YOUR OWN

Malesela Montle, Heritage Moleke


Abstract


Flannery O’Connor’s The Life You Save May Be Your Own examines the ableist and exploitative attitudes affecting persons with disabilities. The text demonstrates how disability hierarchies intensify marginalisation based on the severity of impairments. It presents two characters with distinct disabilities: one physically impaired and the other psychologically impaired, whose experiences converge through shared marginalisation and exploitation. Through this convergence, O’Connor exposes not only ableism pointed at persons with disabilities by the able-bodied community, but also intra-community ableism, where individuals with lesser impairments marginalise those with more severe disabilities. Accordingly, this study employs a qualitative close reading approach to explore hierarchies within the disabled community and their impact on victimisation and marginalisation of persons with disabilities. The study finds that differing social valuations attached to disability contribute to the reproduction of internalized ableism. Less severely disabled characters exploit and marginalise those with greater impairments, perpetuating othering, systemic discrimination, and lived struggles within the disabled community. The analysis of these findings is grounded in Critical Disability Theory.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Adhikari, A., Aryal, B., & Khatiwada, K. (2024). Addressing disability inclusion in Nepal: Barriers and actions. Quest Journal of Management and Social Sciences, 6(3), 540–549. https://doi.org/10.3126/qjmss.v6i3.72486

Barnes, C., & Oliver, M. (1993). Disability: A sociological phenomenon ignored by sociologists. UK: University of Leeds.

Beatty, J. E., & Joffe, R. (2006). An overlooked dimension of diversity: The career effects of chronic illness. Organisational Dynamics, 35(2), 182–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ORGDYN.2006.03.006.

Blanck, P. (2020). Disability Inclusive Employment and the Accommodation Principle: Emerging Issues in Research, Policy, and Law. J Occup Rehabil, 30(1), 505–510. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-020-09940-9

Boehm, S., & Jammaers, E. (2024). Disability-based discrimination in organisations. Current Opinion in Psychology, 60 (1), 101932. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2024.101932

Boorse, C. (2009). Disability and medical theory. In Philosophical reflections on disability (pp. 55–88). Springer.

Campbell, F. A. K. (2019). Contours of Ableism: The Production of Disability and Abledness. Palgrave Macmillan.

Campbell, F. K. (2009). The project of ableism. In Contours of ableism: The production of disability and ableness (pp. 3–15). Palgrave Macmillan.

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Sage.

Davis, L. J. (2013). Introduction: Normality, power, and culture. The disability studies reader, 4, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203077887

Devlin, R. F., & Pothier, D. (Eds.). (2006). Critical disability theory: Essays in philosophy, politics, policy, and law. UBC Press.

Garland-Thomson, R. (2002). Integrating disability, transforming feminist theory. NWSA Journal, 14(3), 1–32. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4316922.

Goodley, D. (2014). Dis/ability studies: Theorising disablism and ableism. Routledge.

Goodley, D. (2021). Disability studies and human encounters. Indian Journal of Critical Disability Studies, 1(1), 12-21. https://jcdsi.org/index.php/injcds/article/view/45

Hall, M. C. (2019). Critical disability theory. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2019 ed.). Stanford University.

Hassouneh-Phillips, D., & McNeff, E. (2005). “I thought I was less worthy”: Low sexual and body esteem and increased vulnerability to intimate partner abuse in women with physical disabilities. Sexuality and Disability, 23(4), 227–240. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11195-005-8930-3.

Hennekam, S., Richard, S., & Özbilgin, M. (2023). How social structures influence the labour market participation of individuals with mental illness: A Bourdieusian perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 60(1), 174–203. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12851.

Hosking, D. M. (2008). Can constructionism be critical? In Handbook of constructionist research (pp. 669–686). New York: Guildford Press.

Jalal, S., & Gabel, S. (2014). Physical disability, gender, and marriage in Jordanian society. Review of Disability Studies: An International Journal, 10(1–2). https://rdsjournal.org/index.php/journal/article/view/33

Jammaers, E., & Fleischmann, A. (2025). Unveiling affective disablism at work: A structural approach to microaggressions. Disability & Society, 40(6), 1622–1645. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2024.2368561

Jammaers, E., & Williams, J. (2021). Care for the self, overcompensation and bodily crafting: The work–life balance of disabled people. Gender, Work & Organization, 28(1), 119–137. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12531

Jammaers, E., & Zanoni, P. (2021). The identity regulation of disabled employees: Unveiling the “varieties of ableism” in employers’ socio-ideological control. Organization Studies, 42(3), 429–452. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840619900292

O’Connor, F. (1953). The life you save may be your own. Kenyon Review, 15(2), 195–207. https://kenyonreview.org/piece/april-1953-the-life-you-save-may-be-your-own/

Oliver, M. (1990). The politics of disablement—New social movements. In The politics of disablement (pp. 112–131). Macmillan Education.

Parker, S. (2006). International justice: The United Nations, human rights and disability. Journal of Comparative Social Welfare, 22(1), 63–78. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190846626.013.919

Reeve, D. (2014). Psycho-emotional disablism and internalised oppression. In J. Swain, S. French, C. Barnes, & C. Thomas (Eds.), Disabling barriers–enabling environments (3rd ed., pp. 92–98). Sage.

Rohleder, P., Braathen, S. H., & Carew, M. (2018). Disability and sexual health: A critical exploration of key issues. Routledge.

Sandberg, LJ., Rosqvist, H.B. & Grigorovich, A. 2021. Regulating, fostering and preserving: the production of sexual normates through cognitive ableism and cognitive othering. Cult Health Sex, 23(10),1421-1434. https://doi.org/10.1080/23293691.2023.2271897

Sauder, K. (2015, April 27). Can we please stop calling able-bodied people TABs? Crippledscholar. https://crippledscholar.com/2015/04/27/can-we-please-stop-calling-able-bodied-people-tabs/

Shakespeare, T. (2013). Disability rights and wrongs revisited (2nd ed.). Routledge.

Shakespeare, T., Watson, N., & Alghaib, O. A. (2017). Blaming the victim, all over again: Waddell and Aylward’s biopsychosocial (BPS) model of disability. Critical Social Policy, 37(1), 22–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261018316649120

Siebers, T. (2008). Disability theory. University of Michigan Press.

Smith, I. Z., & Read, J. G. (2024). Racial and gender differences in discrimination and psychological distress among young adults. Social science & medicine, 1982(354), 117070. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2024.11707.

Stewart, R. (2004). The Really Disabled: Disability Hierarchy in John Hockenberry’s Moving Violations. Review of Disability Studies: An International Journal, 1(2), 113–16. https://rdsjournal.org/index.php/journal/article/view/397.

Thomas, C. (2014). Disability and impairment. In J. Swain, S. French, C. Barnes, & C. Thomas (Eds.), Disabling barriers–enabling environments (3rd ed., pp. 9–16). Sage.

Tyson, L. (2015). Critical theory today: A user-friendly guide (3rd ed.). Routledge.

Wasserman, D. (2017). Philosophical issues in the definition and social response to disability. In Disability and equality law (pp. 19–52). Routledge.

Williams, G. (2001). Theorizing disability. In G. L. Albrecht, K. Seelman, & M. Bury (Eds.), Handbook of disability studies (pp. 123–144). SAGE Publications.

World Health Organization. (2011). World report on disability. World Health Organization.

Zewude, B., & Habtegiorgis, T. (2021). Willingness of youth without disabilities to have romantic love and marital relationships with persons with disabilities. Life sciences, society and policy, 17(1), 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40504-021-00114-w




DOI: https://doi.org/10.30743/ll.v10i1.13411

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.