A Response to Alex "Wheelchair Rapunzel" Dacy's “INSTITUTIONAL RACISM AND ABLEISM: BOTH ARE EQUALLY IMPORTANT (minorities need to do better)”
“INSTITUTIONAL RACISM AND ABLEISM: BOTH ARE EQUALLY IMPORTANT (minorities need to do better)” by Alex Dacy addresses many issues that marginalized communities deal with. Instead of being a piece that conveys a conclusive final statement, it is a manifesto produced from a thinking process that is full of anti-blackness and other racist ideologies, further harming disabled people of color.
When I came across this blog post, I wasn’t sure what I would think by the end of having read it. As I began to read it I was surprised to see that there was only one person who wrote it, being that there is an image of an unnamed Black woman being used as part of the header image along with the author herself. It’s unclear on why a Black woman is being used in the header.
In my opinion, it was grossly irresponsible to write and publish a piece on these two experiences together, especially coming from a place of privilege on one of the topics that she later speaks on. The very first sentence of the post opens with the author declaring that she doesn’t claim to be well-educated on the things that she’ll be speaking on. There’s a mention of this being a “very important matter,” so it is confusing why she decided that it was okay to be willfully ignorant on it. The author mentions having a degree in disability studies, and as the disability rights movement in the United States adopted a grand chunk of its blueprint from the civil rights movement, I feel that it was a major feat to not be well-versed on the basics of racism-- a major theme of the piece she wrote.
The author seems to use terms without actually knowing the significance of them. She poses intersectionality theory as something that is to be done, asking why all minorities can’t root for each other as soon as the theory is brought up.
The theme shifts onto explaining how “minorities” are failing their “non-marginalized” allies and the ironic question of why all minorities can’t root for each other is posted to the reader. She claims that as minorities “we” are failing our allies. As if there is labor that needs to be done to care for the privileged during the resistance against violence that harms marginalized people fighting simply to exist every single day. In one sentence, she exemplifies what she complains about.
The author goes on to ask the rhetorical question of why she feels people call other people racist as often as she craves sushi, adding that it happens “way too often.” It is clear that the author is not trying to understand the subject that she admits she’s ignorant on because rather than educate herself, she complains about it (as it doesn’t affect her).
She then goes on to make the statement that when someone calls another person racist that it “furthers the divide” between marginalized and non-marginalized people. Perhaps not ironically, this statement comes after people having called her racist. The reader is left unclear on if the author is speaking on all marginalized groups or just people of color and white people.
She brings up examples on how people can respond to people who “display white privilege” or “racist behavior” because she believes that “these words” are being misused.
The author writes that she does her best to “bring awareness to all marginalized groups,” which I tried to find evidence of after doing an internet search. What I did find was a saved “Instagram story” from a few days ago which were links to academic papers-- one she points out was written by a “disabled POC” (as she writes) to further prove the point that she is trying to make in this post.
Alex goes on to declare that disabled people are “just as marginalized as people of color.” In that very sentence she ignores the existence of disabled people of color (like the one she referenced in one of her Instagram posts). After this, she declares that disabled people of color “are one of the most marginalized groups there is.” She then goes on to add that we should “examine all minorities,” not just “the more “popularized” ones” because “We could really use your help.” It's not clear who “we” is supposed to be.
The theme of the post changes as she begins to list off examples of ableism that she has experienced. Among this are examples of low employment rates, trouble accessing healthcare, housing difficulties, and more. It is the example of someone telling her she can’t be on a dance floor because she might run someone over that she says labeling someone as ableist “might be okay.”
The theme changes back to talking about people of color. The author says that “no one group deserves more attention or allies,” and that “advocating for both groups doesn’t take away from the other.” This is confusing for me because she is not being an ally of people of color but claims to love advocating for people with disabilities.
We get to what I believe is the main point of the piece as she asserts that saying “disabled bodies matter” (a phrase that is a variation of and co-opts the “Black Lives Matter” phrase) does not take away from the Black Lives Matter movement. As she is selling merchandise that says “disabled bodies matter,” it is to be concluded that that’s why this post was made.
She claims that she stands with “all minorities” which I feel would be easier to believe if there were proof of it. Instead, many people who are marginalized in many aspects (including race, disability, gender, sexuality, etc) have had their comments deleted by her once they expressed their concerns about what she’s doing. She says that she pledges to do better, but doesn’t answer how. All that she offers is a reason on why she decided to write this piece which she says draws a parallel between ableism and racism… Even though disabled people of color have repeatedly said that doing this harms them. She admits that she finds it “hard to digest how much work is being done to end racism and not ableism.”
Instead of just using her platform to make the world more aware of ableism-- something that she personally experiences-- she uses it to complain about people who choose to spend some of their time on making people aware of the injustices that affect black, non-black indigenous, and other people of color every day.
To me, it doesn’t appear that she recognizes how the fight against racism improves her quality of life every single day. Since the inception of the civil rights movement (which hasn’t ended)-- non-black, especially non-PoC disabled people, have benefited from it. During the beginning of the civil rights movement, many pro-black events and black groups including the Black Panther party helped the disability rights movement get traction. Black Panthers provided food and personal assistant services almost every single day in what would end up making the longest non-violent protest inside of a federal building (in United States history)-- the 504 Sit-In. This would not have been possible without them. And that’s just the beginning of what the fight against racism has done for disabled people. People of color have fought for fair housing, educational rights for disabled students, and against so many other harmful practices and it’s apparent that she doesn’t recognize it.
The author concludes the piece by saying that “we need to do better,” and asking you, the reader, what you will do to “become an ally,” “a voice,” or an advocate. As she continues to silence the voices of others speaking up, make posts and videos explaining why what she’s doing is okay, co-opt the body positive movement while throwing the very people who created it under the bus and sell these “disabled bodies matter” shirts during Black History Month (despite the considerable backlash from black disabled organizations and activists), I’m left wondering what her answer to that question is myself.
“I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.”
-Martin Luther King Jr.