#disability stereotypes

[ghost-rambles]

Disability representation

Disabled character rarely get to be their own, full character, instead they tend to fall in one of a few archetypes of disability representation, few of which grant them much humanity and in many cases, disabled characters were/are clearly separated from able-bodied society.

with early characters, the only place disability was seen at all is villains and other vile characters, who´s disabilities served to underscore that they were evil and distinctly different from what was usually an able-bodied group of heroes. Disability itself was represented as a moral defect, which deserved ridicule and separation from "proper" society (which is to say able-bodied society).

In the past as well as many places currently, disability is shown as something damning you to live miserably and bitter and without any hope for a happy or fulfilling lives, sometimes death is portrayed as a best case scenario for a disabled character like this and any responsibility of society to improve conditions for disabled people is disregarded.

Other cases present Disabled characters as a motivational story, meant for a able-bodied audience, in which characters often overcome their disability in one way or another, which is dishearteningly impossible for many real people with disabilities and only serves to play into the idea that disabled people, instead of getting external support from government or fellow people to make a world they´re able to participate in, should "pull themselves up by their bootstraps" and simply try harder.

A more modern issue in disability representation is when there are simple fixes to a disability, which either reverse it fully, or make the disability non-disabling to the characters, this is especially prevalent in sci-fi and superhero media, but can appear anywhere. In these instances a character might technically have an impairment, such as a missing limb, but it is not addressed and instead "fixed" by, for an example, a hyper-advanced prosthetic which they constantly wear and functions perfectly as a real arm. This might be a nice thought in some instances, but it is extremely unrealistic and causes a disconnect between a fictional disabled character and the reality of being disabled.

In short, there is still a lot of work to be done in regards of representing disabled people as actual people and not disregarding their disabilities entirely.

(EDIT: to be clear, i don't mean to say that any of these ways of representation are always awful and shouldn't exist, i only want to point out how common these stereotypes are and how they can potentially be harmful. i think some of these do a have their place, but i think there should also be more nuanced and varied representation of disability.)

(here are some sources i used to research this:

https://cma4962.wordpress.com/2016/03/01/history-of-disability-on-film/

https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-ouch-27883836

https://www.handinhandqc.org/blog/problematic-representation-of-people-with-disabilities-in-the-media

as well as my own experiences with media)

[bean-spring]

Hot take and not to be a killjoy or the shipping police but people treating Viktor or Jinx's aroace headcanons as if they were canon is not the revolutionary take people think it is.

Headcanons are always all right but we have to acknowledge that they are somehow damaging when they apply to stereotypes. It might not be the case for everyone but most of the time people unconsciously assume that disability/mental illness=asexuality. These headcanons erase the freedom of attraction from people who are already seen as unable to have sexual/romantic experiences/desires, when it's completely untrue and harmful.

You can headcanon Viktor and Jinx as aroace, but I have seen people changing their minds once Viktor is no longer disabled (s2 with all of his other forms) and Jinx is no longer as mentally ill (alternate universe Powder). And it speaks wonders of how people see these characters.

"I never thought about Jinx being able to feel romantic/sexual attraction until s2!" To believe she's actually only capable of that when she's not "damaged" is incredibly disturbing. Especially since Jinx has always had a bit of a flirty personality too.

"I've always seen Viktor as asexual, I don't know why!" That's fine. You can headcanon him as ace. But I believe there is a reason behind it, most of the time, if for some inexplicable reason the "vibes" of the disabled character are making you think he's ace.

I say all of this being aroaspec myself, by the way. Headcanon all you want but going to people's posts commenting how "it's weird for you that they have romantic/sexual plots when they're clearly aroace" is not a win at all. It's a headcanon, after all, and it should be treated as such, and that's fine. But it also is damaging to spread stereotypes like these.

Of course the disabled character is asexual. Of course the mentally ill character is aromantic. It's not as revolutionary as you might think, tbh.

Fandom is not activism and it's all right to have any headcanons you want BUT some of them are filled with damaging stuff and perhaps we should look into ourselves more before treating these assumptions as something canon.

[lunamond]

Love it when a modern "progressive" show makes all the evildoers physically disabled.

Larys has a Clubfoot, Aemond gets his eye cut out, and now Aegon is burnt and missing appendages.

Isn't it convenient that we can immediately tell a person is bad because their body looks different?

And of course, we don't explore any discrimination against these characters because they're horrible, and we shouldn't feel bad for horrible people.

People were mean to Larys because of his Clubfoot? But don't you know he has a gross foot fetish?

Aemond has impaired vision? But his eyepatch looks cool, and he is still a good fighter, so what is he even complaining about?

Aegon has been severely burnt? But he is a rapist and so let's make jokes about his dick burning off, lol.

[five-thousand-loaves-of-bread]

really genuinely more n more sometimes struggle understand why so many people so against mild autism severe autism

all arguments don’t make sense to me when switch autism for another thing?

like mild depression not saying you have less depression than severe depression

n. to have mild depression mean your struggle clinically significant enough. but mild in comparison to what depression could be.

think lots disabled people feel like not struggle bad enough. which include severely disabled, not uniquely “mild” label thing? like me too? n also it not change what you able or not able do though?

if you argue there no mild depression severe depression it all just depression most people look at you silly

n don’t see it as inherently dehumanize either? like if have (& back when had) severe depression n people treat me bad abuse me for it (they did). think most people able know it fault of ableist people who abuse me, not caused by label of severe depression?

like to me mild severe just facts?

maybe it different because developmental disability which people treat as if nondisordered personality trait?

but then people argue against this also say have severe ADHD?

like why autism so special

genuine don’t understand

bc guess it really clear to me n not able ever imagine understand anyone think different… again

(if dont know you please don’t try explain it to me thanks)

[theautismarcana]

I might make a couple people mad but "Terry Fawles was an intellectually disabled man that Dahlia Hawthrone took advantage of." and "Fawles' relationship with Dahlia was horribly inappropriate and she was right to distrust him" are two statements that can coexist.

[aroaceleovaldez]

yknow i joke about pjo fandom being "ableism fandom" cause of how ironically the fandom behaves about disability themes in the franchise (and within the community) but the notes on that one post are apparently indicating the majority of the fandom legitimately did not process any disability themes in the entirety of the series besides being explicitly told in direct terms that demigods have adhd/dyslexia and that actually explains a lot

[bigmack2go]

Why do disabled people, fat people, authistic ppl and nonbinary always get hc’ed as asexual?

Dgmw have your headcannons, some of them i have too but it’s like all of them are fanon ace? Like i love the representation but is it really representiom if it’s just a concstant stereotype thats e v e r y w h e r e? And mostly no one else gets hc’ed as aro/ace it too! Like do you think just because i’m authistic and disabled and nonbinary i’m ow so innocent and i can’t have sex??? What??

[lele5429]

Comfort character with his service bird

I got a diagnosis for something I’ve been suspecting for a long time.

Here’s my comfort character with his emotional support bird. Character design by 枭柏, the same artist who did the Chinese regional stereotypes LU AU.

She’s also doing a Chinese high school AU with the same characters (her original design below! ⬇️). And I suggested making Ravio a character with hidden disabilities, and that’s why he has his service bird Sheerow at school!

(In the drawing below he’s showing his phone hahaha)

[cripplecharacters]

For reference, I'm autistic but I'm not physically disabled. I'm wondering if I'm playing into some bad stereotypes with one of my disabled characters. She's primarily a wheelchair user, but she can walk short distances with mobility aids. Basically, she's always visibly disabled.

I gave her quite a few of my own traits (and accidentally made her autistic in the process). One of these traits is I made her aroace. But now I'm thinking it's maybe not the best idea to have an autistic wheelchair user be explicitly uninterested in sex and romance when there's a lot of stereotypes about both groups being uninterested in / incapable of these things. Emphasis on the wheelchair user aspect since that part of her character isn't drawing on my own experiences in the slightest.

If it helps, she's not the only autistic character or the only visibly disabled character in the story. But she is the only wheelchair user, and the only character who's explicitly aspec.

Her being aromantic is pretty essential to her character and storyline, but her being asexual isn't really. I could probably change her sexuality without changing too much else about her. So I guess my main questions are:

1. If I keep her aroace is there anything else I can add to help avoid too many stereotypes regarding sex and romance for wheelchair users?

2. Would making her allosexual help with the situation or would I just be removing an important aspect of representation without doing anything to improve the negative stereotypes?

Thanks for the help

Hello!

While there are stereotypes about physically disabled people not having sex, it's usually more in the realm of "disabled people don't have sex" or "disabled people can't have sex" rather than being about asexuality or aromanticism specifically.

There are stereotypes about autistic people being aromantic or asexual but, as with most stereotypes, there will always be people that fit their description. Their existence is just as important as somebody who doesn't necessarily fit those stereotypes.

This is to say, if your character is aroace and disabled, good for them! That's completely fine, there's nothing wrong with that.

If you are still worried, you could always add more aspec characters or more wheelchair users, though I honestly wouldn't worry too much.

You could also consider having her talk a bit about her experiences being aroace, even if it's just a few throwaway lines here and there. That would help solidify it as being part of her individual identity rather than equating being disabled with being aspec.

In general, though, I don't see anything wrong with this character.

Cheers,

~ Mod Icarus

Hey! I strongly agree with Icarus on adding another wheelchair user that's not aroace. There's nothing wrong with having a disabled aroace character, but it's hard to ignore the fact that often autistic and physically disabled characters get to be the ones headcanoned as aroace because of the "physically disabled/autistic people don't have sex nor romance" stereotype.

Coming from someone disabled and on the aroace spectrum: disabled characters who are aroace are cool, but having disabled characters coincidentally always be the only asexual and/or sex repulsed ones is certainly frustrating. Just put in some variety and you will be good.

If you do want her to be asexual and not add any other character, it would be interesting to see her identities actually intersecting. Does she ever feel "like a stereotype" for being autistic and not being interested in dating? Same thing but for being a wheelchair user who doesn't want sex? Maybe gets annoyed when people assume that her asexuality is caused by her disability, or when interacting with people who just presume that she doesn't have sex/romantic relationships because she's autistic and uses a wheelchair, and not because she's aromantic and asexual? Basically anything to give her depth as a character who is all these things so it doesn't seem like she just got the "default orientation" that disabled characters often end up with in LGBT media.

mod Sasza

[stompingdvds]

Remus🤝Dorcas realising together they have a right to feel angry and express that anger when their whole lives they’ve been afraid of being vilified and embodying negative stereotypes

[elinaline]

I went to the super attractive island and there were so many people with acne and eczema, in wheelchairs, and with dysmorphisms

[alaskan-wallflower]

it’s kinda funny how almost every character with albinism in media is always portrayed as a villain. as if that isn’t feeding into every stereotype out there.

the only protagonist i’ve found with albinism in media was in a book where the girl turns out to be a witch. which is arguably on the level of bad as the evil albino stereotype.

idk why this bothers me so much. nobody knows about albinism and it’s not like it’s actively discriminated against. but i wish there was more media where more normal people had albinism instead of the PWA turning out to be an evil villain or a witch, they turn out to be a normal person with normal struggles. like give me a story about a character with albinism trying to navigate the world on their own terms, trying to fit in and such WITHOUT using stereotypes.

like yes. i know people being ignorant towards a certain condition isn’t the worst thing in the world. maybe i have no right to complain about it given the other tings that are happening in the world that kinda trump issues like this. but it’s still an issue. the fact that people believe these things is just sad to me tbh.

another thing that bugs me is when people refer to us as ‘albinos’. like not everyone hates that word. some PWAs are okay with it. i just say it because it’s shorter and easier to type out than ‘person with albinism’ but even in media seeing the character being referred to as ‘the albino’ makes my stomach turn. people use the word ‘albino’ to refer to animals; most of the time. the word itself can feel dehumanizing sometimes, in certain contexts. for me it’s better to say person with albinism. it’s putting the person before the disability and it doesn’t feel as degrading.

anyway. my inbox is always open if you have questions for me about how to write a character with albinism. i know nobody is gonna see this or care but i just thought i’d say smth.

[mouthlessmaiden]

becoming a radical tyrion stan the way ppl are dany stans…..i will no longer be accepting excuses for why you hate tyrion when he’s a deliberately complex rejection of the trope of “ugly disabled guy = evil and hot people = good”. if you’re uncomfortable with the way he treats women, that’s cool, but if u like jaime or sandor or jon or oberyn or ned or theon or stannis or renly or basically any male character besides like…sam tarly, then it’s pretty clear what’s different about tyrion. and for some reason people don’t tend to talk abt sam tarly being generally pretty good with women. hm, i wonder why.

[thenightpost]

There's this thing that happens, let's say at school where a bunch of guys are in the bathroom, at the urinal, laughing about some dork that made an anus of himself in gym. You're all basically nice guys, right? You know right from wrong, and would not in a million years be brutal to the poor guy's face. And then it happens: the dork was in the shitter. He comes out of the stall with this look. He heard everything. And you realize you're not really that nice of a guy. This is what I would say if I could, to all smart people of the world with their dumb hillbilly jokes: We are right here in the stall. We can actually hear you. - Barbara Kingsolver, Demon Copperhead

[cr1mezone]

the opposite sides of the autism spectrum are so rarely talked about.

hypersensitive and easily overstimulated ? how about hyposensitive/sensory seeking and easily understimulated ?

expressionless and monotone ? how about overexpressive ?

too quiet and introverted or doesn’t talk much ? how about really extroverted and talks too much and has no trouble at all coming up to strangers ?

little to no eye contact ? how about making so much eye contact that the other person becomes uncomfortable ?

for a long time i thought i couldn’t be autistic because i didn’t experience the stereotypical traits, apparently i just experienced the opposite sides of the spectrum. all autistic people are valid, even if their autism presents differently :3

[cripplecharacters]

i want to give one of my ocs intellectual disability because nobody ever represents it in media. in terms of trying to pick a character, 1. are poor motor skills a requirement for id, 2. would it be weird to have a character with id who uses she/it pronouns, 3. one of the characters i am considering has large eyes that 'clip outside' of her face as a stylization thing, would this resemble any stereotypical depictions of people with id or is it fantastical enough to not resemble anything bad?

Hello,

No, intellectual disability by itself does not cause motor disabilities, but if she has any co-occuring conditions, like Down Syndrome, those can.

Also no. People with intellectual disability use all kinds of pronouns. As long as it isn't being used by you, the writer, to dehumanize her, it's fine.

The only stereotypes I know of surrounding the eyes of people with intellectual disability are either "wide-eyed innocence" or "empty" eyes, usually "the lights are on but nobody's home," implying that intellectually disabled people aren't really people, they're more just brainless shells. The stylistic thing you're doing doesn't sound like either of those. Just make sure to keep in mind that any other conditions the character has could have stereotypes of their own to avoid.

Keep in mind that writing intellectual disability into a character that already has a fully-formed personality is going to be difficult. Usually, it's recommended that you keep a character's intellectual disability in mind as you create them due to how much it can impact experiences, emotions, backstory, personality, etc. It's possible to add intellectual disability in later, just be prepared to have to rewrite a few things and make sure you aren't giving them intellectual disability in theory, where they don't have any signs or symptoms of intellectual disability but you say they do.

Feel free to check out this post on writing characters with intellectual disability.

Mod Aaron