Scan barcode
libraryofdreaming's review against another edition
5.0
This book is a masterpiece! Full review to come.
/
As soon as I saw the title of AGAINST TECHNOABLEISM (releasing Sept 19) I knew I had to read it! Thank you to the publisher for an early copy!
When I first started my Bookstagram I had no idea that it would inspire me to learn more about disability justice and introduce me to an entire community. I’ve been fortunate to read some amazing books in the past few years that have truly changed my life and changed the way I view the world. AGAINST TECHNOABLEISM is one of those life-changing books!
At only about 150 pages and only 6 chapters, AGAINST TECHNOABLEISM packs a surprising punch. It’s compulsively readable and tackles SO MANY topics with laser sharp precision. Each chapter was a revelation to me. The sections include but are not limited to disability identity and disability history from a disability-led, disability forward point of view, an examination and a rebuttal on disability tropes or myths, details about the author’s experience with physical disability and cyborg-life, neurodiversity and the roots of eugenics in our current medical and charity landscape, and a look at the accessible future.
This book is at its best when the author places other disabled scholars and writers in conversation with each other, building a web of interconnectivity, shared knowledge, and community. Just when I thought I had absorbed the best of this book, I read another gem and found something else to ponder. My ARC is (no exaggeration) 90% highlights right now.
Even though I’ve been studying disability justice on my own time for multiple years now, I still had NO IDEA about so many things in this book like the connection between factory and farm life with our cultural conception of disability, the continued legacy of eugenics, and the horrific realities of so-called “therapies” for neurodivergent people.
The chapter on neurodiversity has especially stuck with me to the point where I can’t get it out of my head but every page of this book has immense value for disabled and non-disabled people alike. Even though it discusses deep subjects, it’s so well-written that it never feels like a chore to read.
I’ve already preordered a copy of this book for every medical professional or aspiring student in my life because you all NEED to read it. It is simply life-changing and the medical field in particular needs a paradigm shift ASAP to center the experiences, knowledge, and worth of disabled people. Please, please go pick up a copy of this book for yourself and start the change!
/
As soon as I saw the title of AGAINST TECHNOABLEISM (releasing Sept 19) I knew I had to read it! Thank you to the publisher for an early copy!
When I first started my Bookstagram I had no idea that it would inspire me to learn more about disability justice and introduce me to an entire community. I’ve been fortunate to read some amazing books in the past few years that have truly changed my life and changed the way I view the world. AGAINST TECHNOABLEISM is one of those life-changing books!
At only about 150 pages and only 6 chapters, AGAINST TECHNOABLEISM packs a surprising punch. It’s compulsively readable and tackles SO MANY topics with laser sharp precision. Each chapter was a revelation to me. The sections include but are not limited to disability identity and disability history from a disability-led, disability forward point of view, an examination and a rebuttal on disability tropes or myths, details about the author’s experience with physical disability and cyborg-life, neurodiversity and the roots of eugenics in our current medical and charity landscape, and a look at the accessible future.
This book is at its best when the author places other disabled scholars and writers in conversation with each other, building a web of interconnectivity, shared knowledge, and community. Just when I thought I had absorbed the best of this book, I read another gem and found something else to ponder. My ARC is (no exaggeration) 90% highlights right now.
Even though I’ve been studying disability justice on my own time for multiple years now, I still had NO IDEA about so many things in this book like the connection between factory and farm life with our cultural conception of disability, the continued legacy of eugenics, and the horrific realities of so-called “therapies” for neurodivergent people.
The chapter on neurodiversity has especially stuck with me to the point where I can’t get it out of my head but every page of this book has immense value for disabled and non-disabled people alike. Even though it discusses deep subjects, it’s so well-written that it never feels like a chore to read.
I’ve already preordered a copy of this book for every medical professional or aspiring student in my life because you all NEED to read it. It is simply life-changing and the medical field in particular needs a paradigm shift ASAP to center the experiences, knowledge, and worth of disabled people. Please, please go pick up a copy of this book for yourself and start the change!
cayleejanet's review against another edition
5.0
this is such a hopeful perspective on disability, especially in the last part of the last chapter, but the whole book is so ugh it’s so good like i think i know a fair amount about disability at least more than your average non-disabled person but wow this showed me how much i still have to learn and also how stupid it is to think of disability as something that we can eradicate ugh it was so good i want everyone to read this book
panickedhonking's review against another edition
challenging
emotional
informative
reflective
fast-paced
3.25
It's good as an intro for people who aren't well versed on disability but I think the topic needs more in depth work. Feels like the wrong topic for the wrong audience but still good for both?
off2explore's review against another edition
4.0
This thought-provoking work is a must for anyone considering how technology and disability impact each other. Firmly grounded in the disability justice movement, Against Technoableism addresses physical, emotional, and developmental disabilities in unexpected ways.
fjette's review against another edition
funny
hopeful
informative
medium-paced
4.0
Solid discussion of how “improvement” is a double edged sword and what that can actually look like, in positive and negative ways. I found the final chapter to have the most new information for me but I would definitely recommend this to people interested in disability justice and not sure where to start.
chamomiledaydreams's review against another edition
informative
inspiring
fast-paced
5.0
This book made my brain buzz the entire time I was reading it. I hadn't heard of technoableism before, but Ashley Shew does a great job explaining it in simple terms then exploring it more deeply in each chapter.
In essence, technoableism is the belief that technology can/should/will be used to "fix" people with disabilities. Oftentimes, technoableism prioritizes the comfort of non-disabled people over disabled people, as is the case when non-disabled people prefer arm prosthetics with a realistic set of five fingers, while amputees themselves might prefer prosthetics that prioritize function over form, when they feel like wearing prosthetics aft all.
Shew discusses the complexity of technology in the lives of disabled people, explaining that some technologies are genuinely useful for some people, but that non-disabled people tend to put more stock in being perceived as "normal" than disabled people do. For instance, Shew compares taking her leg prosthetic off every night to removing her bra after work: It is a relief to not worry about appearing presentable and to be able to exist comfortably in your own skin.
One reason why this book resonated with me so much is that Shew acknowledges how vast and varied the disability community is. Everyone's needs are unique, and it is strange that amputees and autistic people fall under the same label. This is great from a community/solidarity standpoint, but it means that non-disabled people run the risk of lumping together vastly different identities and experiences.
Still, I was able to relate to and connect with the stories and sentiments that Shew expressed throughout this book. I have low vision, and earlier this year, I attended an online discussion about low vision driving. I got my learner's permit back in high school but never received a proper license for a variety of reasons. Now I know more about the resources that exist for folks with low vision, specifically bioptic lenses (telescopes mounted on top of glasses, to work around the fact that regular glasses cannot "fix" low vision). At the time, I wondered, "Is it wrong that I don't want to look into bioptics for myself?"
"Technoableism" is firm in its stance that disabled people know their own limits and should not feel pressured to achieve "normality" for the sake of non-disabled people. Just because a wheelchair-user can walk a little on their own does not mean that they should push themself beyond their limits just so non-disabled people can applaud them for doing a good job. Strangers often don't understand how much of a toll tasks that seem mundane to them can take for a disabled person.
I have a pair of glasses, for example, that help me see things from a distance, although I seldom use them. They are only helpful to me in a handful of situations. When I watch Jeopardy at home, for instance, I have trouble reading the questions, unless I am sitting very close to the TV. If I put on my glasses, then I get dizzy whenever I look at things that are too close to me, making eating and watching the show at the same time challenging. (I can't even admire my cats properly!) Even though the text onscreen appears sharper when I wear glasses, the ensuing headaches leave me exhausted, and I would much rather forgo the ordeal and just listen to the questions as they are read aloud.
In cases such as my own, the technology to mitigate my disability exists, but a complex set of factors prevents me from being permanently "fixed" by it. What non-disabled people often fail to understand is that the milestones they value are not universal. Yes, being able to drive would grant me more agency and mobility, but I shouldn't need a driver's license to be viewed as a mature and capable adult. And I would much rather have accessibility features that allow me to enlarge onscreen text than to wear my glasses in order to follow along as quickly as my well-seeing peers.
Just as Shew writes in her final chapter about envisioning a disabled future, I do not dream of a world in which people like me no longer exist; I dream of a world where we are properly accommodated and understood and where people allow us to comfortably exist without wondering why we don't do something to "fix" ourselves—a sentiment which reeks of the "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" mentality that is so common in the United States.
In a technoableist world that applauds amputees for donning prosthetics and becoming athletes, we need to remind people that just taking care of yourself is okay, too. Disabled people don't need to be exceptional to be appreciated and respected. We should aim for a world that allows for and protects people with disabilities rather than a world in which they no longer exist. We need to accept that disability is a common side-effect of living and aging and embrace it as such.
Some people cannot walk on their own, and that is okay. Some people cannot hear and do not wish to change that, and that is okay. Some people have low vision and are not keen on trying bioptic driving, and that is okay. Let disabled people live their lives as they see fit, and do not think less highly of them because of it.
In essence, technoableism is the belief that technology can/should/will be used to "fix" people with disabilities. Oftentimes, technoableism prioritizes the comfort of non-disabled people over disabled people, as is the case when non-disabled people prefer arm prosthetics with a realistic set of five fingers, while amputees themselves might prefer prosthetics that prioritize function over form, when they feel like wearing prosthetics aft all.
Shew discusses the complexity of technology in the lives of disabled people, explaining that some technologies are genuinely useful for some people, but that non-disabled people tend to put more stock in being perceived as "normal" than disabled people do. For instance, Shew compares taking her leg prosthetic off every night to removing her bra after work: It is a relief to not worry about appearing presentable and to be able to exist comfortably in your own skin.
One reason why this book resonated with me so much is that Shew acknowledges how vast and varied the disability community is. Everyone's needs are unique, and it is strange that amputees and autistic people fall under the same label. This is great from a community/solidarity standpoint, but it means that non-disabled people run the risk of lumping together vastly different identities and experiences.
Still, I was able to relate to and connect with the stories and sentiments that Shew expressed throughout this book. I have low vision, and earlier this year, I attended an online discussion about low vision driving. I got my learner's permit back in high school but never received a proper license for a variety of reasons. Now I know more about the resources that exist for folks with low vision, specifically bioptic lenses (telescopes mounted on top of glasses, to work around the fact that regular glasses cannot "fix" low vision). At the time, I wondered, "Is it wrong that I don't want to look into bioptics for myself?"
"Technoableism" is firm in its stance that disabled people know their own limits and should not feel pressured to achieve "normality" for the sake of non-disabled people. Just because a wheelchair-user can walk a little on their own does not mean that they should push themself beyond their limits just so non-disabled people can applaud them for doing a good job. Strangers often don't understand how much of a toll tasks that seem mundane to them can take for a disabled person.
I have a pair of glasses, for example, that help me see things from a distance, although I seldom use them. They are only helpful to me in a handful of situations. When I watch Jeopardy at home, for instance, I have trouble reading the questions, unless I am sitting very close to the TV. If I put on my glasses, then I get dizzy whenever I look at things that are too close to me, making eating and watching the show at the same time challenging. (I can't even admire my cats properly!) Even though the text onscreen appears sharper when I wear glasses, the ensuing headaches leave me exhausted, and I would much rather forgo the ordeal and just listen to the questions as they are read aloud.
In cases such as my own, the technology to mitigate my disability exists, but a complex set of factors prevents me from being permanently "fixed" by it. What non-disabled people often fail to understand is that the milestones they value are not universal. Yes, being able to drive would grant me more agency and mobility, but I shouldn't need a driver's license to be viewed as a mature and capable adult. And I would much rather have accessibility features that allow me to enlarge onscreen text than to wear my glasses in order to follow along as quickly as my well-seeing peers.
Just as Shew writes in her final chapter about envisioning a disabled future, I do not dream of a world in which people like me no longer exist; I dream of a world where we are properly accommodated and understood and where people allow us to comfortably exist without wondering why we don't do something to "fix" ourselves—a sentiment which reeks of the "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" mentality that is so common in the United States.
In a technoableist world that applauds amputees for donning prosthetics and becoming athletes, we need to remind people that just taking care of yourself is okay, too. Disabled people don't need to be exceptional to be appreciated and respected. We should aim for a world that allows for and protects people with disabilities rather than a world in which they no longer exist. We need to accept that disability is a common side-effect of living and aging and embrace it as such.
Some people cannot walk on their own, and that is okay. Some people cannot hear and do not wish to change that, and that is okay. Some people have low vision and are not keen on trying bioptic driving, and that is okay. Let disabled people live their lives as they see fit, and do not think less highly of them because of it.