Ableist Rhetoric: How We Know, Value, and See Disability by James L. Cherney

Abstract

Reviewed by: Ableist Rhetoric: How We Know, Value, and See Disability by James L. Cherney Emily Krebs Ableist Rhetoric: How We Know, Value, and See Disability. By James L. Cherney. University Park, PA: Penn State University Press, 2019; pp. 200, $101.95 hardcover; $33.95 paper. With the widespread normalization of COVID-19, many of the accessibilities afforded to high-risk groups at the start of the pandemic are slipping away. High-risk groups are facing the brutal realities of ableist rhetoric undergirding claims that it’s “encouraging” that the majority of people dying from COVID are “unwell to begin with.”1 Eugenic logics are hidden beneath rhetoric that seems mundane, perhaps even encouraging to nondisabled groups who call for “returning to normal.”2 As much as I empathize with those seeking relief from isolation, anxiety, and grief, I must also ask: To whose normal are we returning? Who is going back? And who will be left behind? It is with this context that I offer this review of James (“Jim”) L. Cherney’s book Ableist Rhetoric: How We Know, Value, and See Disability.3 This text serves as a jumping off point for rhetorical scholars because it offers a unique turn for disability studies, focusing on rhetorics ableism instead of disability itself. Cherney offers this lens not to replace disability studies research but to complement it with a focus on the basic mechanisms and logics of discrimination that de/value all humans. He identifies his work as an examination of ideology and rhetoric, meaning that he focuses on the meanings attached to disability rather than the material or scientific status of disablement. This approach is powerful because, while few people today openly mock disability, many regularly communicate using ableist rhetorics and logics. At the core of this book, Cherney argues that “contemporary culture accepts ableist rhetoric, not ableism per se.”4 He explains that while our current culture discourages blatant discrimination and bigotry, we also distance ourselves from association with this behavior in a way that erases our complicity in more covert forms of oppression. We do not consider ourselves fundamentally ableist, nor [End Page 227] do we identify rhetorics of ableism as impacting our systems of knowledge or values. However, we still routinely rely on logics that frame disability as “inherently undesirable and diminishing.”5 Cherney argues that this feels like a reasonable perspective because of the ubiquity of ableist warrants; they have become “common sense.”6 This is problematic because, in Cherney’s words, “When ableist warrants remain accepted ways of thinking in the culture, they limit the capacity of antidiscrimination measures.”7 In response, Cherney calls upon rhetorical scholars to attend to that which “goes without saying” in order to expose those allegedly pure logics as rhetoric, and thus, open space to identify and move away from ableist culture.8 Such work is particularly powerful given current discourses around COVID-19, high-risk populations, and resistance to precaution mandates. Thus, Ableist Rhetoric has the potential to serve a wide range of rhetorical projects in health communication and critical cultural studies in addition to more traditional disability studies work. Attending to ableist warrants is a powerful tool for disability justice because these rhetorics operate regardless of a disabled person’s presence or absence. As Cherney explains, attending to ableist warrants therefore allows a broader reach of disability studies—beyond the presence of disabled people/characters—to attend to the violences of anti-disability logics. Addressing ableist rhetoric in spaces where disability itself is not explicit is crucial because it attends to “prior questions”9 and requires scholars to “take a step back from procedural questions typically posed . . . to inquire about what makes certain meanings possible in the first place.”10 This means rhetoricians can address larger phenomenological issues about the nature of ableism and its relationship with other forms of oppression to catch ableism at it roots and reveal undercurrents of ableism that too often run unchecked. To open the project of investigating ableist rhetoric, Cherney addresses three primary rhetorical warrants in this book: (1) deviance is evil, (2) normal is natural, and (3) body is able. He offers case studies for each, which stem from his...